The atonement

[Elijah John]

Does the atonement of Christ make any sense?

Consider the option that Christ is God. Why would God need to sacrifice Himself to Himself in order to give Himself permission to forgive the contrite?

And if Christ is not God, does it make sense that one man,.even a perfect one could atone for the sins of all of humankind by his temporary death?

Also, if Christ is not God but a man, how is that not human sacrifice, an abomination?

After all. even a perfect man is still a man, right?

[marco]

That is all very well, if debatable, but your questions arise, not from apparent contradiction as such, but from your total rejection of the very concept of ransom through any form of sacrifice.

Which means a failure to recognise the authenticity of all relevant verses.

People can interpret verses in their own way. It is not as if the verses were crystal clear to all readers. If it is seen that blood sacrifice was not wanted by God, then suggesting that Christ was killed as a blood sacrifice is clearly wrong. The simple question is: did God suggest that he no longer wanted people to shed blood for him? If we can find verses that suggest this, then it does put a huge question over the claim that Christ was a blood sacrifice.

Surely it seems macabre that civilised people would be expected to accept that a loving God wanted human blood, by way of atonement for some sin. Christ came to give good news not to demonstrate savagery.

[TripleZ]

Does the atonement of Christ make any sense?

Consider the option that Christ is God. Why would God need to sacrifice Himself to Himself in order to give Himself permission to forgive the contrite?

And if Christ is not God, does it make sense that one man,.even a perfect one could atone for the sins of all of humankind by his temporary death?

Also, if Christ is not God but a man, how is that not human sacrifice, an abomination?

After all. even a perfect man is still a man, right?

It is not about whether or not Christ is God.

It is not about whether or not it will make sense to us.

It is not "human sacrifice, an abomination", but about a ransom made by a redeemer as announced by the angel of God; Matthew 1:20-21.

Romans 3:4

Absolutely not! Let God be true and every man a liar. As it is written: “So that You may be justified in Your words, and prevail in Your judgments.�

By " a " redeemer, so you have more than one I take it ?

Mat 1:20 But while he was thinking about this, an angel of Adonai appeared to him in a dream and said, "Yosef, son of David, do not be afraid to take Miryam home with you as your wife; for what has been conceived in her is from the Ruach HaKodesh.
Mat 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to name him Yeshua, [which means 'Adonai saves,'] because he will save his people from their sins."
Adonai saves! " he " will save " his " people,,, From the " Ruach HaKodesh/Holy Spirit "..
I see, THE Redeemer...

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 48 by Elijah John]

The author of Hebrews, for example says "without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin". Yet John the Baptist performed "baptisms of repentance for the forgiveness of sins"

Seems John taught God's forgiveness without the shedding of blood, based on simple repentance!

Basically, it comes down to this. I see simple repentance and forgiveness from God as presenting far fewer logical problems than the doctrine of substitutionary, blood atonement.

The problems with the latter have been presented and debated many time and in many ways on these boards.

John the Baptist, huh?

The one Jesus called the greatest prophet, the one who named Jesus as "the lamb of God".

Repentance and forgiveness has always had the backdrop of the need for blood atonement.

Blood atonement can only be effective if there is repentance for forgiveness.

They are not in opposition but complement each other.

[otseng]

but to your own inability to recognise the authority and authenticity of those scriptures.

Moderator Warning


Please avoid commenting on the ability of another poster.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[otseng]

But go ahead, and hold on the false gospel of the false prophet Paul, as that is apparently your only hope, despite it being a false hope.

Moderator Comment

This is carrying it a bit too personal.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[otseng]

but you go on and on with this " if ", guess work everywhere, why ?

Moderator Comment

Asking questions is certainly permissible. Saying another is going on and on is not.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[TripleZ]

Does the atonement of Christ make any sense?

Consider the option that Christ is God. Why would God need to sacrifice Himself to Himself in order to give Himself permission to forgive the contrite?

And if Christ is not God, does it make sense that one man,.even a perfect one could atone for the sins of all of humankind by his temporary death?

Also, if Christ is not God but a man, how is that not human sacrifice, an abomination?

After all. even a perfect man is still a man, right?

if,if if, if,if if ?

[TripleZ]

Does the atonement of Christ make any sense?

Consider the option that Christ is God. Why would God need to sacrifice Himself to Himself in order to give Himself permission to forgive the contrite?

And if Christ is not God, does it make sense that one man,.even a perfect one could atone for the sins of all of humankind by his temporary death?

Also, if Christ is not God but a man, how is that not human sacrifice, an abomination?

After all. even a perfect man is still a man, right?

Yes, he was the lamb of God, the Lamb without spot of blemish the only acceptable sacrifice for the sin of man. He being a flesh and blood man was OUR Messiah..

[otseng]

if,if if, if,if if ?

Moderator Warning


I'm going to take this as not heeding my comment, so this will be a warning.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.