Philosophy Now Forum

I'd love some Christian to try and explain to what higher moral authority did God have to appeal that he had to kill Jesus to save the world.
Then I'd love them to explain how the hell that is supposed to make any sense. How exactly does that work?

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It's said it was done for the salvation of mankind. Wasn't there a better way?

PhilX

I'm still fascinated by the idea of this "better way." What would you have in mind?

I mean, your question takes for granted that "mankind" needed "salvation." And while you may not personally believe that, if you don't take it for granted at least for heuristic purposes, then the question cannot even be supposed. So you must be thinking of something.

And you say it disconcerts you that there wasn't a "better way"? Which "way" would that be? Can you give an illustration of what you're thinking?

The manner of Jesus death got everyone's attention, even though it was a common means of execution, to execute an innocent man was noteworthy.

From the song,

"Did you know your messy death would be a record breaker?"

source: http://www.lyricsondemand.com/soundtrac ... yrics.html

thedoc wrote:The manner of Jesus death got everyone's attention...

I can't help thinking that god was having an off day, in terms of inspiration. If he wanted to get everyone's attention, as the lyrics say:
"Why'd you choose such a backward time in such a strange land?
If you'd come today you could have reached a whole nation.
Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication."
Really? An omnipotent god that is seeking attention thinks the best way to get it is by nailing himself to a piece of wood? In Palestine? In 4BC? (Bit of artistic licence there.) I mean; really?

uwot wrote:

thedoc wrote:The manner of Jesus death got everyone's attention...

I can't help thinking that god was having an off day, in terms of inspiration. If he wanted to get everyone's attention, as the lyrics say:
"Why'd you choose such a backward time in such a strange land?
If you'd come today you could have reached a whole nation.
Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication."
Really? An omnipotent god that is seeking attention thinks the best way to get it is by nailing himself to a piece of wood? In Palestine? In 4BC? (Bit of artistic licence there.) I mean; really?

People are still talking about it and taking notice of the event, so it must have worked. What other event in history has as much effect on peoples lives, our whole calendar is based on it, what year is it?

If God is so merciful, then why did Jesus have to be sacrificed?

Because "People" would not accept that mercy and wanted to do it their own way. The Jewish religion had over 600 rules to live by from men trying to do it themselves.

I believe this says a lot about our understanding of God,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwkgGPvClF4&t=43s

thedoc wrote:If God is so merciful, then why did Jesus have to be sacrificed?

Because "People" would not accept that mercy and wanted to do it their own way. The Jewish religion had over 600 rules to live by from men trying to do it themselves.

WTF are you talking about?
How is nailing yourself to a cross supposed to change that?
And why did it lead to more rules?

Immanuel Can wrote: And you say it disconcerts you that there wasn't a "better way"? Which "way" would that be? Can you give an illustration of what you're thinking?

Seriously - maybe you could answer this one?

I'd love some Christian to try and explain to what higher moral authority did God have to appeal that he had to kill Jesus to save the world.
Then I'd love them to explain how the hell that is supposed to make any sense. How exactly does that work?

Because it was just his human form that got sacrificed the essence is still intact, and he will return.

HexHammer wrote:it was just his human form that got sacrificed

Oh, is that all?

Harbal wrote:

HexHammer wrote:it was just his human form that got sacrificed

Oh, is that all?

That was enough.

thedoc wrote: That was enough.

Well that's what I thought but I didn't want to over react.

Harbal wrote:

thedoc wrote: That was enough.

Well that's what I thought but I didn't want to over react.

Don't worry, you didn't.

Immanuel Can wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:It's said it was done for the salvation of mankind. Wasn't there a better way?

PhilX

I'm still fascinated by the idea of this "better way." What would you have in mind?

To argue so intelligently and persuasively to all before him, using his powers to understand the souls of those he needed to convince all. This would not be "cheating". JC would not be manipulating anyone to do this, just more keenly observing and understanding others.

Another option would be simply to appear in the clouds and speak to all in a clear and unequivocal manner. Any dumb psychopathic savage can commit atrocities to make a powerful statement but a competent leader will communicate: "Hello. I am your deity. These are the most important rules that you must not break [...] and these are the reasons why [...]. I will return each year to assess and answer questions".