Why is Christ's death considered a sacrifice?

[Neo-Scholastic]

If he loved people, he could do something actually useful, like solve all of the problems and fix all of the flaws of the world, which are ultimately 100% his fault.

Your incredulity is not an argument. You have the burden of proof to show that a perfect world is even possible...(sound of crickets)

Nice distraction from the main point, BTW.

[Ryantology]

You have the burden of proof to show that a perfect world is even possible...(sound of crickets)

Maybe it's not possible. This would mean that either your god has crippling limits to his powers and knowledge and capability, or doesn't exist at all, because this world isn't within spitting distance of perfect.

What a laugh, though, the likes of a philosobabbler like you demanding proof from anybody. I haven't seen you prove your god's existence yet, and I'm sure I've asked you more than once.

[RobbyPants]

Well Robie if you don't like the price paid for you, and it is certainly your choice.
You can pay it yourself.
But why would you choose that?

Well Profefsfesorr, that's not what I was talking about, but thanks for the non sequitur. Also, my choice is one made out of a lack of supporting evidence for Christian claims.

The principle is, the soul that sins shall die.
That was spelled out in the first Covenant and the animals that were killed (prior to roasting) were a shadow and type and a temporary "Covering" for sin until God established the New and final Covenant paid for in His blood.

If you think His sacrifice was bogus- go to the first paragraph above.

So, why did he set up the new covenant that the old one was paid for by having a third of himself sacrificed temporarily to himself? Seems rather pointless.

Unbalanced, yes, but that's what I would expect, comparing God to man. It's nonsensical to expect the two to be identical.

Protip: when using something someone says against them, it doesn't count if when using false equivocation.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Because I had to lose Sunday mornings for eight goddamned years hearing them bleat about it?

[professor]

Robby, Paul was saying the OT was given to show fully that you can NOT make it by your performance/ that the sacrifice system was a shadow and type of Christ.
That, when the perfect has come (Christ) the shadow and type is done away with.
He did not temporarily sacrifice himself prior to Calvary.
Those were animals-
a type, just as Abraham being commanded to sacrifice his son on the mount (both he and God, knowing that it was an exercise in obedience- and that the son would live)
was a type (and a prophecy) of Jesus eventual sacrifice.

[Neo-Scholastic]

You have the burden of proof to show that a perfect world is even possible...(sound of crickets)

Maybe it's not possible. This would mean that either your god has crippling limits to his powers and knowledge and capability,...

All knowledge is limited to what can be known. Since the future does not yet exist, it cannot be known. No one, not even a god that knows everything that it is possible to know can exactly predict all the outcomes of someone else’s actions. As such, the actions of free agents may inadvertently bring about harm and suffering, absent moral accountability. Our ability to love depends on having the freedom to choose whom we love. What you see as "crippling limits", I see as the space wherein God withdraws his Power to make a place for Love to exist.

I haven't seen you prove your god's existence yet, and I'm sure I've asked you more than once.

And I've proved said evidence that you have ignored more than once. You bore me with your continued whining about how God didn't make a perfect world, since you cannot prove that a perfect world is even possible.

[Mr.wizard]

He had to give up his career as a carpenter in the middle of the desert in order to take his place as god in heaven....decisions decisions.

In all seriousness, thank you for starting a thread on this topic, it is not talked about enough.

[Ryantology]

All knowledge is limited to what can be known. Since the future does not yet exist, it cannot be known. No one, not even a god that knows everything that it is possible to know can exactly predict all the outcomes of someone else’s actions.

The god who comes from outside time and space and created time and space doesn't know what will happen in the future?

This sort of discussion invariably goes one of two ways:

1: Atheist questions god, Christian attempts to impress everyone with the limitless capabilities of God.
2: Atheist notes a reasonable expectation of a God with limitless capabilities, Christian insists that there are limitations which make these expectations unreasonable.

As such, the actions of free agents may inadvertently bring about harm and suffering, absent moral accountability. Our ability to love depends on having the freedom to choose whom we love. What you see as "crippling limits", I see as the space wherein God withdraws his Power to make a place for Love to exist.

Do you have kids? If so, when did you sit down, think about whether or not you loved them, and decide that you did? Could you simply change your mind and not love them? I ask because, while there are people I deeply love, none of this ever happened as the result of a decision, and I'm pretty sure that I'm not the one with severe emotional retardation here.

And I've proved said evidence that you have ignored more than once.

Show me where you've objectively proven the existence of your specific God and I'll get on the phone with the Nobel Prize Committee right now. Really, go do it. You claim to have made the biggest human accomplishment in all history and I want to make sure you get the credit for it.

You bore me with your continued whining about how God didn't make a perfect world, since you cannot prove that a perfect world is even possible.

I don't claim that it actually is, you know. I can't. It would require the existence a perfect and all-powerful creator god, and you can't prove there is one.

I'll lay down the challenge right now: If you can prove that your specific god is objectively real, then I will set about to prove the possibility of a perfect world the minute I'm off the phone with the Nobel Prize people. If you can't, then I have no reason to bother and I'm going to never miss an opportunity to remind you of your impotence whenever you make the assertion you failed to prove.

[Mr.wizard]

To be resurrected, glorified beyond comprehension, seated at the right hand of the creator of reality. Is. Not. A. Sacrifice.

To be beaten to a bloody pulp with glass shard whips, having His forehead shredded by twisted needles, and left hanging from metal spikes driven through your wrists for a crowd of people that could give a shit...JUST BECAUSE HE LOVES THEM.

Only an insensitive and ungrateful douche-bag like you would say that's not a sacrifice.

Moreover, you seem to forget that He sacrificed, meaning gave up completely, every single earthly desire to indulge in sin. Whereas I bet a lamebrain like you couldn't stop stroking your own prick, much less your ego, for less than 5 minutes.

It wasn't a sacrifice, does a god who creates everything and knows everything really give anything up? Lets also not forget he was sacrificing himself to himself, in order to create a loophole for rules that he created. If your an omnipotent, omniscient, god why would you create a creation that would require such a process? The idea of an omniscient god that has to make corrections is absurd, he should never make a mistake if he already knows the outcome.

[Polaris]

The three days of suffering.