RE: Rant against anti-atheist agnostics.
September 21, 2014 at 3:16 pm
(This post was last modified: September 21, 2014 at 3:31 pm by Whateverist.)
(September 21, 2014 at 1:41 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Ah, but again - those who bow to this concept are not the yokels, they are not the fundies. Without this concept -even as allegory or metaphor.....there is no christianity. Does it become less abhorrent if we treat it as allegory or metaphor? I think not. Vicarious redemption is, by definition - not a "sacrifice made by each individual". To interpret it as such is to leave the field entirely. Don't get me wrong, your interpretation is admirable - it just isn't very "christian" or "religious".
I'm an anti-theist, not an anti-"well thought out allegorical interpretations not neccessarily bound by their sources or blindly adhered to , exalted, and promoted as fact and fabric of the cosmos" -ist
Ahh but when you see it as a sacrifice you yourself are making, where you are the lamb, there is nothing vicarious about it. It would be interesting to hear from Michael on this point, Frodo, Chad and Perplundy too for that matter. You may well be right about this. I don't know.
The question: Is the vicariousness of the sacrifice essential to Christianity? In other words, is it essential to Christian theology to understand redemption through sacrifice as something given as a gift by something outside oneself?
I'll send a message and see if any of them care to comment. Any bets on what they will say?
