Why do atheists even bother about debating Jesus?

[catfish]

According to the text, God spoke to a prophet and said that He never commanded sacrifices when He brought them out of Egypt.
There are numerous passages where God supposedly condemned sacrifices and that he was "sick of their burnt offerings".
Then there's a passage where God is supposed to have said to NOT worship Him the way the heathens do.
Blood sacrifices were only attonement for "unintentional" sins according to Jewish tradition.
Human sacrifice has always been considered an evil practice in the Bible.

So God condemned human blood sacrifices then sent his son to Earth as a human so Jesus could be sacrificed to save us all. There would have been a lot of blood what with scourging and being nailed to a cross and the crown of thorns could have resulted in bleeding scratches as well. Was Jesus as a sacrifice supposed to be OK because he wasn't burnt on an altar?

Maybe Jesus, if he existed, was just executed for being a public nuisance - this would make more sense than God being against human sacrifice except where his son was concerned.

This is where you use your God-given right to be a cherrypicker and trust in your own moral judgement.

According to the text:
No man can be ransomed who is/was doomed to destruction. (all of us?)
No persons should be put to death for the sins of another.
There would be secret heresies introduced.
The people and teachers would turn aside to myths.
There is no mediator between man and God.
YHWH is salvation...
.

---

The Romans were pagans, I don't think anyone denies that, right?
I don't trust them fuckers, period!
.

---

Human sacrifices are evil, that's why God trolled Abraham into coming within a second of performing one before he dropped in and said j/k bro.

You really don't understand my position of the bible nor the Jewish views of it, do you???


Thank you, try again...
.