I'm an atheist so help me understand the Christian reasoning from a rational perspective:
God created man and i guess he did a bad job because we, as species, decided to be very bad in his eyes. So after killing every man, woman and baby save for Noah and his sons and son's wives...he actually decides we deserve death and torment again. He wants to forgive us but in order to do this he needs blood. And not just any blood but the blood of his only son/aspect of himself. So he makes an animal/human sacrifice of his son in order to forgive us for being so shitty...but it's only going to work if we believe the story after thousands of years.
So....if he wants to forgive and give a second chance, why not just do it without demanding blood and allegiance?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
He bled in two different ways. He bled from every pore whilst taking on every sin we would ever commit. I think this was the result of taking on so much and having a mortal body. This freed us from the bondage of sin. He also bled when he died which was how the Romans killed people back then. He died so he could overcome death, thereby freeing us from death. It was a two part process he underwent.
Because of our mortality we all die physically and because of our sins we can also die spiritually (or rather be separated from God). Christ's sacrifice allows us to live again eternally and also be brought back into God's presence.
Why did he have to do that way? Only a sinless person could pay the debt of all our sins, as he didn't have any debt. His sacrifice paved a path for us.
Justice requires a price be paid. So either we pay it or we allow Jesus to intercede for us. We choose. How is this fair? This life is for us to have experiences, be tested, and choose. He provided a way for us to wipe the slate clean when we choose wrong. It is not as easy as just saying sorry and being forgiven though. It requires true change. So we aren't getting off scott free. True repentance requires becoming a new person. It also requires restitution as far as you are able. This also doesn't absolve you from the consequences here on earth, only spiritually, you'll be right with God.
@midnightrose It’s from the earlier tradition where the sins of the people were transferred to a goat, which was then sacrificed. The term scapegoat originated from this ritual. It lives on in the kapores ceremony some Orthodox Jews still perform around Yom Kippur, where a chicken is sacrificed. The Yom Kippur service itself is a day of gas and repentance when Jews ask God’s forgiveness for any sins they committed against him the previous year.
However, sins against other people can only be forgiven by the other person, God will not forgive these. This is one reason Jews don’t accept the universal atonement supposedly offered by Jesus. As a Jew, Jesus would never have offered such a thing even if he was God, so that tenet of Christianity must be in error.
@LeopoldBloom I don't know much about the Jewish faith so thank you for educating me. The part about not forgiving sins against other people is interesting. My question would be, what does he say about forgiving other people when they have sinned against you? Is it an obligation to forgive? I ask because in Christianity it is for us to forgive as we have been forgiven, or we also find ourselves in sin. I didn't know if it was the same.
It is difficult for me to wrap my head around God putting our forgiveness, and thereby our eternal existence after this life, into the hands of an imperfect being who cannot know our heart. People can hold a grudge for a long time or may never forgive our trespasses, even when a person has done everything to try and make it right. So would we be stuck in sin if they never give us their forgiveness?
I would also say that all sins are committed against God because technically speaking it can't be a sin without also going against God. And lastly, just to clear things up, Christianity also believes a person needs to seek forgiveness from a person if they've done something to another person. However, our forgiveness with the Lord isn't dependant on their forgiveness, because only God can cleanse or remove our sins. If we've done all that we can to make it right, we will find forgiveness. It may not be immediate. Some repentance requires time but forgiveness is promised when we make a full repentance.
I mean the demand that life be payment. Sometimes with animals and sometimes with humans.
Christ's sacrifice allows us to live again eternally and also be brought back into God's presence.
That's the what, but where's the why? Why would a god need or demand that?
Justice requires a price be paid.
But forgiveness doesn't. This is the equivalent of you owing me money and i can't forgive you until you pay...so pay the money for you. Could have skipped that step. Didn't need the money, why does god need the blood?
@Pikachu I would only be speculating on that because we aren't really told (to my knowledge) why it had to be that way, we only know that it did. I'm not entirely convinced it is God who made this the requirement or if he is following some universal law. I think some things are just how it works, similar to physics. The laws of physics are what they are. For the most part, we accept that that is the process in which things happen. We might gain better understanding of how it works but nobody can really explain why it couldn't be done some other way.
When it comes to justice, or forgiveness (they go hand in hand). Forgiveness means your sin is cleaned away. Sin=spiritual death, mortality=physical death. To be spared from these two things, another life must take its place. It is a life for a life. However, while he gave his life, he rose again. He overcame physical death as well. I guess this is why I'm not sure why the process is so bothersome when his life was restored, not just restored, but made into a glorified and perfected state.
When Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge, the part where they were deceived was that they woudn't die. While their eyes were opened and they gained knowledge of good and evil (we only gain that knowledge by experiencing both), they also became subject to illness, growing old, and death. Without the atonement (innocent life sacrifice) they would not have been freed from sin or death.
The scripture states that Adam could have taken of the tree of life (eternal life) in that same moment, but God had it guarded before he could. He says he prevented him from being able to have it because this gave them time for repentance. God's glory, we are told, is not something we can look upon and live (not in our sinful state anyway). Only through Jesus Christ will we be able to come before Him and see Him. So it had to be an unblemished life, not just any life would do.
Hopefully I've helped a little bit. My thoughts can be a little scattered. It's all connected in my mind but I have to go in multiple directions to bring it all together.
e aren't really told (to my knowledge) why it had to be that way, we only know that it did
Indeed. Which is one of the issues i'm pointing out. Why does this super being need blood and death to forgive? Is that just something akin to a law of physics? But that doesn't get us anywhere since god is ostensibly the architect of such laws. Additionally, we see in our own lives that blood and death are not requisite for forgiveness. For instance " I'm sorry" often suffices.
When it comes to justice, or forgiveness (they go hand in hand
Not necessarily. Forgiveness is a choice, not a transaction. And even in the example under discussion there is no justice to substitutional atonement. If i commit murder and at my hearing the judge says " No, my son will be punished in your place" no justice has been served. I think the absurdity of that proposition becomes clear when we put it in a more mundane context. To say " a life demands a life" is just a restatement of the issue, not a justification thereof.
All that said, i appreciate your good-faith attempt to address the question✌
