God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.

[GreatestIam]

God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoHP-f-_F9U]Nothing but the blood? - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ott15j2KwQ&feature=related]God Killed Jesus (Responsibility & Christianity) - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqP_fjBkwxc&feature=related]Richard Dawkins schools Howard Conder on morality - YouTube[/ame]

I think that the notion that punishing the innocent instead of the guilty perpetrator is immoral. Be it a willing sacrifice as some believe with Jesus or unwilling victim.

I also think that God, who has a plethora of other options, would have come up with a moral way instead of an immoral and barbaric human sacrifice.

I agree with scriptures say that we are all responsible for our own righteousness as well as our own iniquity and that God cannot be bribed by sacrifice.

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Psalm 49:7
None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

I believe as I do because I believe that the first rule of morality is harm/care of children.

TED Blog | The real difference between liberals and conservatives: Jonathan Haidt on TED.com

Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

Regards
DL

 

[AmericanFirst]

I think you do not know what you are talking about, again.

 

[fred1369]

I bet He promised Him a bicycle and a puppy.

 

[eots]

there is power in the blood...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttdO2RtX_Ik]Hypo full of love Alabama 3,,,by eots - YouTube[/ame]

 

[fred1369]

I think you do not know what you are talking about, again.

Answer his question:
Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

 

[MaryL]

Another typical clueless pseudo atheist rant. How nice for you. Does your mom know? How cluless you really are? You need help, kiddo.

 

[AmericanFirst]

I think you do not know what you are talking about, again.

Answer his question:
Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

His question is stupid. If he understood the Bible he would not ask stupid questions like that. God is God, he does not have to explain himself.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I think you do not know what you are talking about, again.

Answer his question:
Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

His question is stupid. If he understood the Bible he would not ask stupid questions like that. God is God, he does not have to explain himself.

That is the best answer, but one that these fuckheads wont grasp because they have no faith.

Let me essplain it to you godless heathen.

1. Everyone is guilty of committing sin. No one is innocent, even the greatest saints, monks and holy men have siunned.

2. God is Holy and also Just. He cannot live with thos who accept sin and willfully engage in it. At the same time since He is Just, He cannot condemn the perps and pervs and then let the righteous off the hook because even the most righteous are not completely righteous.

3. Debts can be paid by a person other than the guilty party and have always been able to in almost every nation, even today the court doesnt care if you pay your traffic fine or your parents do. In the past people could take someone elses place for punishments that they could not survive, like whippings etc. We cannot pay the fine for our sin, but Christ can and did.

Now saying all that, it wont matter for jack shit because no anti-Christian or nonBiblical pseudoChristian really gives a shit. This OP question is just more rhetorical bullshit to confuse weak minded people.

But one day the bullshit wont fly and in a sense doesnt even now as God knows what is in our heart and these heathen bastards arent getting away with jack shit. They will answer for all their mockery and blasphemy one day. And may that day hasten.

 

[GreatestIam]

I think you do not know what you are talking about, again.

Chastisement without correction is just cruelty.
Thanks for showing you stripes Christian.

If you could refute or correct, we all know you would.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

there is power in the blood...

[/url]

Not a bad tune actually.

Thanks.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Another typical clueless pseudo atheist rant. How nice for you. Does your mom know? How cluless you really are? You need help, kiddo.

You do if you cannot answer simple questions of morality and love.

Regards
DL

 

[007]

God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.

Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

Regards
DL

God had to send a human. God is not human and therefore can't "die."

He also raised his son from the dead.

Does that answer your question?

 

[GreatestIam]

I think you do not know what you are talking about, again.

Answer his question:
Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

Forget it my friend.

These people are from the bible belt and do not know how to read and have no concept of morals. They do not know Gods morals but they do know when they are morally corrupt. Note the 3 raw immoral nerves I touched.

These are thumpers and not thinkers and cannot find anything to thump against the one quote in the O P let alone the others in the clips.

I get this kind or response when I do well with an O P.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.

Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

Regards
DL

God had to send a human. God is not human and therefore can't "die."

He also raised his son from the dead.

Does that answer your question?

Nope.

HGad to send as in no choice?
Tsk tsk. You dare limit your God.
He will send you to hell for that won't he?

Why send anyone at all?
Why not just forgive or wait for his other way to forgive to kick in?
After all, he did say he prefered repentance over sacrifice.

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Further. Jesus' death is meaningless without the resurrection yet noe of the 4 main gospels talks of it. Something that important and not a word. Strange no?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xH93PSZ6fQ]Bart Ehrman (3/21/11) - YouTube[/ame]

Regards
DL

 

[hortysir]

Cammmpbelll?

Is that you????

 

[GreatestIam]

[

3. Debts can be paid by a person other than the guilty party and have always been able to in almost every nation, even today the court doesnt care if you pay your traffic fine or your parents do. In the past people could take someone elses place for punishments that they could not survive, like whippings etc. We cannot pay the fine for our sin, but Christ can and did.

.

This is not cash.
It is a human life.

Your analogy sucks as bad as your morals.

Regards
DL

 

[Youwerecreated]

Cammmpbelll?

Is that you????

 

[hortysir]

[

3. Debts can be paid by a person other than the guilty party and have always been able to in almost every nation, even today the court doesnt care if you pay your traffic fine or your parents do. In the past people could take someone elses place for punishments that they could not survive, like whippings etc. We cannot pay the fine for our sin, but Christ can and did.

.

This is not cash.
It is a human life.

Your analogy sucks as bad as your morals.

Regards
DL

But not quite as bad as your reading comprehension.

 

[hortysir]

God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.


Nothing but the blood? - YouTube

God Killed Jesus (Responsibility & Christianity) - YouTube

Richard Dawkins schools Howard Conder on morality - YouTube

I think that the notion that punishing the innocent instead of the guilty perpetrator is immoral. Be it a willing sacrifice as some believe with Jesus or unwilling victim.

I also think that God, who has a plethora of other options, would have come up with a moral way instead of an immoral and barbaric human sacrifice.

I agree with scriptures say that we are all responsible for our own righteousness as well as our own iniquity and that God cannot be bribed by sacrifice.

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Psalm 49:7
None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

I believe as I do because I believe that the first rule of morality is harm/care of children.

TED Blog | The real difference between liberals and conservatives: Jonathan Haidt on TED.com

Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

Regards
DL

You start your OP with a ridiculing mock-quote of God.

You follow that with Youtube bullshit.
Try actually picking up a Bible and read for yourself.
Then go to a church and listen to a scholar on the subject and ask him, after the service, if you have any questions.

This drive-by style of posting with the only intent to antagonize just isn't cutting it.

The Jews lived under a sacrificial Law, in Jesus' time.
Jesus was/is the Final Pure Sacrifice.

It's done. It's paid for.
You don't have to believe it. Heck, you don't even have to ASK for It.
All you have to do is ACCEPT It.

 

[007]

God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.

Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

Regards
DL

God had to send a human. God is not human and therefore can't "die."

He also raised his son from the dead.

Does that answer your question?

Nope.

HGad to send as in no choice?
Tsk tsk. You dare limit your God.
He will send you to hell for that won't he?

Why send anyone at all?
Why not just forgive or wait for his other way to forgive to kick in?
After all, he did say he prefered repentance over sacrifice.

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Further. Jesus' death is meaningless without the resurrection yet noe of the 4 main gospels talks of it. Something that important and not a word. Strange no?

Regards
DL

I see you're not really interested in an actual discussion. You just want to piss on every comment.

Have fun pissing... I have more important things to do here.