Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement. Is it a moral religion?

[GreatestIam]

Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement. Is it a moral religion?

The case of substitutionary atonement that I wish to speak of is when God deemed it moral and just to punish his innocent son Jesus, --- instead of punishing the guilty sinners that God was to condemn.

The strange part of this situation is that God had chosen to sacrifice Jesus even before the potential for sin was created, --- God had yet to create the earth, --- showing that what God was killing Jesus for, --- he had yet to create.

This was an arbitrary choice for God that was completely needless. God could have chosen to punish the guilty, --- what most call justice, --- or God could have found a moral way to forgive us. Instead, God chose to do the unjust and punish the innocent instead of the guilty.

The sacrifice was to pay or bribe God to change his usual policy of punishing the guilty to immorally punishing Jesus. God could have shown mercy and justice but instead decided to use an unjust method to forgive us.

That means that to be a good Christian, you have to accept and embrace the immoral tenet of human sacrifice and the notion that the best form of justice, --- when one wants to forgive someone, --- is to kill an innocent party.

As above so below.

At the end of days, God is to bring his law to earth.

Would you, as an innocent party, think it just if God punished you instead of the guilty?

Do you think that Jesus would ever preach such an immoral form of justice?

Regards
DL

Most of your premises here about most Christian denominations are either wrong or incomplete. Because of this I see strange conclusions in your post.

The Father did not punish the Son.

Still a bunch of holes in your story. Doesn't make any sense. Christianity makes as much sense as every other religion that came before or after it.

Correct. Literal interpretation of all myths are all garbage and have all produced garbage religions.

Regards
DL

 

[sealybobo]

Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement. Is it a moral religion?

The case of substitutionary atonement that I wish to speak of is when God deemed it moral and just to punish his innocent son Jesus, --- instead of punishing the guilty sinners that God was to condemn.

The strange part of this situation is that God had chosen to sacrifice Jesus even before the potential for sin was created, --- God had yet to create the earth, --- showing that what God was killing Jesus for, --- he had yet to create.

This was an arbitrary choice for God that was completely needless. God could have chosen to punish the guilty, --- what most call justice, --- or God could have found a moral way to forgive us. Instead, God chose to do the unjust and punish the innocent instead of the guilty.

The sacrifice was to pay or bribe God to change his usual policy of punishing the guilty to immorally punishing Jesus. God could have shown mercy and justice but instead decided to use an unjust method to forgive us.

That means that to be a good Christian, you have to accept and embrace the immoral tenet of human sacrifice and the notion that the best form of justice, --- when one wants to forgive someone, --- is to kill an innocent party.

As above so below.

At the end of days, God is to bring his law to earth.

Would you, as an innocent party, think it just if God punished you instead of the guilty?

Do you think that Jesus would ever preach such an immoral form of justice?

Regards
DL

Most of your premises here about most Christian denominations are either wrong or incomplete. Because of this I see strange conclusions in your post.

The Father did not punish the Son.

Still a bunch of holes in your story. Doesn't make any sense. Christianity makes as much sense as every other religion that came before or after it.

Correct. Literal interpretation of all myths are all garbage and have all produced garbage religions.

Regards
DL

It came to me the other day when I was arguing with theists. Originally we sat around the fire or in a cave and we wondered why we were here. What happened to Gramma when the lion carried her away? Unintelligent Indians, Arabs, Jews, Greeks, etc came up with god(s) or a creator. They said, "something must have created us". For awhile we worshiped the sun, then animals, then Zeus, then Kings & Pharoahs and Popes.

At some point we were all stumped. Even the smartest trible elder didn't know. Then one day some guy came down from a mountain and said he talked to god and gold told him all these things. This was their proof a god exists. Same thing happened with Joseph Smith for god sakes people! He said god told him to start the Mormon religion.

Anyways, we have always wondered what created all this if anything. We still don't know. We may never know.

But the idiots that belong to organized religions think they know. Trust me, they don't. They are just ignorant people all wishful thinking. Ignorance is bliss I hear.

 

[GreatestIam]

Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement. Is it a moral religion?

The case of substitutionary atonement that I wish to speak of is when God deemed it moral and just to punish his innocent son Jesus, --- instead of punishing the guilty sinners that God was to condemn.

The strange part of this situation is that God had chosen to sacrifice Jesus even before the potential for sin was created, --- God had yet to create the earth, --- showing that what God was killing Jesus for, --- he had yet to create.

This was an arbitrary choice for God that was completely needless. God could have chosen to punish the guilty, --- what most call justice, --- or God could have found a moral way to forgive us. Instead, God chose to do the unjust and punish the innocent instead of the guilty.

The sacrifice was to pay or bribe God to change his usual policy of punishing the guilty to immorally punishing Jesus. God could have shown mercy and justice but instead decided to use an unjust method to forgive us.

That means that to be a good Christian, you have to accept and embrace the immoral tenet of human sacrifice and the notion that the best form of justice, --- when one wants to forgive someone, --- is to kill an innocent party.

As above so below.

At the end of days, God is to bring his law to earth.

Would you, as an innocent party, think it just if God punished you instead of the guilty?

Do you think that Jesus would ever preach such an immoral form of justice?

Regards
DL

Most of your premises here about most Christian denominations are either wrong or incomplete. Because of this I see strange conclusions in your post.

The Father did not punish the Son.

Still a bunch of holes in your story. Doesn't make any sense. Christianity makes as much sense as every other religion that came before or after it.

Correct. Literal interpretation of all myths are all garbage and have all produced garbage religions.

Regards
DL

It came to me the other day when I was arguing with theists. Originally we sat around the fire or in a cave and we wondered why we were here. What happened to Gramma when the lion carried her away? Unintelligent Indians, Arabs, Jews, Greeks, etc came up with god(s) or a creator. They said, "something must have created us". For awhile we worshiped the sun, then animals, then Zeus, then Kings & Pharoahs and Popes.

At some point we were all stumped. Even the smartest trible elder didn't know. Then one day some guy came down from a mountain and said he talked to god and gold told him all these things. This was their proof a god exists. Same thing happened with Joseph Smith for god sakes people! He said god told him to start the Mormon religion.

Anyways, we have always wondered what created all this if anything. We still don't know. We may never know.

But the idiots that belong to organized religions think they know. Trust me, they don't. They are just ignorant people all wishful thinking. Ignorance is bliss I hear.

It is more complicated than that but I will not argue here as you are basically right on.

Regards
DL

 

[sealybobo]

Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement. Is it a moral religion?

The case of substitutionary atonement that I wish to speak of is when God deemed it moral and just to punish his innocent son Jesus, --- instead of punishing the guilty sinners that God was to condemn.

The strange part of this situation is that God had chosen to sacrifice Jesus even before the potential for sin was created, --- God had yet to create the earth, --- showing that what God was killing Jesus for, --- he had yet to create.

This was an arbitrary choice for God that was completely needless. God could have chosen to punish the guilty, --- what most call justice, --- or God could have found a moral way to forgive us. Instead, God chose to do the unjust and punish the innocent instead of the guilty.

The sacrifice was to pay or bribe God to change his usual policy of punishing the guilty to immorally punishing Jesus. God could have shown mercy and justice but instead decided to use an unjust method to forgive us.

That means that to be a good Christian, you have to accept and embrace the immoral tenet of human sacrifice and the notion that the best form of justice, --- when one wants to forgive someone, --- is to kill an innocent party.

As above so below.

At the end of days, God is to bring his law to earth.

Would you, as an innocent party, think it just if God punished you instead of the guilty?

Do you think that Jesus would ever preach such an immoral form of justice?

Regards
DL

Most of your premises here about most Christian denominations are either wrong or incomplete. Because of this I see strange conclusions in your post.

The Father did not punish the Son.

Still a bunch of holes in your story. Doesn't make any sense. Christianity makes as much sense as every other religion that came before or after it.

Correct. Literal interpretation of all myths are all garbage and have all produced garbage religions.

Regards
DL

It came to me the other day when I was arguing with theists. Originally we sat around the fire or in a cave and we wondered why we were here. What happened to Gramma when the lion carried her away? Unintelligent Indians, Arabs, Jews, Greeks, etc came up with god(s) or a creator. They said, "something must have created us". For awhile we worshiped the sun, then animals, then Zeus, then Kings & Pharoahs and Popes.

At some point we were all stumped. Even the smartest trible elder didn't know. Then one day some guy came down from a mountain and said he talked to god and gold told him all these things. This was their proof a god exists. Same thing happened with Joseph Smith for god sakes people! He said god told him to start the Mormon religion.

Anyways, we have always wondered what created all this if anything. We still don't know. We may never know.

But the idiots that belong to organized religions think they know. Trust me, they don't. They are just ignorant people all wishful thinking. Ignorance is bliss I hear.

It is more complicated than that but I will not argue here as you are basically right on.

Regards
DL

Of course it is. There is much more to the story. And I think anyone who knows the entire history of religion and still believes in one particular religion is a fool to not realize that their religion is made up just like every other religion.

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” – Stephen F Roberts

 

[Meriweather]

No predestination then. Good.

That makes this a lie then. Right?

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

This is not predestination as you understand it, but Divine Providence. No one scriptural verse stands alone, but works with every other one. Paul's point is God's overall vision/plan as well--not that God chooses and condemns specific individuals. Those who enter into God's plan will be conformed according to God's original plan; those who reject God's plan cannot be conformed.

Paul is pointing out that when things seem to be at their worst, God can step in and create something good of it. That was His plan from the beginning.

 

[Meriweather]

Still a bunch of holes in your story. Doesn't make any sense. Christianity makes as much sense as every other religion that came before or after it.

I would need a case by case presentation to understand what you see as holes, and what (precisely) does not make sense.

 

[GreatestIam]

Most of your premises here about most Christian denominations are either wrong or incomplete. Because of this I see strange conclusions in your post.

The Father did not punish the Son.

Still a bunch of holes in your story. Doesn't make any sense. Christianity makes as much sense as every other religion that came before or after it.

Correct. Literal interpretation of all myths are all garbage and have all produced garbage religions.

Regards
DL

It came to me the other day when I was arguing with theists. Originally we sat around the fire or in a cave and we wondered why we were here. What happened to Gramma when the lion carried her away? Unintelligent Indians, Arabs, Jews, Greeks, etc came up with god(s) or a creator. They said, "something must have created us". For awhile we worshiped the sun, then animals, then Zeus, then Kings & Pharoahs and Popes.

At some point we were all stumped. Even the smartest trible elder didn't know. Then one day some guy came down from a mountain and said he talked to god and gold told him all these things. This was their proof a god exists. Same thing happened with Joseph Smith for god sakes people! He said god told him to start the Mormon religion.

Anyways, we have always wondered what created all this if anything. We still don't know. We may never know.

But the idiots that belong to organized religions think they know. Trust me, they don't. They are just ignorant people all wishful thinking. Ignorance is bliss I hear.

It is more complicated than that but I will not argue here as you are basically right on.

Regards
DL

Of course it is. There is much more to the story. And I think anyone who knows the entire history of religion and still believes in one particular religion is a fool to not realize that their religion is made up just like every other religion.

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” – Stephen F Roberts

Good quote. Thanks.

Regards
DL

 

[sealybobo]

No predestination then. Good.

That makes this a lie then. Right?

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

This is not predestination as you understand it, but Divine Providence. No one scriptural verse stands alone, but works with every other one. Paul's point is God's overall vision/plan as well--not that God chooses and condemns specific individuals. Those who enter into God's plan will be conformed according to God's original plan; those who reject God's plan cannot be conformed.

Paul is pointing out that when things seem to be at their worst, God can step in and create something good of it. That was His plan from the beginning.

OMG I remember I would argue with Christians and they'd say, "you have to read the bible first", so then I read it and now you are telling me I have to read 20 more books and THEN it will all make sense? Pahleez!

 

[GreatestIam]

No predestination then. Good.

That makes this a lie then. Right?

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

This is not predestination as you understand it, but Divine Providence. No one scriptural verse stands alone, but works with every other one. Paul's point is God's overall vision/plan as well--not that God chooses and condemns specific individuals. Those who enter into God's plan will be conformed according to God's original plan; those who reject God's plan cannot be conformed.

Paul is pointing out that when things seem to be at their worst, God can step in and create something good of it. That was His plan from the beginning.

So he had a plan but you will not call it predestination, even though it is just that.

When you do not want to screw up the English language to suit you beliefs, I am here for you.

Regards
DL

 

[Meriweather]

OMG I remember I would argue with Christians and they'd say, "you have to read the bible first", so then I read it and now you are telling me I have to read 20 more books and THEN it will all make sense? Pahleez!

Where am I saying you have to read twenty more books? In fact, I've never told anyone they had to read the Bible....and remember, I taught Continuing Catholic Education.

 

[GreatestIam]

OMG I remember I would argue with Christians and they'd say, "you have to read the bible first", so then I read it and now you are telling me I have to read 20 more books and THEN it will all make sense? Pahleez!

Where am I saying you have to read twenty more books? In fact, I've never told anyone they had to read the Bible....and remember, I taught Continuing Catholic Education.

Then you should be a better apologist than what you are.

Regards
DL

 

[sealybobo]

Still a bunch of holes in your story. Doesn't make any sense. Christianity makes as much sense as every other religion that came before or after it.

I would need a case by case presentation to understand what you see as holes, and what (precisely) does not make sense.

Where do I start?

Every conceivable argument, every imaginable piece of evidence for god is not without some fatal flaw or more likely explanation which precludes it from being used as definitive proof.

Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” - Ken Ham

If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

 

[Meriweather]

So he had a plan but you will not call it predestination, even though it is just that.

There is at least one Christian denomination that centers on this one verse of Paul's. They believe that for each individual God created, He predestined some to hell and some to eternal life. This became known as predestination.

Catholic theology has a different perspective, one that is known as Divine Providence. Divine Providence teaches that God has a plan for humanity, and that He will work with mankind on this pre-planned journey to the ultimate perfection. Divine Providence takes into account free will--that each individual can choose to conform to the predestined plan, or the individual can choose to reject it.

I am sure you can see the difference in the two theologies.

 

[Meriweather]

Where do I start?

Every conceivable argument, every imaginable piece of evidence for god is not without some fatal flaw or more likely explanation which precludes it from being used as definitive proof.

Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” - Ken Ham

If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

If someone brought me a rock and insisted I prove water existed with only that rock, I would have no trouble laying the rock aside and saying, "I can't." In the same way, when someone insists I prove God and use evidence to do so, I have no trouble saying, "I can't."

What I can say is that I have had an experience with a powerful, loving being, who cares about all of us. I can collect stories of others who have had similar experiences--all unverifiable by the scientific method.

With stories like the first Passover and the Amalekites, I can explain where people see God's love, mercy, and justice coming into play. That's what I do. Try to shine a light on the love of God in areas where that love, perhaps at first glance, is not readily apparent.

 

[Darlene]

I consider myself irreligious. There are too many "Christian" bigots and hypocrites. Too much judgment passed.
For those who aren't familiar with irreligion: Irreligion - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Irreligion (adjective form: non-religious or irreligious) is the absence of religion, an indifference towards religion, a rejection of religion, or hostility towards religion.[1] When characterized as the rejection of religious belief, it includes explicit atheism, religious dissidence, and secular humanism. When characterized as hostility towards religion, it includes anticlericalism, antireligion, and antitheism. When characterized as indifference to religion, it includes apatheism. When characterized as the absence of religious belief, it may also include deism, implicit atheism, spiritual but not religious, agnosticism, pandeism, ignosticism, nontheism, pantheism, panentheism, religious skepticism, and freethought. Irreligion may include forms of theism, depending on the religious context it is defined against. In 18th-century Europe, the epitome of irreligion was deism.[2]

 

[ninja007]

Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement. Is it a moral religion?

The case of substitutionary atonement that I wish to speak of is when God deemed it moral and just to punish his innocent son Jesus, --- instead of punishing the guilty sinners that God was to condemn.

The strange part of this situation is that God had chosen to sacrifice Jesus even before the potential for sin was created, --- God had yet to create the earth, --- showing that what God was killing Jesus for, --- he had yet to create.

This was an arbitrary choice for God that was completely needless. God could have chosen to punish the guilty, --- what most call justice, --- or God could have found a moral way to forgive us. Instead, God chose to do the unjust and punish the innocent instead of the guilty.

The sacrifice was to pay or bribe God to change his usual policy of punishing the guilty to immorally punishing Jesus. God could have shown mercy and justice but instead decided to use an unjust method to forgive us.

That means that to be a good Christian, you have to accept and embrace the immoral tenet of human sacrifice and the notion that the best form of justice, --- when one wants to forgive someone, --- is to kill an innocent party.

As above so below.

At the end of days, God is to bring his law to earth.

Would you, as an innocent party, think it just if God punished you instead of the guilty?

Do you think that Jesus would ever preach such an immoral form of justice?

Regards
DL

Most of your premises here about most Christian denominations are either wrong or incomplete.

You are a liar who wishes to stay in your immoral mind set.

Regards
DL

Once again you begin with erroneous premises and reach strange conclusions. Have you any interest in learning what most Christians believe and understand?

Not when your version starts with saying that deciding to make a human sacrifice of a son is not harming a son.

Come to speak truth fully and I will listen but you already began with a lie and should retract if you wish credibility.

Regards
DL

I knew/know Meri from another board and I can assure you G.I.AM that 1. she is not a liar and 2. She has strong beliefs that she feels so strongly about they would scare you if you really knew her 3. She is one of the most loving and patient people I know over the interwebs

 

[ninja007]

No predestination then. Good.

That makes this a lie then. Right?

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

This is not predestination as you understand it, but Divine Providence. No one scriptural verse stands alone, but works with every other one. Paul's point is God's overall vision/plan as well--not that God chooses and condemns specific individuals. Those who enter into God's plan will be conformed according to God's original plan; those who reject God's plan cannot be conformed.

Paul is pointing out that when things seem to be at their worst, God can step in and create something good of it. That was His plan from the beginning.

So he had a plan but you will not call it predestination, even though it is just that.

When you do not want to screw up the English language to suit you beliefs, I am here for you.

Regards
DL

You might be surprised to know you are talking to a teacher. Please give others the benefit of the doubt- yes, us Christians too.

 

[sealybobo]

So he had a plan but you will not call it predestination, even though it is just that.

There is at least one Christian denomination that centers on this one verse of Paul's. They believe that for each individual God created, He predestined some to hell and some to eternal life. This became known as predestination.

Catholic theology has a different perspective, one that is known as Divine Providence. Divine Providence teaches that God has a plan for humanity, and that He will work with mankind on this pre-planned journey to the ultimate perfection. Divine Providence takes into account free will--that each individual can choose to conform to the predestined plan, or the individual can choose to reject it.

I am sure you can see the difference in the two theologies.

Don't you understand that the men of that time were very uneducated, superstitious and curious? For thousands of years they debated this stuff. And what you wrote above was the best those guys could come up with. Today if we started all over, we would be asking the same questions but using science to find the answers, not some ancient made up holy books. You are no different than every other organized/made up religion that came before or after you. The Greeks were very devoted to their gods. Look at how much thought they put into gods. How many gods did they have? One for every occasion. Sort of like an Xman movie. So all this Divine Providence was initially made up and the people who swallowed it passed it on just like a parent passes on a bad genetic gene. Time to change.

If God is real then so is Zeus and the Wolverine because someone made them up in their head too. I even know what the Wolverine looks like.

 

[sealybobo]

Where do I start?

Every conceivable argument, every imaginable piece of evidence for god is not without some fatal flaw or more likely explanation which precludes it from being used as definitive proof.

Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” - Ken Ham

If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

If someone brought me a rock and insisted I prove water existed with only that rock, I would have no trouble laying the rock aside and saying, "I can't." In the same way, when someone insists I prove God and use evidence to do so, I have no trouble saying, "I can't."

What I can say is that I have had an experience with a powerful, loving being, who cares about all of us. I can collect stories of others who have had similar experiences--all unverifiable by the scientific method.

With stories like the first Passover and the Amalekites, I can explain where people see God's love, mercy, and justice coming into play. That's what I do. Try to shine a light on the love of God in areas where that love, perhaps at first glance, is not readily apparent.

You've had an experience with him? Ok, I give up, you win.

 

[sealybobo]

I consider myself irreligious. There are too many "Christian" bigots and hypocrites. Too much judgment passed.
For those who aren't familiar with irreligion: Irreligion - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Irreligion (adjective form: non-religious or irreligious) is the absence of religion, an indifference towards religion, a rejection of religion, or hostility towards religion.[1] When characterized as the rejection of religious belief, it includes explicit atheism, religious dissidence, and secular humanism. When characterized as hostility towards religion, it includes anticlericalism, antireligion, and antitheism. When characterized as indifference to religion, it includes apatheism. When characterized as the absence of religious belief, it may also include deism, implicit atheism, spiritual but not religious, agnosticism, pandeism, ignosticism, nontheism, pantheism, panentheism, religious skepticism, and freethought. Irreligion may include forms of theism, depending on the religious context it is defined against. In 18th-century Europe, the epitome of irreligion was deism.[2]

Big difference between believing in god(s) and being anti religion and not believing any gods exist.

I went from being a Christian to believing in a generic god. But if I don't believe any organized religions, what makes me think the god they tell me exists is even real?

It took meeting a group of atheists and watching the Cosmos every Sunday for me to give up the idea that I had a personal relationship with god. That's why I laugh when people say they had an experience with a loving and powerful being. Sure they did.