Why is the Christian god not fair?

[stretched]

Yo Adstar,

No dude, please do not judge me. My mind is certainly open and I have no hatred for god or another human being in me. But I will question things I do not understand until such time that I do. You have given me some perspective, but you have not satisfied my hunger for rational answers to questions I pose. No disrespect intended. What I cannot do or be is become a slave to what I consider to be irrational. We all travel a path, and some accept, and some question. You have found answers to questions that I have not. Quite simple. Quite likely you are the winner here, because I feel your sincerity.

Yo Jenyar,

Thanks for your input, I will respond tomorrrow.

Ahem.

 

[Tiberius1701]

Tiberius1701, I read your articles, but unfortunately I was unable to find clear answers there.

Sorry, the part that referred to your question on it not being fair to judge based on belief. I am saying that belief of some particular set of facts is a very unjust means by witch to determine who goes to hell and who lives on.

What happens according to the Christian belief with people, who regret their “sins”, but don’t belief in Christ - will god forgive them, yes or no?

While I don't believe in Chriatianity myself, my understanding (having grown up in a conservative Christian home) is that modern Christianity requires belief and acceptance of Jesus as savior to go to heaven and get forgiveness. Those who don't believe Jesus is divine burn in hell, regardless of if their disbelief is honest and regardless of if they are good people who lead good lives.

This modern view is probably a perversion of Jesus' original teachings, but a dark, twisted, evil philosophy in any case.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Yorda]

While I don't believe in Chriatianity myself, my understanding (having grown up in a conservative Christian home) is that modern Christianity requires belief and acceptance of Jesus as savior to go to heaven and get forgiveness. Those who don't believe Jesus is divine burn in hell, regardless of if their disbelief is honest and regardless of if they are good people who lead good lives.

If you have done a mistake (a sin) as an atheist, you can ask forgiveness of yourself and try to forgive yourself. Everyone who asks forgiveness, will be forgiven, if they truly mean it in their heart. Christians say they are forgiven by Jesus, because He also represents the 'higher self' which lives in man. Since God lives in everything, knowing oneself is true belief in Jesus, true knowledge of God. People call themselves atheists and believers but if there is a God, he will always know what they truly are. People are able to know if they are good or evil: they just ask themselves.

 

[Jenyar]

If Jesus died a man, he would still be dead today. If Jesus is god, he could not die anyway. Which is it to be?

But if Jesus was both God and man, as we believe, then He could die and still remain God. He could empty himself of divinity and still remain God. He could take on humanity and suffer what we suffer as genuinely as we suffer it. His being is not dependent on our experience or understanding of his nature, and His love for us did not depend on Him being divine. That tells us something about love, and something about God.

One might say it was Jesus' true nature that kept His identity intact, even while his body died. The "Son" of Him that did not die was the "Father" of Him that could give life - in effect: the One who died was the One who gave life - through Him, life lived, and death died.

Let me know if there is any other objection you would like me to pay specific attention to.

 

[stretched]

Hi Jenyar,

O.K. I am really going to try to get my head around this.

Quote J:
"But if Jesus was both God and man, as we believe, then He could die and still remain God."

Even if gods being is not within our realm of understanding we can not fob off the contradictory logic. I understand your view on the god love aspect, and I concur with the reality of a cosmic love force, a unity, call it whatever. But the mystery does not make the problem as I understand it go away. (note: I accept that my understanding is incomplete)

Yes if Jesus is an omnipotent god he could concievably die the death of a mortal. But then we have to accept that in order for the sacrifice of Jesus to carry the required sacrificial weight:

1.) When in man form, he is not god at all, and has no knowledge of that aspect of his being.
2.) Jesus is full of pain, mortal fear and all the insecurities men face at the threshold of a gruesome tragic death.
3.) He can have no knowledge of his ressurection, as then he knows death is only temporary and thus cannot possibly experience the psychological anguish of a dying mortal.

I would assume these would be the minimum requirements to fullfil the death on the level of a genuine sacrifice for the sins of humanity.

Simply put, whether a mortal death was possible or not does not come into this quandary. What needs to be unequivocally shown is that there were absolutely no factors that would make the death anything less than 100% human in nature. Pain on its own is not an adequate sacrifice. Millions of men have died unspeakable deaths.

If we can concede that the Father and the Son are two seperate entities this problem would dissapear.

Quote J: " the One who died was the One who gave life - through Him, life lived, and death died."

This is beautifully poetic, but it does not explain the problem we have. So the next question needs to be: Did Jesus, as God, have any concept of the temporary nature of his death?

Ahem.

 

[Jenyar]

Hi stretched,

1.) When in man form, he is not god at all, and has no knowledge of that aspect of his being.
2.) Jesus is full of pain, mortal fear and all the insecurities men face at the threshold of a gruesome tragic death.
3.) He can have no knowledge of his ressurection, as then he knows death is only temporary and thus cannot possibly experience the psychological anguish of a dying mortal.

I would assume these would be the minimum requirements to fullfil the death on the level of a genuine sacrifice for the sins of humanity.

I understand your problem, but there is a misunderstanding on the form and nature of Christ's sacrifice here. The requirements for a valid sacrifice lies with its ability to carry out its intended function, in this case: to intercede for sins and reconcile us with God. The sacrifice body itself is only the vehicle - a vicarious life that runs the mechanism of atonement between the parties involved: God and man. It is not an end in itself. So it isn't the anguish, or the loss experienced, or even the life given that makes the sacrifice "valid" - it is the effect.

Another factor is that Jesus had perfect faith - "being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see" (Hebrews 11:1) - He knew by faith that He would be found innocent and resurrected after three days. In fact, it is His faith (and of course, the validity of that faith, being truly innocent and unblemished by sin) that made his sacrifice acceptable - not any other knowledge (or lack of it).

And it is possible for us to have the same faith. We, too, can have the certainty that we will be resurrected into eternal life, made effective through Christ's sacrifice. The same power that raised Christ is at work in us.

Romans 8:11
And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.​

Simply put, whether a mortal death was possible or not does not come into this quandary. What needs to be unequivocally shown is that there were absolutely no factors that would make the death anything less than 100% human in nature. Pain on its own is not an adequate sacrifice. Millions of men have died unspeakable deaths.

No, that is not what must be shown - for if that were true, any one of us could have supplied that acceptible sacrifice. Jesus sacrificed a 100% human life, certainly, but that is what we all lack. Our human lives are 100% claimed by death, whether we are 1% or 99% sinful. That is what we needed to be saved from, and why we needed saving. And that is why Jesus could save us, His whole life being an act of God himself.

If we can concede that the Father and the Son are two seperate entities this problem would dissapear.

Only the mortal life, and the anguish of an inevitable and unjust death threatened to separate Father from Son, and yet even that could not - because it was not separated by sin. The same is true for those who are adopted to Him as children, and whose sins are forgiven.

Romans 8:38-40 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.​

Quote J: " the One who died was the One who gave life - through Him, life lived, and death died."

This is beautifully poetic, but it does not explain the problem we have. So the next question needs to be: Did Jesus, as God, have any concept of the temporary nature of his death?

In summary: at least as much as we who believe that God loves us do, "being fully persuaded that God ha(s) power to do what he had promised" (Romans 4:21). That's what makes any life an acceptible sacrifice, instead of a meaningless waste of life. But it is only God who resurrects, and who judges the resurrected. Nothing we do can make God love us more, and nothing we do can make Him love us less.

Romans 12:1 Living Sacrifices
Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God-–this is your spiritual act of worship.​

 

[stretched]

Hi Jenyar,

Thanks for trying to explain, but sadly I cannot understand your flow of logic. I have trouble making sense of your response. What you are probably trying to say is: " To understand the logic of the sacrifice of Jesus, one must have faith and have the holy spirit within".

I have to respond with quite simply, in my view: " Why would the creator of this universe, the engineer of infinity, need a fancifull, bloody, gory, melodramatic crucifiction scenario to redeem mankind. Why would this god need to judge us in the first place?

Ahem.

 

[Jenyar]

Thanks for trying to explain, but sadly I cannot understand your flow of logic. I have trouble making sense of your response. What you are probably trying to say is: "To understand the logic of the sacrifice of Jesus, one must have faith and have the holy spirit within".

That is not at all what I said. The logic is that sin -- like a disease -- takes the carrier into his grave, unless someone -- Jesus -- takes the disease upon himself, dying the death in our place, and fulfilling the "contract" we had with God. It cannot be understood unless you realize that it is a realtionship that is at stake here -- ours with God, and God's with us. Life is not available outside it; without that relationship, we are all terminally and hopelessly ill. Paul explains it quite elaborately in his epistle to the Romans.

I brought faith into it because you didn't seem to understand how Jesus' sacrifice could be relevant to us, and the Holy Spirit because that is the power that makes it effective.

I have to respond with quite simply, in my view: "Why would the creator of this universe, the engineer of infinity, need a fancifull, bloody, gory, melodramatic crucifiction scenario to redeem mankind. Why would this god need to judge us in the first place?

Ahem.

You are confusing contexts here. Jesus did not die in God's perfect world, He died in ours, from human injustice. He bore the brunt of our sins, and that made Him the victim of the cruelest death penalty mankind could imagine. At that time, it was simply the death saw fit for a God. Today people prefer cleaner, philosophical methods of crucifixion.

That God would subject himself to even such a death shows how much God loves us -- to come fetch us from out of such darkness, so far away from Him, so foreign to Him. Save us from ourselves, mainly: because we do not take judgment into account; we do not reckon with a just God. Outside the crucial lifegiving relationship with God, we tend to feel unaccountabe, untouchable, and justified -- vainly. And of course, to save us from those who do not fear His justice.

God judges, because not to judge means to condone -- and God cannot condone sin for the simple fact that He cares about those on earth who are treated like Christ: as if their faith and hope of being justified, found innocent, and loved are vain arrogance. He cares about the victims and outcasts who are enslaved by the "gods" of this world, the ones who take justice into their own hands, but answer to no higher justice than their own whims. Those who would crucify an innocent man for threatening their sovereignity. And he cares about those who suffer under their own sins, and those of others, which is why He forgives and recreates us. Jesus is how He chose to do this. The crucifixion is how we responded.

 

[stretched]

Hi Jenyar the patient, (not as in hospital!)

*Yeah, you are responding from heartfelt conviction, and I respect that. But could you imagine my heartfelt conviction in the belief, knowing that a just god would not require this logic:

"The logic is that sin -- like a disease -- takes the carrier into his grave, unless someone -- Jesus -- takes the disease upon himself, dying the death in our place, and fulfilling the "contract" we had with God."

*You assume a contract. I utterly reject the notion that god ordained upon man, an inherent sinful nature. And I reject an unconditional need for redemption. From what do we need redemption I ask, with tears in my eyes? For being born? Now you think of the logic. Therefore, in the first instance, to find your idea of god, I would not need the forgiveness of a Jesus. And I remind you once again, I travel close to the god of my understanding. So the basic precept for your faith is not the same for me.

Quote J:
" Life is not available outside it; without that relationship, we are all terminally and hopelessly ill. Paul explains it quite elaborately in his epistle to the Romans."

*I am nothing near terminally ill. I genuinely feel sorry that you believe yourself ill brother. You are truly enslaved, yet you are so enslaved as to view your enslavement as freedom. Nice work Brother Paul.

I reiterate:

Quote S:
"Why would this god need to judge us in the first place?"

*I dont want to know the how`s, just tell me WHY in simple terms, your infinite god would require judgement? Explain the logic of an omnipotent being catching a thrill judging mankind?

As for this:
Quote J:
"God judges, because not to judge means to condone -- and God cannot condone sin for the simple fact that He cares about those on earth who are treated like Christ: as if their faith and hope of being justified, found innocent, and loved are vain arrogance. He cares about the victims and outcasts who are enslaved by the "gods" of this world, the ones who take justice into their own hands, but answer to no higher justice than their own whims. Those who would crucify an innocent man for threatening their sovereignity. And he cares about those who suffer under their own sins, and those of others, which is why He forgives and recreates us. Jesus is how He chose to do this. The crucifixion is how we responded."

*Where do you come with this stuff? How can your god not condone the so called sin that he created in the first place. Or is he mopping up after some other gods creation?

Ahem.

 

[Jenyar]

*You assume a contract. I utterly reject the notion that god ordained upon man, an inherent sinful nature. And I reject an unconditional need for redemption. From what do we need redemption I ask, with tears in my eyes? For being born? Now you think of the logic. Therefore, in the first instance, to find your idea of god, I would not need the forgiveness of a Jesus. And I remind you once again, I travel close to the god of my understanding. So the basic precept for your faith is not the same for me.

And you should utterly reject that notion, because it's false. What God ordained were laws -- order. What we did was transgress against Him, the source of life. Our need for redemption is the need to restore that relationship. Because we have already been born, and there is otherwise nothing left for us but death, which is the wages (the due payment) of sin.

The only "god of your understanding" I can imagine is that you are innocent before God, or otherwise that guilt is of no consequence.

*I am nothing near terminally ill. I genuinely feel sorry that you believe yourself ill brother. You are truly enslaved, yet you are so enslaved as to view your enslavement as freedom. Nice work Brother Paul.

What is the difference between you and a starving AIDS victim, except the length and relative quality of your lives? I do not believe death has any hold on me -- through the grace of God -- and I have already accepted His promise of peace. If this is slavery, then lead on, by all means... I do not wish my own "freedom" at the cost of that promise.

"Why would this god need to judge us in the first place?"

*I dont want to know the how`s, just tell me WHY in simple terms, your infinite god would require judgement? Explain the logic of an omnipotent being catching a thrill judging mankind?

God does not "need" to judge us, as if it's something He lacks. You might as well ask why courts "need" to judge criminals. His nature is to be just, and it is only because He takes an active interest in His creation that it has any bearing on us at all. He makes the distinction between good and evil, and therefore, so do we. Otherwise, death surely would have ahd the last word, and any particular means we got there would be as good or bad as any other.

*Where do you come with this stuff? How can your god not condone the so called sin that he created in the first place. Or is he mopping up after some other gods creation?

Should I remind you of your own conviction, and mine? "I utterly reject the notion that god ordained upon man, an inherent sinful nature". What He created us with is a nature -- human nature -- which He incidentally declared "good". As I have said, God is by nature and definition the only authority, the only judge, and the only source of life. Sin is not a created thing. You cannot set it apart or scrutinize it in isolation. It's like darkness in the absence of light. Sin is our brainchild, a perversion of what was once "good".