Its a cornerstone belief that Jesus died for the sins of mankind and is needed because we are separated from God and he is the way the truth and the life. None other. All those who don’t believe are according to the NT destined for eternal hell.
But what is the evidence for this belief in either the OT or the words attributed to Jesus?
But examine the proposition why we think we are separated from God? That is because of the Garden of Eden and Adam’s fall which is the basis of ‘original sin’ as Paul thought Jesus as the first fruits of Salvation. We now know Genesis is fatually wrong and that Adam and Eve were not created by God as we are now. The Catholic Church now accepts evolution but yet can’t bring themselves to the next stage that without the garden narrative, there is no fall and therefore no need of a ‘Saviour’ for mankind! That would end their power of redemption via the cross and the confessional booth. And the end of the Christian Church other than a meeting place for a few songs of praise.
The story of Zacheus who was in the tree when Jesus called him down. Jesus said that Salvation had come to his house ‘that day’ when Zacheus said he would give half his wealth to the poor (Not all of it BTW) and would change his attitude etc. So no need for spilling of Jesus’s blood at that point then. He also appeared to forgive sins during his ministry and so again no need of atonement by blood.
But this is really my point and question about this concept.
Ask any or most parents in any part of the world, religious or not and ask them would they ‘forgive’ their children of any deed or wrong action even very bad ones without reservation or condition? The answer tends to be that they love their kids very much and so why would they not do so?
We are told that God’s love surpasses human love by a mile and some and yet????
It would seem that IF you believe in the NT and the Church that God’s love IS less than human love and is conditional on believing in the blood sacrifice of Jesus as the ONLY means of redemption and of course passage to heaven.
Personally, I think that this is the weakest of all the Christian doctrines there is and imo undermines the whole basis of that faith put about mainly by St Paul initially and reinforced by an out of touch ignorant church and probably another reason why I reject it. Deism is now my current belief sysyem aka like Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson.
In Isaaih Chap 1 God is supposed to have uttered the words..”Let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them as snow”…
I agree with your sentiments. These are my thoughts:
When I was a Christian I was often baffled/frustrated by many of the apparent contradictions in the gospels, the old “works vs. faith” issue being one of them. This issue gets beaten to death in Christianity, depending on what denomination you belong to. Jesus is often portrayed in the gospels as seeming to say that a person should love God, obey His commandments and do good to his/her neighbor. Yet, the gospels also tell us that Jesus at the last supper told his disciples that he was shedding his blood for the forgiveness of sins. It doesn’t gel with what he taught during his ministry when he was preaching to crowds or to individuals. In most of those cases he appeared to be more focused on how a person behaved and on repentance than on his death on the cross. A case in point is the woman at the well. Jesus forgives her sins and tells her to go and sin no more. No mention of a blood sacrifice in order to be forgiven and go to heaven when you die. In my opinion and from what I’ve read, this would be more in line with the Jewish belief in God and forgiveness and would situate Jesus perfectly as a first century Palestinian Jewish man and what he most likely would have believed. Recent scholarship has veered towards evaluating Jesus as a Jewish itinerant preacher of the first century and not as “Christian” preaching against the Law and abolishing it, though recognizing like many Jews of the time, that he had his own view on how to obey God’s commands.
Which brings me to my second point: Christianity views the Jewish people as getting their scriptures wrong. How arrogant is that? If you listen to any Christian preacher he/she will look at the Old Testament and see Jesus throughout it. They view it as a foreshadowing of Jesus and his sacrifice/atonement for sins by bringing a Christian reading into the text. Isaiah 53 is viewed as speaking about Jesus as the suffering servant and foreshadowing his humiliation, beating and crucifixion. The temple sacrifices are also supposed to be pointing toward his sacrifice at Calvary. So, are we to believe that the Jewish people who revered their scriptures, debated constantly how to adhere to them, and copied them with what has been shown to be dedicated care, so in the dark that when Jesus came on the scene they didn’t recognize him as the Messiah? Or worse, so obstinate and hard hearted that they chose to ignore Him?
My third point is this: Most Christians believe in a Pauline Christianity and define the meaning of Jesus’ life and teachings in line with what Paul believed. It’s hard for them to separate the two (where they differ), often opting for Paul’s view instead of what Jesus said. This belief has caused much of the divisions in Christianity (certainly not all) throughout history down to the present day. My eventual atheism/agnosticism resulted from my sincerely investigating the Bible for myself, as well as reading viewpoints from scholars who have a historical/social view of the Bible, not necessarily a theological one. I also read a lot of Christian apologetics, evaluated both sides and came to my own conclusions, though I still read and study widely from an interest in how religious beliefs originate and develop.
When I was trying to return to Christianity after leaving it I wanted to see if I could find a denomination that took a more liberal view of the Bible so that I could reconcile Christian beliefs with science and my own experience as a human being. It didn’t work. There was no way I could hold on to the Christian God and a sacrificial blood sacrifice of his son. It just didn’t make sense. I read and investigated Deism but felt that it was just a step or two away from not believing in any God, at least one that cares. I’m not insulting your beliefs, just giving my opinion on why I rejected it. If a person believes in evolution, then like you say, the whole atonement for the sin of the original man and woman goes out the window. That would mean death existed before sin, which would be a direct contradiction of “the penalty of sin is death” view of the bible.
Anyway, those are my thoughts.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)