Is the vicarious redemption of jesus MORAL?

[Dr.Physics]

(lets assume the the crucifixion happened as the christians say it does for this thread)

the crucifixion of jesus christ was brutal and bloody. if i were present i would feel the need to STOP the bloody human sacrifice. this act of vicarious redemption is equivalent to scapegoating. is this not immoral and barbaric?

"you can serve my sentence in jail, but you cant take away my responsibility... after looking at the offer (of jesus' sacrifice) and considering it, i would rather decline the offer of this lamb's blood, but thanks anyways...... - whats that? if i dont accept this offer you will KILL ME?! and send me to hell for eternity? is that a THREAT?" (Christopher Hitchens)

This Christian god IF he exists does NOT give me or you a choice, but rather is blackmailing us into following him. The christian idea of god is a "supernatural dictatorship in whose court you have no repeal, with a leader you can not overthrow, and whose supervision you could never escape." (hitch)

i either must worship this being which i think is IMMORAL for performing and/or participating in human sacrifices (among other atrocities) OR burn in hell for eternity.. this is not an offer of a moral creator.[/b]

[wonderer]

(lets assume the the crucifixion happened as the christians say it does for this thread)

the crucifixion of jesus christ was brutal and bloody. if i were present i would feel the need to STOP the bloody human sacrifice. this act of vicarious redemption is equivalent to scapegoating. is this not immoral and barbaric?

"you can serve my sentence in jail, but you cant take away my responsibility... after looking at the offer (of jesus' sacrifice) and considering it, i would rather decline the offer of this lamb's blood, but thanks anyways...... - whats that? if i dont accept this offer you will KILL ME?! and send me to hell for eternity? is that a THREAT?" (Christopher Hitchens)

This Christian god IF he exists does NOT give me or you a choice, but rather is blackmailing us into following him. The christian idea of god is a "supernatural dictatorship in whose court you have no repeal, with a leader you can not overthrow, and whose supervision you could never escape." (hitch)

i either must worship this being which i think is IMMORAL for performing and/or participating in human sacrifices (among other atrocities) OR burn in hell for eternity.. this is not an offer of a moral creator.[/b]

Going even further back than the sacrificial death of Jesus, God was immoral in creating a system where sin and evil would rule in his creation and 'necessitate' the sacrifice of Jesus to fix the problem which he himself had started!

Even as small child in church, I couldn't see how it was so great of God to send his son to be crucified. Like the story of the bird who had the great idea that one of his fellow birds should go down and attach a bell to the cat's collar to warn the birds, but he himself was not willing to go. Later I came to believe that God and Jesus were the same person, so God sent himself to go thru the crucifixion, which seemed more noble. However I still can't see the wonderfulness of God providing the vicarious sacrifice of Jesus, when God was the one who introduced 'the sin problem' in the first place. Someone else on one of these forums had a good analogy, of a doctor who gives someone poison then expects the person to be grateful to the doctor for healing him. I say, don't give the poison in the first place would be more moral.

[Adstar]

(lets assume the the crucifixion happened as the christians say it does for this thread)

the crucifixion of jesus christ was brutal and bloody. if i were present i would feel the need to STOP the bloody human sacrifice. this act of vicarious redemption is equivalent to scapegoating. is this not immoral and barbaric?

It was violent. But it was not Immoral. funny how you use the description scapegoat.

Leviticus 16
10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness.

Actually in the bible sense of the Word, The believers of Jesus are scapegoats because we are Atoned for and set free to enter into eternity with God.

"you can serve my sentence in jail, but you cant take away my responsibility... after looking at the offer (of jesus' sacrifice) and considering it, i would rather decline the offer of this lamb's blood, but thanks anyways...... - whats that? if i dont accept this offer you will KILL ME?! and send me to hell for eternity? is that a THREAT?" (Christopher Hitchens)

Its a warning of what will happen. But since this person has already rejected the atonement of the Messiah Jesus then maybe the term warning is not correct. maybe its just a statement of what is going to happen to Christopher Hitchens.

This Christian god IF he exists does NOT give me or you a choice,

Of course He gives us a choice. Your quote from Christopher Hitchens demonstrates a person making their choice clear and loud. And i see many more people making their choice. If there where no choices then the above quote from Christopher Hitchens would never have been made.

but rather is blackmailing us into following him. The christian idea of god is a "supernatural dictatorship in whose court you have no repeal, with a leader you can not overthrow, and whose supervision you could never escape." (hitch)

Well thats true. His is The Absolute Monarch of Eternity. So i agree with (hitch) on these points. But still Hitch has demonstrated along with millions of others the free will choice of rejecting the Mercy of God.

i either must worship this being which i think is IMMORAL for performing and/or participating in human sacrifices (among other atrocities) OR burn in hell for eternity.. this is not an offer of a moral creator.[/b]

Well thats your judgement. But Jesus was not a "human" sacrifice He was (and is) the Word of God made flesh. And he willingly suffered death to save me.


All Praise The Ancient of Days

[Adstar]

Going even further back than the sacrificial death of Jesus, God was immoral in creating a system where sin and evil would rule in his creation and 'necessitate' the sacrifice of Jesus to fix the problem which he himself had started!

When God created the universe and man He said they where "Good" God did not force them to take the knowledge of Good and Evil. They used their free will to Join with satan in his quest to become gods. Even thought such a quest is imposable.

God created free willed human beings. And if we did not have free will we would not be human beings. We would be nothing more than glorified zombies.

Even as small child in church, I couldn't see how it was so great of God to send his son to be crucified. Like the story of the bird who had the great idea that one of his fellow birds should go down and attach a bell to the cat's collar to warn the birds, but he himself was not willing to go. Later I came to believe that God and Jesus were the same person, so God sent himself to go thru the crucifixion, which seemed more noble.

Well Jesus and the Father are One. Sad you got this far but never endured in Faith.

However I still can't see the wonderfulness of God providing the vicarious sacrifice of Jesus, when God was the one who introduced 'the sin problem' in the first place. Someone else on one of these forums had a good analogy, of a doctor who gives someone poison then expects the person to be grateful to the doctor for healing him. I say, don't give the poison in the first place would be more moral.

If mankind never had the option to rebel then mankind would just be slaves. Free will is a wonder and precious thing. It gives us the opportunity to agree with God through our own free will. With that opportunity must come the option of rejecting God. And again God gave the option of rebellion, and never forced it on anyone. God has also gone to the extreme to provide a way to reconciliation for anyone who is willing to accept that loving gift.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[Woland]

Hello Adstar,

When God created the universe and man He said they where "Good" God did not force them to take the knowledge of Good and Evil. They used their free will to Join with satan in his quest to become gods. Even thought such a quest is imposable.

I don't even need to dwell for very long here on the nevertheless very important fact that none of these stories are corroborated by any other evidence than tales from religious promoters of a specific bronze-age monotheism.

The whole story is nonsensical and represents an absurdly petty and cruel, infinitely callous and unforgiving deity. Free will is a meaningless and necessarily irrelevant defense in this situation.

Did Adam and Eve have knowledge of good and evil before they "joined Satan"?

No.

Was disobeying God an evil action?

Yes.

Then why in the world could it even potentially be seen as just and loving of God to hold them responsible for doing something without understanding the meaning of it as well as its consequences - responsible to the point of deserving death, painful childbirth, disease, etc., no less? Do you feel like comparing God to a loving parent just right now?

How does "free will" explain the collective punishment of all subsequently born humans? Who but an infinitely callous and cruel being would just desert his ENTIRE own creation because some of them committed a crime without knowing even what a crime is?

But he didn't desert us, you will say. He provided the few of us who are lucky enough to believe he exists (mainly because of being born to believing Christian parents) with a loophole. If you'll just believe that the proposition that killing an innocent can forgive "the guilty" is representative of perfect justice, you can be saved.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy it, and frankly I don't see how anyone ever could. Vicarious redemption - the concept that blind belief in the redemptive value of human sacrifice can erase the consequences of your actions - cannot reasonably be seen as being anything near to just.

When you add to that the notion, shared by several popular brands of Christianity, that people who don't manage to convince themselves while alive of the worth of this proposition after having been exposed to it will be tortured eternally for failing to do so and without any further chance of forgiveness, it infinitely compounds the absurdity of the entire "loving and just deity" theory.

If mankind never had the option to rebel then mankind would just be slaves.

That's an interesting theory.

What exactly, pray tell, are humans under your version of "God" if not abject slaves - slaves that can be abused in the most horrible imaginable ways?

It gives us the opportunity to agree with God through our own free will. With that opportunity must come the option of rejecting God.

Not believing in a specific supernatural alleged being is not equal to rejecting an offer from this being.

If I told you that Santa would give you presents but only if you believed in him (and if you didn't you'd be tortured), would that make you believe in Santa? Would it be meaningful to say that you rejected Santa Claus' offer of free gifts?

And again God gave the option of rebellion, and never forced it on anyone. God has also gone to the extreme to provide a way to reconciliation for anyone who is willing to accept that loving gift.

in the utter absence of meaningful and verifiable evidence setting his own religion apart from others as being "true", of course.

Concerning "to the extreme", I infinitely disagree. There's nothing special about a deity sacrificing himself to himself by brief torture only to go reign in Heaven and supposedly save billions. What would you do in his situation?

Exactly. There's nothing special about it.

If you're one of those eternal-Hell-believing Christians, you may want to ask yourself why the punishment for not believing in the truth of a specific set of myths promoting vicarious redemption must be infinite if we are to believe in a loving and just deity.

-Woland

[flitzerbiest]

When I was 5 or 6, our minister did a little children's sermon before the main one. He asked us to imagine that we had done something very bad--breaking a neighbor's window with a baseball (which I had already done once). He then asked, "Would it be good if a friend came along and told the neighbor, "I did it--I'll pay the price." I said no, whereupon my older brother elbowed me in the ribs and told me to stop misbehaving. Some days you just can't win.

All this to say that I didn't see the point of substitutionary atonement when I was five, but after a few more years (and starting with my brother's elbow), I was just as dialed in doctrinally as the rest of the sheep. It took me another 30 years to realize that my initial answer was the correct one.

[TheParticlePerson]

Well I would say that the sacrifice of Jesus was barbaric and unnecessary, but as it turns out after three days he was fine. It's really pretty anti-climactic.

[Adstar]

Hello Adstar,

When God created the universe and man He said they where "Good" God did not force them to take the knowledge of Good and Evil. They used their free will to Join with satan in his quest to become gods. Even thought such a quest is imposable.

I don't even need to dwell for very long here on the nevertheless very important fact that none of these stories are corroborated by any other evidence than tales from religious promoters of a specific bronze-age monotheism.

The whole story is nonsensical and represents an absurdly petty and cruel, infinitely callous and unforgiving deity. Free will is a meaningless and necessarily irrelevant defense in this situation.

Did Adam and Eve have knowledge of good and evil before they "joined Satan"?

No.

Was disobeying God an evil action?

Yes.

Then why in the world could it even potentially be seen as just and loving of God to hold them responsible for doing something without understanding the meaning of it as well as its consequences - responsible to the point of deserving death, painful childbirth, disease, etc., no less? Do you feel like comparing God to a loving parent just right now?

As i said before. Jesus has provided a free gift of Redemption to anyone and all who accept it. Adam and Eve did die because they took the knowledge of Good and Evil but they also can be saved through the Messiah Jesus as can all humans that have ever lived down through History. Thats an act of a loving Parent. He would have been justified in executing them on the spot and ending the universe then and there. But He is a God of longsuffering willing to work towards a solution that redeems His creation from destruction.

How does "free will" explain the collective punishment of all subsequently born humans? Who but an infinitely callous and cruel being would just desert his ENTIRE own creation because some of them committed a crime without knowing even what a crime is?

Once again punishment only happens when one rejects forgiveness and redemption.

But he didn't desert us, you will say. He provided the few of us who are lucky enough to believe he exists (mainly because of being born to believing Christian parents) with a loophole. If you'll just believe that the proposition that killing an innocent can forgive "the guilty" is representative of perfect justice, you can be saved.

Believing God exists does not save anyone. satan believes God exists and he will be spending eternity in the Lake of Fire. And i came to believe in Jesus from reading the Bible. I do not belong to the religion of my human parents.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy it, and frankly I don't see how anyone ever could. Vicarious redemption - the concept that blind belief in the redemptive value of human sacrifice can erase the consequences of your actions - cannot reasonably be seen as being anything near to just.

It's not blind belief at all. The message is read it is contemplated and from that knowledge one accepts or rejects it. And God by providing Redemption is justice because it is just to have mercy on the repentant.

When you add to that the notion, shared by several popular brands of Christianity, that people who don't manage to convince themselves while alive of the worth of this proposition after having been exposed to it will be tortured eternally for failing to do so and without any further chance of forgiveness, it infinitely compounds the absurdity of the entire "loving and just deity" theory.

Those who reject the offer of God will not have eternity with God. It is good to accept the offer of God not because of the reward but because the offer is good and just.

If mankind never had the option to rebel then mankind would just be slaves.

That's an interesting theory.

What exactly, pray tell, are humans under your version of "God" if not abject slaves - slaves that can be abused in the most horrible imaginable ways?

All mankind is under God. That includes you. And you clearly demonstrate that you are not a slave. I am also not a slave, i am a willing follower of God.

It gives us the opportunity to agree with God through our own free will. With that opportunity must come the option of rejecting God.

Not believing in a specific supernatural alleged being is not equal to rejecting an offer from this being.

Rejecting the Message irrespective of belief or otherwise in the One offering it shows that one is against the Message. Being against the Message is evil. The message is the measuring tool and peoples response to the Message judges them.

If I told you that Santa would give you presents but only if you believed in him (and if you didn't you'd be tortured), would that make you believe in Santa? Would it be meaningful to say that you rejected Santa Claus' offer of free gifts?

Of coerce not. I would feel no offence at the offer either. See i do not believe that santa exists, So anyone telling me that i am going to be tortured for not accepting santa's offer would have no emotional effect on me. But it seems that many people get very offended and rant and rave with anger when they hear about the outcome of rejecting God's offer. Strange when the people who rant and rave proclaim they do not believe God exists. Something tells me their emotion betrays knowledge deeply implanted within.

And again God gave the option of rebellion, and never forced it on anyone. God has also gone to the extreme to provide a way to reconciliation for anyone who is willing to accept that loving gift.

in the utter absence of meaningful and verifiable evidence setting his own religion apart from others as being "true", of course.

Concerning "to the extreme", I infinitely disagree. There's nothing special about a deity sacrificing himself to himself by brief torture only to go reign in Heaven and supposedly save billions. What would you do in his situation?

Well i would hope i had the fortitude to do what Jesus did. But even if i did my sacrifice would be worthless because as a sinner i would not be the perfect Lamb of God needed to save the world

If you're one of those eternal-Hell-believing Christians, you may want to ask yourself why the punishment for not believing in the truth of a specific set of myths promoting vicarious redemption must be infinite if we are to believe in a loving and just deity.

-Woland

Odd how many people shake their fists at the supposed injustice of the eternal Lake of Fire but never shake their fists at the supposed injustice of eternity with God.

Like how can anyone justify eternity in a paradise as a reward for anything done in a limited life time on earth? Isn't that a totally unjust reward?

Our eternal destination is based not on our sin or good deeds, it is based on our response to the Message of God. The Word Of God.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[wonderer]

Going even further back than the sacrificial death of Jesus, God was immoral in creating a system where sin and evil would rule in his creation and 'necessitate' the sacrifice of Jesus to fix the problem which he himself had started!

When God created the universe and man He said they where "Good" God did not force them to take the knowledge of Good and Evil. They used their free will to Join with satan in his quest to become gods. Even thought such a quest is imposable.

God created free willed human beings. And if we did not have free will we would not be human beings. We would be nothing more than glorified zombies.

Even as small child in church, I couldn't see how it was so great of God to send his son to be crucified. Like the story of the bird who had the great idea that one of his fellow birds should go down and attach a bell to the cat's collar to warn the birds, but he himself was not willing to go. Later I came to believe that God and Jesus were the same person, so God sent himself to go thru the crucifixion, which seemed more noble.

Well Jesus and the Father are One. Sad you got this far but never endured in Faith.

However I still can't see the wonderfulness of God providing the vicarious sacrifice of Jesus, when God was the one who introduced 'the sin problem' in the first place. Someone else on one of these forums had a good analogy, of a doctor who gives someone poison then expects the person to be grateful to the doctor for healing him. I say, don't give the poison in the first place would be more moral.

If mankind never had the option to rebel then mankind would just be slaves. Free will is a wonder and precious thing. It gives us the opportunity to agree with God through our own free will. With that opportunity must come the option of rejecting God. And again God gave the option of rebellion, and never forced it on anyone. God has also gone to the extreme to provide a way to reconciliation for anyone who is willing to accept that loving gift.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Whatever wonderful opportunities God gave us by giving us free will, they are not worth the cost of billions of people being tortured for eternity. God should have stayed alone in the universe, if this was the cost of creating humans.

[Flail]

(lets assume the the crucifixion happened as the christians say it does for this thread)

the crucifixion of jesus christ was brutal and bloody. if i were present i would feel the need to STOP the bloody human sacrifice. this act of vicarious redemption is equivalent to scapegoating. is this not immoral and barbaric?

"you can serve my sentence in jail, but you cant take away my responsibility... after looking at the offer (of jesus' sacrifice) and considering it, i would rather decline the offer of this lamb's blood, but thanks anyways...... - whats that? if i dont accept this offer you will KILL ME?! and send me to hell for eternity? is that a THREAT?" (Christopher Hitchens)

This Christian god IF he exists does NOT give me or you a choice, but rather is blackmailing us into following him. The christian idea of god is a "supernatural dictatorship in whose court you have no repeal, with a leader you can not overthrow, and whose supervision you could never escape." (hitch)

i either must worship this being which i think is IMMORAL for performing and/or participating in human sacrifices (among other atrocities) OR burn in hell for eternity.. this is not an offer of a moral creator.[/b]

As a metaphor, the sacrifice could be fashioned a teaching moment, containing philosophical considerations of self sacrifice(although the idea of an almighty god suffering doesn't hold up). As a literal event so interpreted by Christianity, it has become a ridiculous ploy for memberships and donations. In addition, teaching that responsibility for conduct can be pawned off to a God upon a belief and a ritual is as immoral as it is nonsensical.