Is it egotistical to think that a God would die for you?

People who believe in the barbaric human blood sacrifice of the Triune Jesus/God must believe that the greatest force ever to exist decided that humans, lowly creations whom we are told are infinitely inferior to God, are somehow more important than God’s own life and that he would give it up for believers.

That is like a slave master dying in place of his slave. A rather silly notion to me.

Jesus preached that we should develop a humble character with little self-pride.

How is placing your own life above Triune Jesus/God’s showing a humble character as you think that he would die for you? That is taking self-pride to the maximum.

I think that those with good morals will know that no noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

Yet Christians who think they are moral will believe that God would do such a despicable thing as having his son killed even as scriptures say that God prefers repentance to sacrifice and does not believe in asking or accepting a ransom.

Is thinking that to believe that God would die for you the epitome of an inflated ego?

If not, what could possibly inflate an ego more than that?

Regards
DL

In short? Yes.

As a Christian, I take Jesus dying on a cross for humanity as a fact.
Part of this belief is that we are not worth that sacrifice, and the love it took to make it is what we are impressed by.
Jesus' mission was voluntary, which means that neither did God the Father or humanity force him to do it.

Trying to cast a friendly light over scapegoating is pointless. Regardless of whether it happened, you deserve it, or it was voluntary - it remains scapegoating.

Egotism? Who gives a shit, it's scapegoating. Egotism is minor -if it's anything at all - compared to that.

(May 31, 2013 at 3:15 pm)Consilius Wrote: Jesus' mission was voluntary, which means that neither did God the Father or humanity force him to do it.

Isn't Jesus also God?

(May 31, 2013 at 3:15 pm)Consilius Wrote: As a Christian, I take Jesus dying on a cross for humanity as a fact.
Part of this belief is that we are not worth that sacrifice, and the love it took to make it is what we are impressed by.
Jesus' mission was voluntary, which means that neither did God the Father or humanity force him to do it.

Doesn't the bible say that god sent his only son to die for our sins? That doesn't sound too voluntary to me...

(May 31, 2013 at 2:15 pm)Greatest I am Wrote: If not, what could possibly inflate an ego more than that?

Regards
DL

Hmmm....how about creation of repetitive threads with no intention of following through with debate?

(May 31, 2013 at 3:41 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote:

(May 31, 2013 at 3:15 pm)Consilius Wrote: Jesus' mission was voluntary, which means that neither did God the Father or humanity force him to do it.

Isn't Jesus also God?

Yup. I was just trying to make my reply compatible to what Greatest said. He wanted to talk about God and Jesus as different people, so I went along with it, since they ARE different natures of one person.

(May 31, 2013 at 3:50 pm)Consilius Wrote:

(May 31, 2013 at 3:41 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote: Isn't Jesus also God?

Yup. I was just trying to make my reply compatible to what Greatest said. He wanted to talk about God and Jesus as different people, so I went along with it, since they ARE different natures of one person.

As different natures of a single entity (God), how is it that the Son would be able to choose not to die for our sins if God set out onto Earth as the the Son. How would they have seperate thought processes? The Father and the Son are one in the same. For Jesus to choose not to die for our sins, it would require God to not have Jesus die for our sins because...he is God. I'm confusing myself, but you get what I mean.

(May 31, 2013 at 3:44 pm)Baalzebutt Wrote:

(May 31, 2013 at 3:15 pm)Consilius Wrote: As a Christian, I take Jesus dying on a cross for humanity as a fact.
Part of this belief is that we are not worth that sacrifice, and the love it took to make it is what we are impressed by.
Jesus' mission was voluntary, which means that neither did God the Father or humanity force him to do it.

Doesn't the bible say that god sent his only son to die for our sins? That doesn't sound too voluntary to me...

Yes, God is the mind behind the sending of Jesus, but that doesn't mean that his Son went kicking and screaming up to the Cross. Jesus's mission was obedience to God, but that doesn't mean that was just a chore he had to do. Jesus came down willingly, and had a strong sense of duty to what he did.

---

(May 31, 2013 at 3:55 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote:

(May 31, 2013 at 3:50 pm)Consilius Wrote: Yup. I was just trying to make my reply compatible to what Greatest said. He wanted to talk about God and Jesus as different people, so I went along with it, since they ARE different natures of one person.

As different natures of a single entity (God), how is it that the Son would be able to choose not to die for our sins if God set out onto Earth as the the Son. How would they have seperate thought processes? The Father and the Son are one in the same. For Jesus to choose not to die for our sins, it would require God to not have Jesus die for our sins because...he is God. I'm confusing myself, but you get what I mean.

Jesus can't rebel against God, but he can't be a slave to God either, since they are one an the same, and, as such, are equals. They do not have separate thought processes, because Jesus is God who 'came down' (as the same person) or was 'sent' (as different people) to die for our sins.
God and Jesus work in unison, which means that the love God expresses in having his Son go to Earth is the same love with which this Son dies on a cross. It is a willing sacrifice of a Father seeing his Son die and a Son dying. They both give something up for humanity out of love.