5 Votes
Christianity: The First Question
All the Christian sects, but particularly the American fundamentalist, evangelical, protestants, make a big thing about Christ being our personal savior. Ignoring the problem of how it could be personal as well as covering all mankind forever, I would like to ask them all about what I think is the most basic problem for any person trying to come to grips with Christianity.
God gave his only son to a horrible death on earth to save us. How could such a requirement ever come to exist? God is all powerful. Presumably he did not want to do this to his son. Does this not therefore indicate the presence of a force on God which he could not resist? How could suffering like that earn credit with or for any all-powerful being?
Sacrifices of animals and even humans made sense to ancient peoples (e.g., Aztecs, Hebrews, etc.), but now we know this is barbaric behavior based on ignorance and mindless unwilling suffering which can not achieve anything. I can understand how this notion made sense in years past and how this let Christianity get off the ground – but now?
I am amazed at how few people can give an answer to this other than something like: It is a mystery. You just believe or not – faith, etc. Surely we are entitled to better than that. Even when the Pope tries to answer it he gets into a metaphysical tangle.
Similarly tagged OmniNerd content:
- Vatican Says Aliens Are Cool, by VnutZ about 5 years ago
- Iranian Movie About Jesus, by VnutZ about 5 years ago
- Darth Vader Assaults Jedis, by VnutZ about 5 years ago
- American Prude Awakening, by VnutZ about 5 years ago
Print Friendly
Write an Article
Pascal's Wager by VnutZ
It’s interesting you bring that up … it reminds me of a blog I passed a few weeks ago entitled "Atheist’s Wager."
Everyone is familiar (perhaps not by name) with Pascal’s Wager where Blaise Pascal laid the philosophical groundwork by which many people admit they found religion – a gamble for heaven. The thought goes:
Hence, many people have followed the logical conclusion that for lack of anything else to do, you may as well believe in god. (As a sidenote, this choice disgusts me as a ridiculous notion – if the god were real, I would certainly hope he sees through such your facade and lets you burn in hell right next to me).
Moving on. The Atheist Wager, looks at the implications of such a decision making tree and what it tells you about your god. It relies on the Pascal’s premise that if you don’t believe and god exists, that you go to hell. Now, what if you are born into another religion and raised as such by your parents. It’s all you know and you’re not exposed to anything else (case in point – see discussion "Can you explain why you don’t believe in other gods?"). It follows that you aren’t going to arbitrarily change your faith.
Therefore, if you’re born into the "wrong religion" you go to hell. What sort of god is so fickle that he would damn good, innocent people of alternate circumstances to an eternity of misery? What sort of god is all powerful yet fails to make his existence clearly irrefutable such that people cease worshipping the wrong diety? What sort of god is all powerful yet fails to make his existence clearly irrefutable such that people of different faiths continue to slaughter each other in his name? What sort of god is all powerful (and allegedly loving) yet has a bouncer checking names against a disparate virtues list (as evidenced by multiple religions and their variations of morality) for admittance to the eternal party?
The Atheist Wager is therefore:
A different way of thinking by Anonymous
I am not an expert on religion and even with my beliefs and understanding of the Passion I don’t think I would come close to the "truth" but I would like to share one story with you that my pastor told his congregation during an Easter service.
One cold morning a woman woke up to a loud noise outside. There was a huge flock of geese that were flying over her house on their way South for the winter. As she watched them a few very young geese landed in her front yard. She thought this strange because the rest of the flock continued on toward their final destination. She couldn’t understand why they just stood there in her yard. After some time she decided to go out there and try to "shoo" them back into the sky. She knew in her heart that if they didn’t return to their flock they would die a cold death when winter set in.
She went outside and began to try and get them back into the air. However, with every attempt these young geese continued to stay firm in her yard. They had no desire to return to the flock and it seemed that they had no understanding of the consequences of their actions.
This went on for quite some time.
Through this time the lady’s worry began to grow, as did her desperation. She just couldn’t understand what they must be thinking and why they were still in her yard.
In resignation she sat down on her porch and wept. "Why? She cried? If I could just become a goose I could explain to them the error of their ways and help them return to the flock. "
And then it hit her
That is what the life of Christ was all about.
Hopefully I did this story justice and I hope you get out of it what I did when I first heard it. I think it’s a wonderful and simple explaination of why God did what he did.
God's omnipotence by Brandon
I think the core issue is your view of God’s nature and motivations. You’re correct that if you go with the view that God is omnipotent and thus can do whatever, it would make sense for him to just wave the "magic wand" and make everything perfect. A different view of God’s omnipotence, however, does not allow Him to do such things that, for example, violate the law of non-contradiction, or change the past, or sin and remain God, etc. In this way, yes, there are "forces" (i.e., free agents) with which God must deal (i.e., not control). Additionally, there are things He would like to accomplish and ways he must go about accomplishing them without violating those laws, such as allowing a free agent to learn/progress through experience.
A lot more could be said on the topic, but I’ll leave it at that and address your specific questions.
Something to Think On by Darabe
I have to agree, the Christian Religion has left something to be desired. It worships the messenger and not the
message that was brought.
The Bible in the Genesis tells of two trees in the garden of Eden of which Adam and Eve were not to partake.
Then having partook of the tree of Knowledge they were tossed out of the garden.
But there was another tree in the garden. The Tree of Life. This is the one that should be paid attention to.
From the Creation?? Through the Revelations.
Man was a bad child, and was sent to where man would not get into more trouble.
[Kicked out of the garden]
When a child is in need of correction the child is put under the law.
[The ten commandments]
When the child obeys the law, showing he has learned discipline, the child is given a reward.
[The son of man bringing the tree of life]
How long will it take man to learn this? That is the Revelation.
[Science is getting close]
Does this sound right to you?
There could be more.
a simple answer, from a simple poster by Dereck
The answer to your question is it’s just a story. A story that uses tangible events to illustrate an abstract concept. I remember a quote from Chris Hedges, speaking about the Genesis story, "Genesis was not written to explain the process of creation…It was written to help explain the purpose of creation….to help us grasp a spiritual truth, not a scientific or historical fact". This concept can clearly also apply to the crucifixion. Only through the emotion of the story do we grasp the spiritual message. Asking a question like, "How could such a requirement ever come to exist?", is kind of self-defeating. You and I know both know the point of the suffering and crucifixion is to make the reader understand the love of God.
I wanted to answer you question as clear and concise as possible, but I’m sure there’s a lot more that can be said.
Not "Required" by gnifyus
God gave his only son to a horrible death on earth to save us. How could such a requirement ever come to exist?
One cause for bewilderment here is in the thought that giving his only son was actually a requirement in the first place. It was probably more of a choice made by God and was not necessarily the way things had to go. In other words, if it were not that then it would have been something else, because for reasons having to do with joy and love, God was not willing to concede every human soul over to Satan, or simply annihilate everything and call it a day. The gospel of John 3:16; reads (NIV) "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." This passage demonstrates that attitude of love and perhaps he chose to redeem us in this way because he knew that it would be a powerful way to deliver his message to us and have it continue as long as it has.
A more pertinent question and one in which yours maybe has its roots in is, "Why does God allow Satan to have so much power over us when Satan himself is one of his creations? By removing Satan from the picture, maybe there would have been no need to give up his son for us. I think the answer to this lies fully in the concept and consequences of having freewill. I know that freewill itself is a source of contention; i.e. Calvinism vs. Arminianism, but since I am from the ‘freewill camp’’ I am going to elaborate with that as my basis.
By giving us freewill, God willingly gives up some of his omnipotence, because the nature of freewill requires that you cannot ‘take some of it away’; it would cease to be freewill at all if this were to happen. And so in giving true freewill God has to submit to the fact that he may lose some of us to hopeless sin and rebellion against him, and ultimately to the world of Satan, even if this is not to his desire. This concession is necessary because by doing anything in the way of direct interference he would violate his own wish for freewill, which for reasons we may never know on this earth is of utmost importance to him. (I believe it has something to do with God wanting to derive joy from those who do not rebel against him on their own, but that’s just me. In fact it may be the entire reason for our existence at all.)
And so I believe that the sacrifice of his only son was not so much a requirement, but a choice made by God who gave us the freewill to either live as he meant us to live, or rebel against him. For those who will understand it, the sacrifice of his son is the most powerful message of love that could be sent without violating freewill.
response by Anonymous
If you look in the Bible the forgiveness of sins has always demanded blood. This is God’s justice. God is not only all knowing he is pure holiness and therefore demands atonement for all sins. He gave us all this through his Son Jesus. Of course he didn’t want this to happen to his son but he loves his creation so much that he was willing to sacrafice his son to save us all. This was the plan since the begining of time, it didn’t just come up spontaniously. It was all part of the grand plan- to trust in his Son Jesus. The reason his suffering can earn credit is because Jesus was sinless and didn’t deserve what he got. It should have been us on the cross. All we have to do is acknowledge his sacrafice and trust in Jesus. I’ll pray for you.
An answer by Anonymous
I am amazed at how few people can give an answer to this other than something like: It is a mystery. You just believe or not – faith, etc. Surely we are entitled to better than that.
I am amazed that you can’t find someone to give an answer. I’ll give a shot…
First, though, let me say that I am an atheist. But I’ve never felt that my beliefs preclude me from understanding other’s beliefs. So here goes:
The answer: Free will
Accept that God is omnipotent – he can do anything. But that doesn’t REQUIRE that he do anything. Yes, he CAN make everyone be perfect, but then there is no free will.
The suffering of jesus on the cross was the punishment for EVERYONE’s sins – he bore it all, so that none of us would have to. But we still need to choose to accept it. That choice is what god wants – thus, free will.
At least that’s how I’ve always understood the idea.
PS – just discovered OmniNerd today – looks like I’ll have to keep an eye out here!
what if by Anonymous
me thinks folks are simply not looking outside the box on this one. it never made sense to me either, as you said, who would the supreme being have to sacrifice his son to. for the longest time the only thing i could come up with was God wanted to show that under the right conditions, even the son of God has a weakness of faith & to some may even have sinned. so it stands to reason that mere mortals should accept the fact none will be perfect, even the son of God, but that God will still love them.
while i still think these ideas have merit, the idea put forth over the centuries that Jesus had children & that his bloodline continues today is a much more logical reason for God to have sacrificed his son. how many times have christians heard the phrase "washed in the blood of the lamb?" what better way to ensure at least some "good" genes among your creations.
Answer the question! by AnonBCA
DUDE!!! No one ever answered the question…you guys keep saying "good question" and blah blah blah, this is a basic question in Christianity…geez
God gave his only son to a horrible death on earth to save us. How could such a requirement ever come to exist? God is all powerful.
Dude this question can be very clearly answered through the scriptures…firstly, the entire problem stems from the sin of Adam, he set in motion an unrighteous line that has perpetuated through humanity and just about everything that humanity affects (directly and indirectly). God created the Universe in such a way that man has always had the ability to have free will. You’re saying "duh" but I’m saying that’s significant, because its given man the ability to dig a whole and jump in. Thats exactly what happened…you had a righteous line (or scarlet thread, or chosen people) throughout the bible (and after the bible) and you’ve had an "unrighteous" line, the righteous line starts with Abel , Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Moses, etc…and the unrighteous line, Cain Ishmael…and basically everyone else that was in the world at the time…so good then put commandments in the earth to give humanity an opportunity to know what was truely right and what was truely wrong…well these laws were an "outward manifestation of an inward work" ….remember that theme…so if you notice, all the sacrifices and such that were required were all very elaborate and consistent, they are allegories of the relationship between God and the heart (or Soul) of a man. The idea of "burning with fire" and "unleavened bread"…well those were "a shadow of the good things to come" You see…the sacrifices were made, but they were little more then indulgences…you do something wrong, you kill a heffer…you do something else, you kill a dove…there was never a change of heart…if there is no change of heart, there is NO opportunity for salvation of your soul…"IF you through the spirit do mortify the deeds of this flesh ye shall live…" (Colossians) he could have said if you through the spirit "burn" the works of the flesh…or he could have said "if ye through the blood of Christ do burn the works of the flesh you shall live." Jesus had to die because he was the ULTIMATE sacrifice, not for every random sin you make but to reverse the effects of the sin of adam…death, on all humanity.
Clarification by AnonBCA
How could such a requirement ever come to exist?
Think of it this way…you know the proverbial question…"Could you kill one person to save everyone?" Society has concluded that the "moral" answer to that question is "no"…not the way God sees it.
I think if you have trouble seeing the problem you’ll have a huge challenge understanding the solution….
We needed a way of eliminating sin completely from our lives (not just sacrificing goats to "acknowledge" our sins) Jesus was the "ultimate" sacrifice…lots of people complain about how Abraham took his son to get killed…there is actually a GREAT picture in that event…there was a "ram in the bush" that Ram is a picture of Jesus, he made a way where there once wasn’t one…
So in lay terms…everyone before Jesus HAD to die, soul and body, after Jesus died, and, (more importantly!) resurrected, he sent back the "Comfortor" which, upon receipt, restores back the connection that Adam lost in the Garden…and begins the process of "salvation", or "atonement" back to God…being saved is a PROCESS not an event…
Sacrifices of animals and even humans made sense to ancient peoples (e.g., Aztecs, Hebrews, etc.), but now we know this is barbaric behavior
LOL barbaric behavior is COMPLETELY relative…from your perspective. The process of sacrifice still happens in our lives daily…I would post scriptures but I doubt you’d take the time to even read them…I don’t think God was any more happy with killing of his animals then we are…but sin was and still is persistent and ever-growing…I think the sacrifices needed to be made to show the gravity of the issue…these days sin is made to be trivial, even romanticized, but God hates it no less then he did thousands of years ago, as a matter of fact its gotten worse…now, instead of at least making sacrifices, people go to a various "priest" (what is that anyway) and ask them to "absolve" their sins…I guess that’s more convenient for an animal lover, lol…point is, Jesus eliminated the need to sacrifice Animals, his death eliminated the deadly "sting" of sin, now we make sacrifices in our HEARTS, "Mortify therefore your members on the earth" (Col 3:5 KJV) I admonish you to AT LEAST read that verse through the end of that chapter…this will show the NEW sacrifice that we are to make in order to eliminate sin from our SOULS…(as in not our bodies)
I am amazed at how few people can give an answer to this other than something like: It is a mystery.
That is NOT a mystery!! There are MANY mystery’s in the bible (like Mystery Babylon) but this concept is very trivial…you’ve got a fall, then redemption…
The key is to understand that there was (and is) a problem…
check this out in Romans:
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
Then it says:
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
Okay sooo:
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
So thats a BIG thing to accept for most people "in my flesh dwelleth no good thing" people like to blame their issues on someone or something, (devil with a pitch fork, Hades, their big brother, sister, nanites, aliens, etc.) but once you see that there is a "serpent" in all of our lives we can begin to see the gravity of the act that Jesus performed…the reason everything is so "gory" is because this is in fact a matter of life and death, not "heaven" and "Hell" or burning flames of fire and pillows of clouds, the way religion (and Paganism) glamorizes it to be…Christs death and ressurection isn’t about Christmas and Easter (which are holidays with absolutely no association with Jesus at all) its about giving people who want solutions, real solutions…
Even when the Pope tries to answer it he gets into a metaphysical tangle.
uhhh…yeah…not the best reference