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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoHP-f-_F9U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ott15j2K...re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqP_fjBkw...re=related

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.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

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

Meh - the god of the bible does whatever he wants and then tells everyone all actions from a deity are just.

Of course I don't think his decision to sacrifice his son is moral ... but than again, damn few of his decisions have ever had any moral or ethical value. We're talking about Yahweh the Horrible here.

Sending your son to die for your mistake and the crimes of others when theres an infinite amount of alternatives available to you because you're an all-powerful, all-knowing being?
Is that immoral?
Is that the question?

It's really very simple:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mII6-IyaT3o

Dang. Stimbo beat me to it!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzuxyq3ltls

Wait, isn't god the same as jesus? *scratches head* you know, the trinity? Or are those not true christians™?

Sorry about that, apo. It really was a choice between the 'identity crisis' one and your 'really big favour', so between us we've pretty much covered it.

(June 1, 2012 at 7:48 pm)Greatest I am Wrote: Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral

"Morality" is a variable and not an absolute standard. In essecne morality is whatever you want it to be. To judge this moral or immoral means nothing aside from taking a survey of the popular moral standard of your peers on this board. Morality is not the standard of righteousness you believe it to be.

Quote:and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

To make this assertion based from the bible, one would have to ignore the rest of the bible that calls for the death/blood sacerfice of Christ.

(June 2, 2012 at 5:30 pm)Drich Wrote:

(June 1, 2012 at 7:48 pm)Greatest I am Wrote: Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral

"Morality" is a variable and not an absolute standard. In essecne morality is whatever you want it to be. To judge this moral or immoral means nothing aside from taking a survey of the popular moral standard of your peers on this board. Morality is not the standard of righteousness you believe it to be.

Quote:and that God’s first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?

To make this assertion based from the bible, one would have to ignore the rest of the bible that calls for the death/blood sacerfice of Christ.

I thought God was supposed to be the absoloute standard of morality yet he is in violation of his own commandments. Either he isn't as moral as he claims in which case why follow him or the commandments aren't a real standard of his morality in which case hes a liar and we can't trust his word for anything... in which case why follow him.

I am unable to view the media content on this connection, so I may end up missing the point. As most of you will say that any way, I will carry on. Basically half son, half son half self, able to experience as a human with well above average ability and intellect. A much clearer connection to get the message over, important message that need to be given correctly. The more you look at the message the deeper it gets, the more connections you find. Also like any good leader he is not asking any one to do any thing he is not willing to do himself.

As this post seems to be about death, I would like to run a few ideas past you. Ain't death weird,
the two types of physical death, destruction of the body by disease or injury and built in obsolescence. The first understandable, the second an evolved attribute picked up around our jelly fish stage, without which evolution wouldn't work, or rather work as well. We can look at a person and guess to within a few years there age, yet other than our hearts neurons and the lens of our eyes there is no part of us older than ten years.

Then there is what we are, energy, OK there is some argument as to whether mass being composed of energy has been proved, but mass or energy both are eternal have no beginning or end. So the intellect, consciousness, soul what ever you call the essential you, that hides behind the eyes is the same. It changes is it absorbed, diffused, or could it be saved like we do on our various media. I say if you want to see ghosts just watch an old movie.

This system is about to shut down for maintenance, so I will pop in again some time.