Why do we consider God's sending his son to be such a great act of love?

[AngryAtheist8]

Do you really think that Jesus (who is God) did not really lose His human life? Did not suffer excruciating pain?

Here’s something to think about, AA, and Poisedon.

According to “Da Rules”, if we follow Jesus and accept His salvation, guess what? WE are going to wind up in heaven, after a few years of suffering on earth.

So I guess that for all of us, we don’t really LOSE or sacrifice anything, right? Because it’s just a ‘few years’ and ‘we know it comes out right in the end.’

So losing our parents to cancer isn’t REALLY suffering, right?
Personal illness isn’t really suffering.
Mental illness isn’t really suffering.
Hunger, hardship, rape, torture. . .

None of these are really suffering because. . . it all comes right in eternity.

I would love to see you tell this to one of my friends whose husband is about to die of pancreatic suffering, (she is a believer). . .that her pain and his isn’t REALLY suffering.

Bad analogy.

Neither I (nor you) have confirmation of the afterlife.
Jesus didn’t have to believe, he KNEW (assuming Catholicism is correct).

I refuse to feel sorry for an all-powerful being who brought his suffering on himself and ultimately caused ALL suffering.

Fortunately, I don’t have to believe in such a silly system.

 

[Gaber]

… He provided the model on which we can base our lives and discover true freedom through unselfish love.

He apparently failed in His mission yet He has changed the history of mankind because His example and teaching are the basis of modern civilisation with its principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. He infused His vitality into our moribund race without infringing divine justice or human freedom by a simple but sublime solution: by intervening from within as a man. We are still subject to temptation, responsible for our decisions and accountable for our conduct but we are no longer trapped in the prison erected by our egoism and isolation from others. We can choose to be spiritually united to everyone if we follow His example and believe in the power of unselfish love. Yes, He did, among others. And ordinarily, we are trapped in forms of egoism, benign or not, though using the agency of an expemplar might enable us to be free of that. I don’t think you are saying, are you, that just because Jesus taught, we are automatically free of ego? I don;t notice that about myself, but maybe I’m being too hard on me.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Bad analogy.

Neither I (nor you) have confirmation of the afterlife.
Jesus didn’t have to believe, he KNEW (assuming Catholicism is correct).

I refuse to feel sorry for an all-powerful being who brought his suffering on himself and ultimately caused ALL suffering.

Fortunately, I don’t have to believe in such a silly system.

So let’s see. Suffering isn’t suffering if you absolutely know in the end it will be ‘all right’.

And by knowing, you can’t just have faith, because faith isn’t REALLY knowing.

And Jesus (God) by creating beings and giving them free will somehow knew they would sin (even though we have no idea if Adam and Eve lived in a temporal universe as we know and you are just postulating that God thinks in linear temporal terms and deliberately created beings to suffer and die and of course there could be no reason for that.

Of course, you’re thinking of a god made in your image, limited to your understanding.

Picture a man brought to a hospital with a raging infected leg ulcer.

The physician comes in. Both he and the man know that in order to treat the infection (without treatment the man will die) will require a surgery that is extremely painful, even with the best pain killing drugs and even with the best possible rehab treatment.

The man agrees. He undergoes pain and even though there is a fair assurance that all will be well, there is still always the chance with these surgeries of death, disfigurement, continued pain, further surgery. But he has faith that even if any complications ensue or even if heaven forbid he does die, it is better to freely choose to try to combat evil than to let it take its course unimpeded.

Now let’s picture a scenario where the man comes in and the physician waves a magic wand because in THIS universe, any ‘ill’ is magically erased by doctors. Toothache from eating too many sweets? Wand wave, pain gone. Somebody shoots you? Wand wave, bullet gone.

Doesn’t that sound great? No matter what physical evil happens to you, the wand waves, the pain is gone.

So. . .how many people do you think will limit sweets? NObody, because there is no consequence to the overeating. The wand waves and the pain is gone.

How many people will be law abiding and not shoot, maim, or kill other people? After all, no matter what damage you do to a person, wand wave, the pain is gone.

What kind of society do you have when any natural consequences of wrong choices has the ‘pain’ erased? Why act responsibly when you’re just going to get ‘wand wave’ and never ever have to worry about the consequences?

 

[fhansen]

You are overlooking the fact that Jesus was a man in all things except sin. He was not omniscient while He was on earth and must have been prey to doubts like everyone else. Is that surprising when you have been crucified? When you are in agony and faced with imminent death you must inevitably be tempted to believe you have been misguided and only imagine you have been sent by God. It is easy to belittle His sacrifice but to do something comparable is an entirely different proposition. It is also easy to criticise and destroy but to appreciate and create takes far more insight and understanding. Let those who judge and condemn judge and condemn themselves first…

Jesus was not compelled to die as a scapegoat at the command of the Father: His death was not imposed on him against His will but resulted from His own free decision. The apparent subordination of Jesus to the Father is due to the relation of His human to divine nature.

He allowed Himself to be executed unjustly because He knew someone had to break out of the vicious spiral of evil in which men react to hatred with hatred and to violence with violence. He refused to be contaminated by the vices of others and in spite of severe provocation He remained true to his principles of love and forgiveness. He did not compromise Himself in any way but retained His self-control in the face of injustice, suffering and death. Neither fear nor doubt nor pride made him abandon His self-appointed task of liberating us from our weakness and blindness. To forgive one’s executioners is undeniable proof of self-mastery.

The purpose of His mission was to enable us to escape not from pain and death but from selfishness and cowardice. He became a man in order to uplift humanity without interfering with our freedom. Our individual guilt cannot be erased but our addiction to ourselves can be cured by His example. His execution was caused by a combination of human vices and weaknesses: pride, ignorance, cruelty, callousness, selfishness, apathy, hypocrisy, self-righteousness and the lust for power. He provided the model on which we can base our lives and discover true freedom through unselfish love.

He apparently failed in His mission yet He has changed the history of mankind because His example and teaching are the basis of modern civilisation with its principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. He infused His vitality into our moribund race without infringing divine justice or human freedom by a simple but sublime solution: by intervening from within as a man. We are still subject to temptation, responsible for our decisions and accountable for our conduct but we are no longer trapped in the prison erected by our egoism and isolation from others. We can choose to be spiritually united to everyone if we follow His example and believe in the power of unselfish love.

Nicely put.

 

[Gaber]

Repost due to poor formating. And sorry, this thing dopesn’t have a spell check.

Tonyrey "… He provided the model on which we can base our lives and discover true freedom through unselfish love.

He apparently failed in His mission yet He has changed the history of mankind because His example and teaching are the basis of modern civilisation with its principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. He infused His vitality into our moribund race without infringing divine justice or human freedom by a simple but sublime solution: by intervening from within as a man. We are still subject to temptation, responsible for our decisions and accountable for our conduct but we are no longer trapped in the prison erected by our egoism and isolation from others. We can choose to be spiritually united to everyone if we follow His example and believe in the power of unselfish love. "

Yes, He did, (provide a model) among others. And ordinarily, we are trapped in forms of egoism, benign or not, though using the agency of an expemplar might enable us to be free of that. I don’t think you are saying, are you, that just because Jesus taught, we are automatically free of ego? I don;t notice that about myself, but maybe I’m being too hard on me.

 

[tonyrey]

Yes, He did, (provide a model) among others. And ordinarily, we are trapped in forms of egoism, benign or not, though using the agency of an exemplar might enable us to be free of that. I don’t think you are saying, are you, that just because Jesus taught, we are automatically free of ego? I don;t notice that about myself, but maybe I’m being too hard on me.

You obviously can’t escape from yourself and your desires; nor can any of us! But although we aren’t automatically free of ego we are free to the extent of being capable of thinking and living as we choose - within limits of course.

 

[tonyrey]

*You are overlooking the fact that Jesus was a man in all things except sin. He was not omniscient while He was on earth and must have been prey to doubts like everyone else. Is that surprising when you have been crucified? When you are in agony and faced with imminent death you must inevitably be tempted to believe you have been misguided and only imagine you have been sent by God. It is easy to belittle His sacrifice but to do something comparable is an entirely different proposition. It is also easy to criticise and destroy but to appreciate and create takes far more insight and understanding. Let those who judge and condemn judge and condemn themselves first…

Thank you. It’s good to know some one agrees!

 

[Gaber]

You obviously can’t escape from yourself and your desires; nor can any of us! But although we aren’t automatically free of ego we are free to the extent of being capable of thinking and living as we choose - within limits of course.

No, but you can see them for what the are, and be free from being ruled by them. What I don’t get about your statement is that you appear to put it all on Jesus. Nopne of what you stated is directly ayytibutable on;y to Jesus, especially that modern civilization is founded on Him, as absolutely wonderful as His vastly misunderstood teaching is.

For example, the highly noble idea of curing the addiction to ourselves, which I take to mean egoic identification, or false, constructed self, has been treated since time immemorial. And as far as I can see, the non dualist way of doing that is far simpler than what has been accreted around the teachings of Jesus to the point where in imho it is darned near unrecognizable. Despite that, many Catholics. contemporary and more remote, have come up with what in essence that is by their own diligence and despiote some ecclesiastic discouragement,

 

[AngryAtheist8]

**So let’s see. Suffering isn’t suffering if you absolutely know in the end it will be ‘all right’.**And by knowing, you can’t just have faith, because faith isn’t REALLY knowing.

And Jesus (God) by creating beings and giving them free will somehow knew they would sin (even though we have no idea if Adam and Eve lived in a temporal universe as we know and you are just postulating that God thinks in linear temporal terms and deliberately created beings to suffer and die and of course there could be no reason for that.

Of course, you’re thinking of a god made in your image, limited to your understanding.

Picture a man brought to a hospital with a raging infected leg ulcer.

The physician comes in. Both he and the man know that in order to treat the infection (without treatment the man will die) will require a surgery that is extremely painful, even with the best pain killing drugs and even with the best possible rehab treatment.

The man agrees. He undergoes pain and even though there is a fair assurance that all will be well, there is still always the chance with these surgeries of death, disfigurement, continued pain, further surgery. But he has faith that even if any complications ensue or even if heaven forbid he does die, it is better to freely choose to try to combat evil than to let it take its course unimpeded.

Now let’s picture a scenario where the man comes in and the physician waves a magic wand because in THIS universe, any ‘ill’ is magically erased by doctors. Toothache from eating too many sweets? Wand wave, pain gone. Somebody shoots you? Wand wave, bullet gone.

Doesn’t that sound great? No matter what physical evil happens to you, the wand waves, the pain is gone.

So. . .how many people do you think will limit sweets? NObody, because there is no consequence to the overeating. The wand waves and the pain is gone.

How many people will be law abiding and not shoot, maim, or kill other people? After all, no matter what damage you do to a person, wand wave, the pain is gone.

What kind of society do you have when any natural consequences of wrong choices has the ‘pain’ erased? Why act responsibly when you’re just going to get ‘wand wave’ and never ever have to worry about the consequences?

I did not say that.
I said that an all-powerful being deliberately inflicting suffering on himself for a very limited period of time isn’t that impressive. Especially if that same all-powerful being inflicts INFINITE suffering on ordinary people (the damned) for limited crimes.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

So let’s see. Suffering isn’t suffering if you absolutely know in the end it will be ‘all right’.

And by knowing, you can’t just have faith, because faith isn’t REALLY knowing.

And Jesus (God) by creating beings and giving them free will somehow knew they would sin (even though we have no idea if Adam and Eve lived in a temporal universe as we know and you are just postulating that God thinks in linear temporal terms and deliberately created beings to suffer and die and of course there could be no reason for that.

Of course, you’re thinking of a god made in your image, limited to your understanding.

Picture a man brought to a hospital with a raging infected leg ulcer.

The physician comes in. Both he and the man know that in order to treat the infection (without treatment the man will die) will require a surgery that is extremely painful, even with the best pain killing drugs and even with the best possible rehab treatment.

The man agrees. He undergoes pain and even though there is a fair assurance that all will be well, there is still always the chance with these surgeries of death, disfigurement, continued pain, further surgery. But he has faith that even if any complications ensue or even if heaven forbid he does die, it is better to freely choose to try to combat evil than to let it take its course unimpeded.

Now let’s picture a scenario where the man comes in and the physician waves a magic wand because in THIS universe, any ‘ill’ is magically erased by doctors. Toothache from eating too many sweets? Wand wave, pain gone. Somebody shoots you? Wand wave, bullet gone.

Doesn’t that sound great? No matter what physical evil happens to you, the wand waves, the pain is gone.

So. . .how many people do you think will limit sweets? NObody, because there is no consequence to the overeating. The wand waves and the pain is gone.

How many people will be law abiding and not shoot, maim, or kill other people? After all, no matter what damage you do to a person, wand wave, the pain is gone.

What kind of society do you have when any natural consequences of wrong choices has the ‘pain’ erased? Why act responsibly when you’re just going to get ‘wand wave’ and never ever have to worry about the consequences?

According to my understanding of Catholicism, God is supposed to be all-knowing.
If he is all-knowing, then by definition He knew.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

So let’s see. Suffering isn’t suffering if you absolutely know in the end it will be ‘all right’.

And by knowing, you can’t just have faith, because faith isn’t REALLY knowing.

And Jesus (God) by creating beings and giving them free will somehow knew they would sin (even though we have no idea if Adam and Eve lived in a temporal universe as we know and you are just postulating that God thinks in linear temporal terms and deliberately created beings to suffer and die and of course there could be no reason for that.

Of course, you’re thinking of a god made in your image, limited to your understanding.

**Picture a man brought to a hospital with a raging infected leg ulcer.

The physician comes in. Both he and the man know that in order to treat the infection (without treatment the man will die) will require a surgery that is extremely painful, even with the best pain killing drugs and even with the best possible rehab treatment.

The man agrees. He undergoes pain and even though there is a fair assurance that all will be well, there is still always the chance with these surgeries of death, disfigurement, continued pain, further surgery. But he has faith that even if any complications ensue or even if heaven forbid he does die, it is better to freely choose to try to combat evil than to let it take its course unimpeded.

Now let’s picture a scenario where the man comes in and the physician waves a magic wand because in THIS universe, any ‘ill’ is magically erased by doctors. Toothache from eating too many sweets? Wand wave, pain gone. Somebody shoots you? Wand wave, bullet gone.

Doesn’t that sound great? No matter what physical evil happens to you, the wand waves, the pain is gone.

So. . .how many people do you think will limit sweets? NObody, because there is no consequence to the overeating. The wand waves and the pain is gone.

How many people will be law abiding and not shoot, maim, or kill other people? After all, no matter what damage you do to a person, wand wave, the pain is gone.

What kind of society do you have when any natural consequences of wrong choices has the ‘pain’ erased? Why act responsibly when you’re just going to get ‘wand wave’ and never ever have to worry about the consequences**?

Your forgetting that in this world pain often serves no purpose.
What about those with phantom-limb pain?
What about those with chronic pain due to injuries that they can do nothing about?
What about those with psychological pain that cannot be cured?

 

[Sair]

You are overlooking the fact that Jesus was a man in all things except sin. He was not omniscient while He was on earth and must have been prey to doubts like everyone else. Is that surprising when you have been crucified? When you are in agony and faced with imminent death you must inevitably be tempted to believe you have been misguided and only imagine you have been sent by God. It is easy to belittle His sacrifice but to do something comparable is an entirely different proposition. It is also easy to criticise and destroy but to appreciate and create takes far more insight and understanding. Let those who judge and condemn judge and condemn themselves first…

Well, I can only speak from the perspective of a mortal human being, after all. But what other perspective can we realistically have? If we take a genuinely human and historically plausible account of Jesus the man (assuming he actually existed as such) then we can suppose he died for a cause in which he passionately believed, and that is truly admirable in and of itself (though neither unprecedented nor unexampled in later times). The only thing that makes it reprehensible, morally speaking, is the idea that God demanded this sacrifice in order to bestow his forgiveness on humanity - something which, given his supposed omnipotence, he could have freely bestowed without ‘payment’.

Jesus was not compelled to die as a scapegoat at the command of the Father: His death was not imposed on him against His will but resulted from His own free decision. The apparent subordination of Jesus to the Father is due to the relation of His human to divine nature.

Actually, it’s interesting that you mention the ‘scapegoat’, since that appears to be where the idea of vicarious atonement originated, at least in Jewish tradition - they symbolically placed all their ‘sins’ upon a goat then sent that goat into the desert to shift for itself (and probably die of starvation or be eaten, presumably). Justify it after the fact all you like, but again, if we’re talking about an omnipotent god, then this god set the conditions by which he himself was to be appeased - by demanding the sacrifice of himself to himself in order to provoke his own forgiveness towards his own creations, for whose sins he is therefore ultimately responsible, being omniscient as well as omnipotent? Doesn’t sound so marvellous when you strip away the mythology and doublethink.

 

[JDaniel]

I’ve never understood why this was always considered such a sacrifice. God sent his son to die for our sins, but neither God nor Jesus actually lost anything. Basically, the way I see it is Jesus was in heaven, went to earth for a few decades to do an unpleasant, but quick (relative to eternity 30-some years is really quick) job, and then he went back up to heaven. Job done. Easy peasy. Why do people always talk about this like it was such a sacrifice?

Poseidon:

You’re forgetting something - the scourging and crucifixion. God not only converted and placed an aspect of his very Being into the mortal realm, but also, put that aspect of his Being through the ultimate intensity of human pain and trauma. Pain such that it only took about 12 hours for the effects of it to render the mortal aspect of him, dead. Pain such that his mortal aspect asked if He could be relieved from its foreseen grisliness. Pain such that his mortal aspect cried out, “Abba, why have you forsaken me?” And, finally, enduring all that, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.” (A real “man” in every sense of the word!)

Do not confuse what I am asking here: this is not to be construed as a rationale. God, by doing this, directly participated in the trials and tribulations, and the pains and sufferings of any mortal - taken to their limits. The important thing to come away with is that he proved that physical life’s pains and traumas provide no more than a mortal can bear. Christ asked his Father for relief from what was about to happen to him, and for relief from what was happening to him. It only took him a moment or two though, to accept the inexorability of it and sublimely endure it. Remember, this is known as the Passion, which comes from the Latin passio, and means, “passivity.” Christ passively endured it. (Imagine what he could have done to those guys! But, he even Loved them!!))

I have always found it strange that those who are undergoing real pain or trauma, for which only endurance is the answer, rarely complain about, or, to God. It is always the wimpy, less theistically inclined who wallow in the discovery that whining to, or about, God makes them feel less guilty, and thereby better, about themselves. Since it is not they who experience the pain and trauma, that can be the only explanation. Either that, or they watch way too much television.

God bless,
jd

 

[JDaniel]

All:

The young man, whose book I point out below, is such a man. He was a new father himself, a respected sports writer in the Tampa Bay, Florida, market, who, one night, suffered a massive brain trauma. He survived it and has endured it, and the book is that story. It is short, sweet and very inspiring. He describes surviving that trauma from the point of view of someone who actually suffered and is suffering the trauma!

God bless,
jd

 

[tonyrey]

You obviously can’t escape from yourself and your desires; nor can any of us! But although we aren’t automatically free of ego we are free to the extent of being capable of thinking and living as we choose - within limits of course.

The unconscious is not so easy to rule…

What I don’t get about your statement is that you appear to put it all on Jesus. Nopne of what you stated is directly ayytibutable on;y to Jesus, especially that modern civilization is founded on Him, as absolutely wonderful as His vastly misunderstood teaching is.

Much of what we can learn from Jesus is not what he said but what what He did. For example, in a patriarchal society He treated men and women as equals, children and Gentiles as members of God’s family and condemned those who virtually enslaved the poor - thereby instituting the principles of liberty, equality and (above all) fraternity, even today ignored or rejected by many people.

For example, the highly noble idea of curing the addiction to ourselves, which I take to mean egoic identification, or false, constructed self, has been treated since time immemorial. And as far as I can see, the non dualist way of doing that is far simpler than what has been accreted around the teachings of Jesus to the point where in imho it is darned near unrecognizable. Despite that, many Catholics. contemporary and more remote, have come up with what in essence that is by their own diligence and despiote some ecclesiastic discouragement.

By addiction to ourselves I mean our inclination to put ourselves first rather than consider the interests of others. Like the lust for power it becomes a deep-rooted habit…

 

[Sair]

Poseidon:

You’re forgetting something - the scourging and crucifixion. God not only converted and placed an aspect of his very Being into the mortal realm, but also, put that aspect of his Being through the ultimate intensity of human pain and trauma. Pain such that it only took about 12 hours for the effects of it to render the mortal aspect of him, dead. Pain such that his mortal aspect asked if He could be relieved from its foreseen grisliness. Pain such that his mortal aspect cried out, “Abba, why have you forsaken me?” And, finally, enduring all that, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.” (A real “man” in every sense of the word!)

Do not confuse what I am asking here: this is not to be construed as a rationale. God, by doing this, directly participated in the trials and tribulations, and the pains and sufferings of any mortal - taken to their limits. The important thing to come away with is that he proved that physical life’s pains and traumas provide no more than a mortal can bear. Christ asked his Father for relief from what was about to happen to him, and for relief from what was happening to him. It only took him a moment or two though, to accept the inexorability of it and sublimely endure it. Remember, this is known as the Passion, which comes from the Latin passio, and means, “passivity.” Christ passively endured it. (Imagine what he could have done to those guys! But, he even Loved them!!))

I have always found it strange that those who are undergoing real pain or trauma, for which only endurance is the answer, rarely complain about, or, to God. It is always the wimpy, less theistically inclined who wallow in the discovery that whining to, or about, God makes them feel less guilty, and thereby better, about themselves. Since it is not they who experience the pain and trauma, that can be the only explanation. Either that, or they watch way too much television.

God bless,
jd

So…Christ’s suffering is supposed to be the extreme of human endurance?

Interesting.

Was it worse than being burnt to a crisp, as was the fate of many a “heretic” who held beliefs slightly different from those of the orthodox Christians who carried out this heinous sentence? Was that God’s will also?

What about those who have suffered even more horrifying ends in the name of Christian belief? Such as being slowly roasted alive, or being skinned, or being broken on the wheel (and I seem to recall something in the Gospels about not a bone of the Christ being broken)? Are these experiences to be considered better or worse than crucifixion?

And how about those who have suffered for no better cause than the triumph of that human free will which is supposed to have been the be-all and end-all of the Christian God’s creation? Does the ancient Persian politician slowly lowered into boiling oil (or the modern Middle Eastern soldier slowly run over by a tank) silently thank the Christian God for allowing them to emulate the sacrifice of Christ? I doubt it…

 

[tonyrey]

Well, I can only speak from the perspective of a mortal human being, after all. But what other perspective can we realistically have? If we take a genuinely human and historically plausible account of Jesus the man (assuming he actually existed as such) then we can suppose he died for a cause in which he passionately believed, and that is truly admirable in and of itself (though neither unprecedented nor unexampled in later times).

 

[tonyrey]

So…Christ’s suffering is supposed to be the extreme of human endurance?

Interesting.

Was it worse than being burnt to a crisp, as was the fate of many a “heretic” who held beliefs slightly different from those of the orthodox Christians who carried out this heinous sentence? Was that God’s will also?

What about those who have suffered even more horrifying ends in the name of Christian belief? Such as being slowly roasted alive, or being skinned, or being broken on the wheel (and I seem to recall something in the Gospels about not a bone of the Christ being broken)? Are these experiences to be considered better or worse than crucifixion?

And how about those who have suffered for no better cause than the triumph of that human free will which is supposed to have been the be-all and end-all of the Christian God’s creation? Does the ancient Persian politician slowly lowered into boiling oil (or the modern Middle Eastern soldier slowly run over by a tank) silently thank the Christian God for allowing them to emulate the sacrifice of Christ? I doubt it…

The significant omission in your examples is that the victims had no choice in the matter. They were not afflicted by the agony of knowing they were able to avoid their fate…

 

[Sair]

The significant omission in your examples is that the victims had no choice in the matter. They were not afflicted by the agony of knowing they were able to avoid their fate…

So much for that glorified free will.

 

[tonyrey]

So much for that glorified free will.

?