Rant against anti-atheist agnostics.

[fr0d0]

just because we love someone so much we would "x" for them - that won't automatically make "x", and whether or not they would accept "x" - right. I doubt that I'm going to have to explain this to you any more than you might have to explain it to me. Love can make a person do...or at least consider, terrible things. Agreed? Can I excuse anything on the grounds of love? No, I cannot -even if I can understand the motivation.

Yes, I'd agree. I'd kill to protect my family I'm sure. I certainly have that feeling. If that's love. Possibly a misplaced expression of love. Because love doesn't cause harm. I've experience of love making you do foolish things. Harmless I think. How is Jesus sacrificing himself harmful to anyone but himself though?
I wouldn't expect anyone to accept my killing of those threatening my family. I would think that just.

A generous act by God, causing his human incarnation terrible suffering, is somehow immoral because... WHY???

Bolded where it starts to go off the rails into the territory of immorality for you.

It does? How?

We've just cleared up one point... If the gift was given freely then it wasn't immoral.

I could freely give you the proceeds of an assault. Would it be immoral for me to do so - would it be immoral for you to accept this gift?

That would be immoral based upon the Ill gotten gain. You have no ill gotten gain here.

You can't do it, btw, can you... You absolutely can't say that you wouldn't string someone up for your parking tickets (even though we both know that you wouldn't)...you've obviously realized that all I'm going to do is exchange parking tickets for "sin" and then ask you the question again. There's christianity, eroding humanity. :claps:

I'm not stringing someone up though. You're putting the cart before the horse. In all of this, none would want such a sacrifice made on their behalf. It is an abhorrent suggestion. We would rather no sacrifice had to be made. But it's our nature, the severity of our failings that demands the strongest sacrifice. Personally I'm glad that we don't have the lesser sacrifices of varying sizes of animals substituting for the gravity of our misdemeanor or our ability to pay. This one small act, in the grand scheme of things, actually finished the need for actual sacrifice of any sort. The beginning of civilisation as we know it.

So just like you, I and all of the Christians I know wouldn't be happy with any sacrifice that would cause anyone, even God in human form, pain.

Isn't that charity? I go without the rewards of my toil so that someone less fortunate may gain? Are you saying that that person would be acting immorally to accept the reward of my efforts? I guess you draw the line.

So what sacrifice would you need to make to pay my parking ticket? You'd have to give up some of the reward of your toil. A sacrifice.

Do you see that it's a matter of degree? Small needs can be met by small sacrifice. Large needs need matching sacrifice. We're talking about the liberation of the entirety of mankind. What would you think to be fitting reparation?

On the upshot of this thread...thusfar, I've been given the notion to start calling the crucifixion god's "Final Solution" - so thanks for that.

Good call lol

---

I have no idea what you're reckoning on about. "We demanded the debt to be paid in blood." No, I did not. "We're using culture references of the time." What's that got to do anything you're saying?! "Hamburgers!" WHAT?!
Please stop babbling nonsense and return to reality, sir!

I include ourselves in humanity that demanded blood sacrifice. The cultural references are exactly the language that you're contending. You have to view that language in context. Crucifiction using nails isn't something I witness on my daily commute. I don't know what it's like where you live.