Are you riding Jesus or are you elevating him?

Greatest I am

Greatest I am

Valued Senior Member
Are you riding Jesus or are you elevating him?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzj8aE1KPPQ

Substitutionary atonement is thought of by many to be an immoral practice yet Christians embrace such a notion as moral and good.

Christians see God sending Jesus to be murdered as a good thing as it makes it possible for God to forgive man’s sins.
They tend to forget that the moral thing to do was to just forgive outright the same way he had done before sending Jesus.

This thinking says then that it is ok to use a scapegoat for our sins and not take responsibility for our own sins. That is why many think that we are saved by faith alone and not by deeds. Obviously a poor moral position.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4dANEsd5so

Who ultimately is responsible for your sins?
Should Jesus, as your hero, be carrying you and your responsibilities, or should you be carrying your hero?

Matthew 10:38
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

Did Jesus do the immoral thing and try to offer himself as a scapegoat?

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am said:
Are you riding Jesus or are you elevating him?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzj8aE1KPPQ

Substitutionary atonement is thought of by many to be an immoral practice yet Christians embrace such a notion as moral and good.

Christians see God sending Jesus to be murdered as a good thing as it makes it possible for God to forgive man’s sins.
They tend to forget that the moral thing to do was to just forgive outright the same way he had done before sending Jesus.

This thinking says then that it is ok to use a scapegoat for our sins and not take responsibility for our own sins. That is why many think that we are saved by faith alone and not by deeds. Obviously a poor moral position.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4dANEsd5so

Who ultimately is responsible for your sins?
Should Jesus, as your hero, be carrying you and your responsibilities, or should you be carrying your hero?

Matthew 10:38
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

Did Jesus do the immoral thing and try to offer himself as a scapegoat?

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

You have some interesting points, but I think of it this way. Jesus lived his life as a template for others to follow. Through his actions he demostrated charity, foregiveness, and love. And in his death he demonstrated the most nobel of acts, self sacrifice.

Does God care about blood for blood, an eye for an eye? If Jesus is to be believed, I think not. For me the story of Jesus on the cross is just a continuation of a life of principal. In my view, the cruxifiction was not about God's law, but rather a demonstration of morals and the most noble of acts - self sacrifice, too suffer and die so that others might live.
 
Seriously, it's like this forum is only ever used for little ongoing holy wars between a small subset of people. In fact it's not just like that, it is that.
 
Lori_7 said:
you're forgetting about repentance...again.
Click to expand...

Not at all. That does not speak to the issue at hand.
Do try to pay attention.

I must have hit a nerve because you just went into straight abuse without even looking at the issue this time.

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am said:
Not at all. That does not speak to the issue at hand.
Do try to pay attention.

I must have hit a nerve because you just went into straight abuse without even looking at the issue this time.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

you're talking about jesus and you call that abuse? :rolleyes:

jesus can't be a scapegoat when you consider repentance. there is no scapegoat. you either repent, or you're fucked.
 
joepistole said:
You have some interesting points, but I think of it this way. Jesus lived his life as a template for others to follow. Through his actions he demostrated charity, foregiveness, and love. And in his death he demonstrated the most nobel of acts, self sacrifice.

Does God care about blood for blood, an eye for an eye? If Jesus is to be believed, I think not. For me the story of Jesus on the cross is just a continuation of a life of principal. In my view, the cruxifiction was not about God's law, but rather a demonstration of morals and the most noble of acts - self sacrifice, too suffer and die so that others might live.
Click to expand...

So others might live?

You mean so that God would not kill them.
Don't forget that the whole story is to pay back God the father by his sacrifice to himself.
How that works exactly, we do not know.

Regards
DL
 
Rav said:
Seriously, it's like this forum is only ever used for little ongoing holy wars between a small subset of people. In fact it's not just like that, it is that.
Click to expand...

For evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing.

Regards
DL
 
I am Glad that Jesus is lifting me up and supporting me into eternity. :)


All Praise The Ancient Of Days
 
Rav said:
Seriously, it's like this forum is only ever used for little ongoing holy wars between a small subset of people. In fact it's not just like that, it is that.
Click to expand...

Well contention between different theists is nothing new.

I would say it varies a bit between theist vs theist and athiest vs theist.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days
 
Adstar said:
I am Glad that Jesus is lifting me up and supporting me into eternity. :)


All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Click to expand...

How nice for you to make Jesus your personal beast of burden.

Nice way to use a God.

Most humans pride themselves in being able to raise themselves but you go ahead and never learn to stand on your own.

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am said:
How nice for you to make Jesus your personal beast of burden.

Nice way to use a God.

Most humans pride themselves in being able to raise themselves but you go ahead and never learn to stand on your own.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

oh yes, humans should be so proud of themselves.

again i ask, what planet are you beaming this in from?
 
Lori_7 said:
oh yes, humans should be so proud of themselves.

again i ask, what planet are you beaming this in from?
Click to expand...
Wow! It helps me consolidate my view of Lori when I find Greatest I Am is actually making points with which I am in agreement. Remarkable.
 
Ophiolite said:
Wow! It helps me consolidate my view of Lori when I find Greatest I Am is actually making points with which I am in agreement. Remarkable.
Click to expand...

how about your view of the world and the state of humanity? you agree with greatest i am that this is something we should be proud of? :confused:

because THAT would be most remarkable. and in this case "remarkable" is a euphemism most definitely.
 
Greatest I am said:
Are you riding Jesus or are you elevating him?
Click to expand...

Myself? I'm not a Christian, so I'm not particularly interested in doing either one.

Substitutionary atonement is thought of by many to be an immoral practice yet Christians embrace such a notion as moral and good.
Click to expand...

There are several Christian theological theories about what Jesus' death and (supposed) resurrection were all about. A substitutionary sacrifice is only one of them.

But yeah, I agree with you that the idea of substitutionary sacrifice is crude. It's the idea that God is totally pissed off, and the only way that he can stop being angry is if something dies. Of course, everything that exists is supposed to be his own creation, so that's not unlike a child throwing a tantrum by breaking his own toys.

It's even more problematic when we are told that Jesus is literally God in the flesh. Apparently the idea is that mankind's offense against God is so heinous that no earthly sacrifice can possibly make God happy. Something has really got to die, but only a supernatural divine sacrifice will do. So God came down to earth and became his own sacrifice to himself.

But confusingly, if Jesus was God in the flesh, then Jesus' death on the cross would seem to imply the death of God as well, God's own suicide so to speak, leaving us with no God. Killing himself is certainly an effective way for God to cleanse himself of his own anger, but it does seem kind of excessive.

Or alternatively, Jesus was kind of an video-game-style avatar, God's docetic projection into this earthly plane, and the "death" of Jesus was nothing more than shutting off and then restarting an image. So on that theory it was all just an act, a charade. Maybe playing his earthly video-game makes God feel better or something.

If God created some toys for himself and then wasn't satisfied with them, he could easily improve them and make them better. The myth says that he's omnipotent and omniscient after all, so he obviously knows how and has the ability.

If he wants the toys to improve themselves, to grow or something, then he could create conditions conducive to the desired evolution and help the toys do that.

But this flying into a wrath stuff, this smiting everything in sight and this demand that something has to die before he can be happy, is psychologically crude. It makes God appear as if he was an immature and petulant child that happens to have super powers. That's a little unsettling. It's not the most inspiring mythological image of God, that's for sure.
 
Yazata said:
Myself? I'm not a Christian, so I'm not particularly interested in doing either one.



There are several Christian theological theories about what Jesus' death and (supposed) resurrection were all about. A substitutionary sacrifice is only one of them.

But yeah, I agree with you that the idea of substitutionary sacrifice is crude. It's the idea that God is totally pissed off, and the only way that he can stop being angry is if something dies. Of course, everything that exists is supposed to be his own creation, so that's not unlike a child throwing a tantrum by breaking his own toys.

It's even more problematic when we are told that Jesus is literally God in the flesh. Apparently the idea is that mankind's offense against God is so heinous that no earthly sacrifice can possibly make God happy. Something has really got to die, but only a supernatural divine sacrifice will do. So God came down to earth and became his own sacrifice to himself.

But confusingly, if Jesus was God in the flesh, then Jesus' death on the cross would seem to imply the death of God as well, God's own suicide so to speak, leaving us with no God. Killing himself is certainly an effective way for God to cleanse himself of his own anger, but it does seem kind of excessive.

Or alternatively, Jesus was kind of an video-game-style avatar, God's docetic projection into this earthly plane, and the "death" of Jesus was nothing more than shutting off and then restarting an image. So on that theory it was all just an act, a charade. Maybe playing his earthly video-game makes God feel better or something.

If God created some toys for himself and then wasn't satisfied with them, he could easily improve them and make them better. The myth says that he's omnipotent and omniscient after all, so he obviously knows how and has the ability.

If he wants the toys to improve themselves, to grow or something, then he could create conditions conducive to the desired evolution and help the toys do that.

But this flying into a wrath stuff, this smiting everything in sight and this demand that something has to die before he can be happy, is psychologically crude. It makes God appear as if he was an immature and petulant child that happens to have super powers. That's a little unsettling. It's not the most inspiring mythological image of God, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Well said.

You are right in that scriptures show a strange God indeed who is far from good. More like insane, yet Christians love their insane God.

Or better said, give him lip service.

Regards
DL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top