Jesus forgiving sin is unjust to Victim.

[Greatest I am]

Jesus forgiving sin is unjust to Victim.

Sin, by it’s very nature must have a victim. Without a victim, there is no sin.

The one sinned against has the first right of forgiveness.

If Jesus usurps that right then I think it would be unjust.

Closure is being denied the victim thus victimizing is twofold.

Jesus would not condone such a thing.

Secular law now demands a victim assessment report before sentence is given.

To think that Jesus would ignore this requirement is unthinkable.

This means that, “Why have you forsaken me? “, is answered by God with; because what you do is immoral. You deny the victim her or his rights. It is also unjust to punish the innocent instead of the guilty. In fact, that notion is insane.

In the scenario shown here the victim is ignored thus showing the flaw in the judge’s ruling, if he accepts substitutionary atonement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqP_fjBkw...re=related

Regards
DL

[Anomalocaris]

In the eyes of xtians, all that counts is their imaginary god in his imaginary caprice might deem himself displeased. When that is imagined to have happened, the alledged prepentrator is imagined to have sined.

That measely, but fleash and blood, humans might be hurt and victimized through some action of the faithful shouldn't really be allowed to register in the mind of the xtian faithful so long as they deem their imaginary god to have not been imaginarily offended. If victimization is deem ed to not be a sin, then it is the fault of the agrieved party and it just sucks to be the victim.

Victims per se don't count, which is why so many xtians throughout the ages down to the present were so very glad to created so many victims.

[Napoléon]

Jesus would not condone such a thing.

Well, seen as jesus is god, and god has done some pretty terrible fucking things, I'd think again on anything you think jesus would condone.

[Anomalocaris]

What would Jesus do?

1. He would never work a honest day in his life
2. He would see his future in murky, fanatically sectarian underbelly of his failing society
3. He would be mean to his own mother
4. He would disown his own father
5. He would call himself son of god
6. He would produce no evidence of his own heterosexuality
7. He stroke his own ego by haranging a posse of dim witted and same sexed groupies with plagerized banalities
8. He would disturb the civil peace
9. He would come to a bad end.

If he had more guts, he might become 1st centuries, homosexual version of Charles Manson.

[Minimalist]

If I owe Smith ten dollars and God forgives me, that doesn't pay Smith.

- Robert G. Ingersoll

Something xtians always seem to forget.

[Anomalocaris]

If a xtian owes some one else ten dollars, and insists god forgives him, then the xtian becomes ten dollars richer at the expense of someone else, who, not being Jesus, doesn't count much anyway.

After all, if someone gives them a meal, they are likely to thank jesus rather than their benefactors.

[Thor]

After all, if someone gives them a meal, they are likely to thank jesus rather than their benefactors.

Very true! I have been in many houses where people have thanked "God" or "Jesus" for providing them with the bounty on the table. I have been sooooooo tempted to ask why they're thanking some deity when he had nothing to do with the food on the table. The deity didn't grow and harvest the food.... the farmer did! The deity didn't transport the food to the market.... the trucker did! The deity didn't offer the food for sale.... the grocer did! The deity didn't purchase and cook the food... the home owner did! These dingbats always want to give credit to their deity when none of it is due.

[Minimalist]

Xtians are ungrateful fucks, IOW.

[Drich]

Sin is anything not in the expressed will of God. No victim required.

[Anomalocaris]

In that case your own will is given by mistake, and that you have a will is proof your god is a worthless piece of shit who can't even create so trivial a thing as you right.