I just don't get it. I know the story and understand that Christians believe that he died for our sins but if that's the case, what happened before him? How did people get into heaven before he came down? And I don't understand how God can't just forgive sins without sending his son down here and having him crucified and what not. Jesus may have existed or he may not have existed, I would like to know why exactly do I care?

And whats the significance of the gruesome death? Is that really necessary?

And why do (some) Christians make such a big deal about the nature of His death like its a really huge deal that he was crucified? Its not like thousands of others (including the two next to Him) did not experience the same fate (and plus, Jesus wussed out early, whereas others had a slow painful death, remember?). Plus, there have been millions of people who have suffered more in their life than Jesus did, so i'm not sure what the big deal is? Is it because he is the Son of God so its so amazing that someone like Him should have to suffer at all? I honestly can not understand that line of thinking. Any sane person would happily suffer the amount Jesus suffered plus more if the result was saving mankind from the eternal BBQ and being seated on the right hand of God and given God-like abilities for eternity.

There was no means available for someone to pay the sin debt they inherited from Adam.

They didn't.

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Man owed the debt, so it was by a man that the debt had to be paid. As for why the settlement of that debt needed to take the form it did, I have not seen an explanation for this in the Bible, so I don't know.

Whether and why you care or not is entirely up to you.

So, wait. You actually believe that every single human being that lived before Jesus went to hell? So God just said one day "Hey, I don't think I really like sending all these people to hell, I think I'll now send my son down to live and die for all of their sins and then I'll be able to have people up here in heaven"? Does that really seem logical to you? And you really believe in a God that because one guy ate an apple would send billions and billions of people to hell for all eternity? How do you sleep at night believing in a God that would do something like that?

I don't have any idea what happens when I die. I don't have any idea if there is a God or not. But I'll tell you what - I couldn't live if I really thought that there was a God up there that did something this unbelievably atrocious to the human kind he claims to "Love". That's just insane to me.

No, some people went into an intermediate state until salvation was available.

I don't have enough information about the decision process of the Creator of the universe to answer that question.

It was Adam's disobedience, with full knowledge of the consequences, that corrupted his lineage and brought death, etc (or, roughly translated, "hell") into the world, not the eating of an apple.

Does not compute.

What atrocity? God owns heaven and therefore can set the conditions for admission into it and the eternal life His love has offered. If these necessary steps cramp your style, you're free to choose permanent death ("eternal punishment" in translation) as your lasting fate after the inevitable natural demise we share with the animals.

I'm not a Christian in most senses of the word (I don't believe in heaven or hell, for example), so it may be irrelevant. Nonetheless, in my view the 'significance' of Jesus is as an ideal human we can strive to be (though we'll never achieve it). By attempting to live and act as he would have, we become better people and become closer to God (as well as having fulfilling, positive lives, imo). The awful death is not particularly relevant to me - I don't really understand God killing someone to forgive billions of descendants for the crimes of their ancestors. Personally, I think the torture of Jesus and reluctance to hear his teachings speaks more about human capacity for evil and a love of worldly things rather than spiritual development and living as God wants.

As I say though - this is my personal view so probably not that interesting. It's heretical at best and probably best characterised as non-christian. I think you should 'care' because it provides a path to being a better person and living a more fulfilling life, not because you'll live forever in perfect bliss.

First, is that in the bible?

Second, doesn't this seems completely illogical to you? If this is the case, why didn't God just judge these people at the time of their death? Why would he need Jesus to come down from heaven, live, and die for him to vindicate these people? Why do they have to wait if they lived a righteous life? Does that either:

1.) Make any sense at all?

2.) Seem even remotely fair to you?

3.) Seem moral to you?


Of course he can but you don't have any problem at all with him sending rightous and good people to hell just because they happened to not believe in him? Really? I can't fathom this type of immorality. If the picture of hell that's portrayed in the bible is correct, this is the most atrocious (sp) act I can possibly imagine.

Excellent answer and of course if this is what the significance was to Christians, I wouldn't have made this thread. I'm in no way attacking the teachings of Jesus and the example that he represented. I aspire to live that same kind of life myself.

I guess I'm arguing the intepretation of the Christian religion and the injustice and immorality it represents.

It is, though this intermediate state is not well defined there.

The decision process, with the complete set of variables considered, that went into this is completely unknown to me, so I don't have enough information to determine how logical God was in making the decision.

See previous.

See previous.

See previous.

See previous.

By definition, yes. Since my personal preference for morality is whatever God says it is. You evidently have chosen a different standard. To each his own.

The picture of "hell" (bad translation of Gehenna, name of the city dump of Jerusalem, where garbage, animal carcasses and human bodies were incinerated by "unquenchable fire" in the first century AD) found in the Bible is essentially the graveyard. There is nothing immoral about not letting someone into eternal life with God, but rather leaving them to the grave, unless God's conditions for admission into His heaven are met.

I guess I should have known. So, your choice is to completely disregard using your brain to determine logic in religion and just take it completely at face value? And you don't see anything wrong with a God that chooses to make someone stay in this grave (which sounds pretty horrible to me) for all eternity for the simple reason that they didn't believe in him? Even if they lived a righteous life and treated people with respect and was a good person?

And before you answer, don't treat this just as an argument, and please don't use the "God says so" argument. Look inside yourself, consider what you deem moral, fair and good. How do you justify:

God making this decision

and

Actually believing in a God that makes this decision.

No, it's my brain that is telling me I don't have enough information to make a logical determination.

God's criteria for letting people into His heaven has nothing to do with whether they lived a good life or not, and I'm not nearly smart enough to second guess Him on this. So no, I do not judge God here, or anywhere else for that matter, not least because I lack sufficient understanding of His knowledge and intent to make a judgement.

I don't get this. "God says so" is a perfectly valid basis for a moral code and the only one I use, while "you say so" and "I say so" don't even rate in comparison.

So, when you as an individual looks at something, anything, the only moral code you know is the one God teaches? You have no sense of morality of your own?

You realize that Hell is not a good place, right? So, if you look at a situation where a person loves his family, treats people with respect, gives to charity, helps others, makes others feel good about themselves and generally helps human kind as a whole go to hell because he doesn't believe in God, use your own brain and morality and tell me why this person deserves to feel pain for all of eternity. Just think about it outside of the "God says so, that's why" argument. Wouldn't you like to be an individual for once?

The Romans thought so.

Is this too long to be made into a bumper sticker?

I don't have my own moral code for the same reason I don't have my own space program: I lack the means and the competence. The Creator of the universe including humanity, on the other hand, has all the prerequisites, so I go with His calls.

See previous.

Too long and too out of context.

Concerto, are you avoiding the "science flies you to the moon..." thread or missed my post there? Really curious about your response now that you're aware ganstman is jewish.

Although your view of the atonement would be considered heretical in some corners of Christendom, it is certainly not non-Christian. It is an old and influential view whose most well-known proponent was Peter Abelard.

Neither, I'm just done posting in it. What ganstaman being Jewish has to do with either the topic of that thread or anything I said there is a bit of a mystery. Looks like you're trolling.

I don't know about that , there were many people who had done amazing deeds for others , probably suffered more pain and death in order to save others, they probably gave up all material things as well for the good of others.. so i don't agree that somehow nobody has achieved on earth what JESUS achieved..

He's given us more public holidays than anyone else.

I didn't really mean that though. In my personal theology, it doesn't matter much if Jesus is real or not, nor if he didnt do any of the things the bible said he did. Jesus is important as an ideal - and nobody will ever achieve the ideal. Nobody (in my view anyhow) will ever live their entire life never comitting an evil act even if they are by and large good people.

I wasn't really speaking about any specific action Jesus did and suggesting that encapsulated 'perfect humanness' but I think the story of Jesus is a more general exhortation to live as well as you can, even though you're doomed to occasionally miss the mark.

I'll try not to be too harsh but to me, this is just an excuse so that you can feel okay about believing in a God that punishes good people.

I realize you refuse to have your own thoughts but if you have a shread of human empathy or human compassion, you have to see that punishing someone that has lived a good life is wrong. That doesn't seem wrong to you?

You do realize that you can make up your own mind as to what you believe, right? You are not forced to believe everything the bible teaches, completely at face value.

Of all the religions in all the world that currently exist and have existed in the past, do you realize how unlikely it is that Christianity got it EXACTLY right?

It's okay to have a brain and think on your own. You talk as though your under some sort of crazy spell.

After several attempts to communicate a basic idea to you and getting simplistic condescension in return, I will also try not to be harsh but your thought process seems rather stereotyped and clumsy. Doesn't it bother you to be stuck parroting such commonplace mass-market rubbish with near-zero intellectual content? That is, if you even believe what you are saying rather than just auto-posting atheist outreach spam.

Question dodging in sophisticated ways is still question dodging.

I'm actually not an atheist and you didn't respond in any way to my post. I guess we're at an impasse if your only response is "Because God says so". I was just hoping you could actually use your own brain to make an assessment of the situation. My feeling is that when deciding what to believe (and we do decide ourselves), we can use our brain and hearts to look at the different options and make the proper conclusions about what makes sense and what doesn't. I don't see how finding religion can work any other way. Yet, so many people (millions in fact, maybe billions) don't make judgements in religion this way. However, in every other facet of life (politics, family, morality, career), they do make decisions this way. I guess I just don't understand why someone would accept the flaws of religion when they don't anywhere else.

Personally, I find the idea of vicarious salvation to be insulting and I don't want it.