Dilemma for theists!

[The Grand Nudger]

I find it similarly disgusting that you are able to laugh when discussing the disgusting practice of scapegoating. Is this where we are now, laughing whilst someone else is tied to the post, anyone, as long is it is not ourselves?

It is still scapegoating, even when the subject is willing. It still doesn't work. It's still magic. I also find it very convenient for you that this "willing" victim is unable to speak for himself in the matter. I think it far more likely that the only party "willing' in this little song and dance is yourself.

Jews aren't hiding in my attic, nor are they hiding in yours, nor were they hiding in Jesus's, and just who is god supposed to be in this little analogy? The Nazis? Clever, but many of us have already beaten you to that punchline. I answer your questions directly, consistently, and coherently. Lets not pretend that anything else has ever been the case.

[C Rod]

as for genkaus:
We shouldn't be with God? Maybe we shouldn't but if he wants us with Him and we want him, why not?

It was the only way and he wanted to do it. As for time, he was sinless no time should be had, his death should not have even happened, in that he suffered more than anyone because he deserved none of it.

[The Grand Nudger]

The only way, some powerful god you have there. I hear that there are genies that live in lamps capable of more astonishing feats.

I agree with you, his death should not have happened, and thankfully, at least in the specifics which you profess, it did not. Why not take this little concession further though CRod, why not propose that his death should not have happened, and that anyone who accepts the poisoned fruit of this tree is as culpable as those who strung this particular goat to that particular post? Shouldn't you be petitioning god for a redress? I am, personally, even though I don't believe in your god, everytime I post my thoughts on the matter to you.

[C Rod]

I find it similarly disgusting that you are able to laugh when discussing the disgusting practice of scapegoating. Is this where we are now, laughing whilst someone else is tied to the post, anyone, as long is it is not ourselves?

It is still scapegoating, even when the subject is willing. It still doesn't work. It's still magic. I also find it very convenient for you that this "willing" victim is unable to speak for himself in the matter. I think it far more likely that the only party "willing' in this little song and dance is yourself.

Jews aren't hiding in my attic, nor are they hiding in yours, nor were they hiding in Jesus's, and just who is god supposed to be in this little analogy? The Nazis? Clever, but many of us have already beaten you to that punchline. I answer your questions directly, consistently, and coherently. Lets not pretend that anything else has ever been the case.

And I'm laughing(i like how i have to defend laughing, i know that type) because I'm capricious and while we have this day to day discourse i am facebooking and youtubing. I can laugh, anyways what you said was funny, that "Friends" episode is one of my favorites.
You know willingness contends its not scapegoating. You have to divert to magic and the proof of if the willingness is true to confirm or vanquish my assertion.

You didn't answer teh question? Why does God have to play a role in the scenario? All i proposed was humans and the human position.

[The Grand Nudger]

No, willingness contends no such thing. Many a believer went willingly to their deaths as scapegoats for the tribe. See, we've been doing this for a long time (far longer even than the word or your faith has existed). I don't divert to magic or willingness, you continually assert it. I'm simply reminding you that there is no such thing as magic, and that the only person in this exchange that can be demonstrably shown to be "willing" is yourself.

I don't think that god does play any role in any scenario CRod, which makes it even more terrible (if that's even possible). This is what I've been trying to explain to you for some time. You made the analogy, you are defending the crucifixion. The comparison is an obvious one.

Scapegoating does seem to be a part of the human condition, a regretful part of it, except insomuch as people such as yourself would disagree. You've spent what, a couple of days now just trying to get out of the gates by redefinition. Would it be safe to assume at this point that if you had been able to address my objection, if you had within you an explanation which would satisy my own (clearly much more stringent) sense of morality and conscience, that you would have done so and provided such an explanation?

[genkaus]

"Scorch the earth" how?
Have you ever watched "Friends" the TV show when the dude said tart-lets over and over again and then just said the words lost all meaning. I noticed how you used disgusting, it made me laugh.
The difference between Jesus and the soldiers compared to the Jews in Germany in the 1930s and the very first goat to ever be "scaped", is willingness. If they are willing its sacrifice and not scapegoating. Its not passing the blame by our cause, they are simply accepting that they can fix are cause because we cant because sometimes we just cant do it, were not strong enough or aware enough. You may think you can and might be able to, but it doesn't make you better, it just makes you more fortunate or more delusional.
Jews are hiding in your attic, soldiers know there are Jews hiding and have been told some are in your apartment. They come to your door and ask, demanding that you tell them to give them up because the soldiers have orders to find them. You are a German citizen firm in your belief that what the Nazis are doing is wrong. You tell them they are not here. The soldiers know you are lying and explain that if you do not confess you will be taken instead. What do you do? If you continue in your lies you are scapegoated for the Jews in your attic or are you sacrificed? Or do you scapegoat the Jews so you can have freedom? Or should the Jews come out from hiding and give themselves up? If you don't like the question, just evade and answer "What do you want me to say" or "how is that relevant", you have that pattern.

Do you even read any of the replies? The concept of scapegoating vs sacrifice has been explained so many times that you should be able to tell the difference here. That you cannot implies that you suffer from some cognitive disability because of which you cannot form new concepts or correct the old ones.

In this case there is no sin or fault. The Jews are not at fault for being alive and therefore, even if you die for them, there is no "fault" to be accounted for. Thus - not scapegoating. Also, you are not at fault either for offering Jews shelter and you are not at fault for valuing your life above theirs. So, no, even if you give them up, its not scapegoating.

---

as for genkaus:
We shouldn't be with God? Maybe we shouldn't but if he wants us with Him and we want him, why not?

Because in doing so he is ignoring what is just. He is being unjust and therefore sinful.

It was the only way and he wanted to do it. As for time, he was sinless no time should be had, his death should not have even happened, in that he suffered more than anyone because he deserved none of it.

A) It was not the only way. I can think of many different ways none of which involve discarding justice.

B) Your suffering is not a matter of how much you deserve - its a matter of how much pain you go through. A guy who has spent four days in hell has suffered more than Jesus. His suffering is greater by one day. Which means, your Jesus suffered less than anyone else who has ever been to hell.

[C Rod]

Genkaus,
If there is no fault then why are they in this situation?

What standard of justice are we using?

A) Share
B)Jesus should have suffered nothing and he did thus his suffering compared to any that deserved pain is can never be matched. Only if one was sinless and suffered more and one has not.

Rhythm:
I cant. Its either magic or its disgusting. Im content with that.

[The Grand Nudger]

It isn't either, it is both. You would be content with a system of justice or atonement that you could not explain, and that was disgusting? I don't think this is true.

[genkaus]

Genkaus,
If there is no fault then why are they in this situation?

Misfortune.

What standard of justice are we using?

There can be only one - consequences in accordance to actions.

A) Share

He could actually have chosen to be just - condemning people to hell only for as ling as their sins warranted and then letting them up in heaven.
He could've made sure that no sin ever happened.

B)Jesus should have suffered nothing and he did thus his suffering compared to any that deserved pain is can never be matched. Only if one was sinless and suffered more and one has not.

Pain has nothing to do with whether it is deserved or not. Whether you purposefully drop the hammer on your foot or you do it accidentally, the pain is the same. The pain you think your Jesus suffered has been outdone and outmatched countless times. Compared to what humans go through in hell for eternity - your Jesus has suffered nothing. And yet he has the gall to say that he has paid for all our sins.

The most he can say is that he tried to, but chickened out after three days because he couldn't take the heat. If he was serious about paying for every one's sins, then he still should be down there.

[The Grand Nudger]

For my own part along the lines of whether or not Jesus has paid for our sins, It matters very little to me how long it would take him. It matters very little to me whether or not he wishes to do so. I, personally, will not partake in this. Whatever price needs be paid (if such a price indeed needs be paid in the first place, or even could be), I will handle on my own. No one will be tied to a post on my account. If I am unable to pay the price, so be it, it's still my own.