Christianity is based on substitutionary atonement

[Gnostic Bishop]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Our sense of right and wrong comes from God. There are definitely things we aren't big enough to understand that will be revealed to us later on. Jesus is God in flesh. God didn't send an eternal son; He sent his begotten son who he fully indwelt through all of the agony and pain. My mind is limited, but I can comprehend the grace that has been bestowed upon me and I hope you will one day repent of your sins and unbelief and turn to such a merciful God.

Thanks for the usual script.

If your sense of value come from the bible God then repent. His really suck and so do the morals of those who embrace un-necessary human sacrifice.

Regards
DL

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Gnostic Bishop

The usual scripted reply. Good grief.

You forget that what you quote makes it look like your prick of a God did not even love his own son enough to die for him.

As above so below says you have the same cold heart.

A moral man will wish his son to bury him but do not let that fact worry your self-centred thinking. You are just like your God. That is not good.

Regards
DL

Why are you here? To spout anything you can against the Bible or our faith? Nice.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Gnostic Bishop

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

Please act like you know there is more than 1 theory of atonement.

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 atonement theory you are speaking of is more or less specific to "penal substitution" in which it is believed that Jesus was "punished instead of sinners".

Again this is not the only theory of atonement (though it may be the only one you have heard of since it's the most common these days).

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.

Not even sure how this poses a problem but okay.... Maybe you should explain your reasoning a bit better?

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.

Okay, so now we are back on track. God could have chosen to punish the guilty instead of the innocent and everything else. I agree but this is only a problem if one adopts a penal substitutionary view of atonement. Penal substitution is not the only view.

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.

Again what you are arguing against is penal substitution. It's not the only view. I tend to agree that penal substitution doesn't adaquately describe the atonement. It's a good thing that it isn't the only view.

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.

Sacrifice isn't typically penal in nature (which is what bothers you in the Jesus example you gave). When the old testament laws demanded the jews perform a sacrifice it wasn't typically done with the mindset that the sacrrifice was being killed in place of the jew that was sacrificing the animal. Sacrifices were mostly a way of showing humility toward God. They were typically costly to those who sacrificed.

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 all the problems you have with atonement are only present in the penal substitutionary model. Read about some others before you dismiss it all outright.

My personal view is probably a bit less mainstream than the other theories you will read about. But that's because I don't think Jesus' death was necessary to forgive our sins. God could have chosen to forgive us any way he wanted to. So why choose the death of his Son, Jesus as the way to forgive us our sins? Maybe it was the best way? Maybe it wasn't? Maybe it's just the way God decided to get our attention. Maybe it's deeper than that. I don't think anyone knows for sure how or why the atonement works, but we do know that God has elevated belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the primary starting point and focus of our salvation.

Everything else is just human theories as to how it all worked and those can never do justice to thoughts and intentions and heart of God almighty himself.

[Aquila]

Heaven, is eternal life in blissful union with God, with pleasures forever more. How can a sinful creature (like man) earn that? How many works are necessary??? How many good deeds must one perform??? 1,000 good works? 10,000 good works?? 100,000 good works??? What kinds of works would be acceptable as it relates to "good works"???

Frankly, there is NOTHING one could do to earn their way to Heaven on their own merit. Without substitutionary atonement... one would have better luck building a ladder to the moon with toothpicks than making it to Heaven on their own.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Heaven, is eternal life in blissful union with God, with pleasures forever more. How can a sinful creature (like man) earn that? How many works are necessary??? How many good deeds must one perform??? 1,000 good works? 10,000 good works?? 100,000 good works??? What kinds of works would be acceptable as it relates to "good works"???

Frankly, there is NOTHING one could do to earn their way to Heaven on their own merit. Without substitutionary atonement... one would have better luck building a ladder to the moon with toothpicks than making it to Heaven on their own.

I think you miss the point. He's not worried whether we can make it to heaven. He is asking whether it was wrong for God to punish Jesus in our place, and it most certainly would have been if God actually punished Jesus is our place.

You shouldn't limit God and say that substitutionary atonement was the only way he could have saved us from hell. He's God! He could have saved us any way he wanted.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Gnostic Bishop

How will you get yourself into heaven? On your own merit or via a scapegoat?

Revisit substitutionary atonement or vicarious redemption and scapegoating with me just to refresh your memory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNtBkOXItqw

I am not an atheist but Satan and Christians want atheists to embrace barbaric human sacrifice and the notion that we should profit from punishing the innocent instead of the guilty. Scapegoating IOW.

In reality, if God did demand such a barbaric sacrifice, he would be sinning as we all know that it is immoral to kill the innocent. God knows this yet Christians do not seem to. You do. Right?

Those with good morals will know that no noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a son just to prove it's benevolence. When you die, Satan will ask you; how was your ticket to heaven purchased? With innocent blood?

If and when you say yes, you become his.

-----------------------------------

The other option in scriptures, a moral one, is shown here. 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.

Scriptures indicate that God prefers repentance to sacrifice and as God’s will is supreme and cannot be thwarted, this will come to pass.

---------------------------------

It is a special distorted Christian view of love that sees, --- as the greatest act of love possible, --- their God condemning them, and then turning and demanding his son’s deaths and thus corrupting God's perfect justice. A bribe set by God as judge himself for himself. This is of course ridiculous.

Christians have an insane view of love, IMO.

Would you express your love for humanity or those you love by having your own child needlessly murdered?

Or if convinced that a sacrifice was somehow good, would you have the moral fortitude to step up yourself to that cross instead of sending your child?

Your cowardly God did not.

Regards
DL

The Bible also speaks of Christ willingly giving his life for us. He had a choice in this. God did not force him to do it. Furthermore Christ gladly did this "for the joy set before him". You might be complaining, but he is not. He is perfectly happy with what Calvary wrought for him as well as for us.

You can self righteously mock God all day if you want. But in the end you lack sufficient righteousness to stand guiltless before God in the day of wrath. So you can either embrace the imputed righteousness offered to you by God through faith in Christ's atoning work, or you can rattle off all of these accusations to God personally at the judgement bar. Good luck with the latter.



Basically you are a self righteous person who

[Gnostic Bishop]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Why are you here? To spout anything you can against the Bible or our faith? Nice.

Did you see anything that was not true?

No you did not. It is not my fault that you never really thought of the disgusting theology you follow.

No theology that begins with barbaric human sacrifice is worthy.

But do not think of what you follow. You would not want you to be enlightened.

If you were an honest man, you would have answered those little questions that upset you.

Regards
DL

[Gnostic Bishop]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Please act like you know there is more than 1 theory of atonement.



The atonement theory you are speaking of is more or less specific to "penal substitution" in which it is believed that Jesus was "punished instead of sinners".

Again this is not the only theory of atonement (though it may be the only one you have heard of since it's the most common these days).



Not even sure how this poses a problem but okay.... Maybe you should explain your reasoning a bit better?



Okay, so now we are back on track. God could have chosen to punish the guilty instead of the innocent and everything else. I agree but this is only a problem if one adopts a penal substitutionary view of atonement. Penal substitution is not the only view.



Again what you are arguing against is penal substitution. It's not the only view. I tend to agree that penal substitution doesn't adaquately describe the atonement. It's a good thing that it isn't the only view.



Sacrifice isn't typically penal in nature (which is what bothers you in the Jesus example you gave). When the old testament laws demanded the jews perform a sacrifice it wasn't typically done with the mindset that the sacrrifice was being killed in place of the jew that was sacrificing the animal. Sacrifices were mostly a way of showing humility toward God. They were typically costly to those who sacrificed.



Most all the problems you have with atonement are only present in the penal substitutionary model. Read about some others before you dismiss it all outright.

My personal view is probably a bit less mainstream than the other theories you will read about. But that's because I don't think Jesus' death was necessary to forgive our sins. God could have chosen to forgive us any way he wanted to. So why choose the death of his Son, Jesus as the way to forgive us our sins? Maybe it was the best way? Maybe it wasn't? Maybe it's just the way God decided to get our attention. Maybe it's deeper than that. I don't think anyone knows for sure how or why the atonement works, but we do know that God has elevated belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the primary starting point and focus of our salvation.

Everything else is just human theories as to how it all worked and those can never do justice to thoughts and intentions and heart of God almighty himself.

Your last is bang on.

"but we do know that God has elevated belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the primary starting point and focus of our salvation."

Yes God has, to his shame shame.

As above so below.

We have to embrace human sacrifice and the punishment of the innocent instead of the guilty when God's law is on earth.

Do you like that idea? Is it a moral one?

Regards
DL

[Gnostic Bishop]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Heaven, is eternal life in blissful union with God, with pleasures forever more. How can a sinful creature (like man) earn that? How many works are necessary??? How many good deeds must one perform??? 1,000 good works? 10,000 good works?? 100,000 good works??? What kinds of works would be acceptable as it relates to "good works"???

Frankly, there is NOTHING one could do to earn their way to Heaven on their own merit. Without substitutionary atonement... one would have better luck building a ladder to the moon with toothpicks than making it to Heaven on their own.

You call the bible a liar with your scripted so called thinking.

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.

1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Tell us again why you have to embrace barbaric human sacrifice to get to heaven.

Do some more lying.

Regards
DL

[Gnostic Bishop]

Originally Posted by Originalist

The Bible also speaks of Christ willingly giving his life for us. He had a choice in this. God did not force him to do it. Furthermore Christ gladly did this "for the joy set before him". You might be complaining, but he is not. He is perfectly happy with what Calvary wrought for him as well as for us.

You can self righteously mock God all day if you want. But in the end you lack sufficient righteousness to stand guiltless before God in the day of wrath. So you can either embrace the imputed righteousness offered to you by God through faith in Christ's atoning work, or you can rattle off all of these accusations to God personally at the judgement bar. Good luck with the latter.



Basically you are a self righteous person who

You ignore all the places where Jesus says he is doing his fathers work and his will and not his own.

Go lie to yourself elsewhere. I seek those who read what the word says and not what you want the words to say.

You must be a fool if you think God's justice includes punishing the innocent instead of the guilty.

Show us how that works and how a fool would explain such a just method of judging.

Regards
DL