I'd say God's judgement's are just but then again all of us deserve death and it's only by the mercy of God that we have been given any sort of life at all. So if everyone deserves death then it's not wrong for God to save those whom he chooses to save.
Why would a loving and just god create beings that are immediately deserving of death?
Here's why: Let's set up a situation, you and a computer. You can progam this computer to say "I love you." Does that mean that the computer loves you? No, you just programmed it to say that. (I acknowledge that a computer isn't living and doesn't obtain the ability to make choices, but this goes to prove my point, as you'll see in a sec.) Now, Christianity is based off of the fact that God is a loving and just God. So, why would He create humans if we were immediately deserving of death? He wouldn't, and He didn't. He gave us free will to make our own choices. To love ourselves, or to love Him. To believe in Him, and that He sent His one and only son to die for the world's sins (who is also Him, along with the Holy Spirit (That's why they're called the Trinity, as they're "one")) or to not believe. Also, God doesn't choose who to save, as stated by I forgot who , He lets us choose our own path.
How will you get yourself into heaven? On your own merit or via a scapegoat?
Revisit substitutionary atonement or vicarious redemption and scapegoating with me just to refresh your memory.
#ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Christ is Back in Christmas!
I am not an atheist but Satan and Christians want atheists to embrace barbaric human sacrifice and the notion that we should profit from punishing the innocent instead of the guilty. Scapegoating IOW.
In reality, if God did demand such a barbaric sacrifice, he would be sinning as we all know that it is immoral to kill the innocent. God knows this yet Christians do not seem to. You do. Right?
Those with good morals will know that no noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a son just to prove it's benevolence. When you die, Satan will ask you; how was your ticket to heaven purchased? With innocent blood?
If and when you say yes, you become his.
-----------------------------------
The other option in scriptures, a moral one, is shown here. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Scriptures indicate that God prefers repentance to sacrifice and as God’s will is supreme and cannot be thwarted, this will come to pass.
---------------------------------
It is a special distorted Christian view of love that sees, --- as the greatest act of love possible, --- their God condemning them, and then turning and demanding his son’s deaths and thus corrupting God's perfect justice. A bribe set by God as judge himself for himself. This is of course ridiculous.
Christians have an insane view of love, IMO.
Would you express your love for humanity or those you love by having your own child needlessly murdered?
Or if convinced that a sacrifice was somehow good, would you have the moral fortitude to step up yourself to that cross instead of sending your child?
Your cowardly God did not.
Regards
DL
First of all, you're mixing up a few things. You seem to think that God and His son, Jesus , are two different beings. They're not. The Trinity is one being and it is made up of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They're one, which disproves your argument that God didn't send himself up on the cross. You're arguing a point that requires you to think in terms of the Bible, and you have to a the Trinity, or else your argument would be invalid, which it is because you refuse to acknowledge it.
Now, the way you get into heaven is not by your own merit, nor is it via scapegoat. It is by believing that God sent his son to die on the cross for our sins.
I probably should've cleared this up earlier, but the first post I was making got deleted, so I had to start over with the thought process that I had going on at the end of the lost post
(It's why this is a little bit out of order, my apologies).
Also, you think that God sacrificing his son is immoral. Let's think about this. If God made everything (which He did), then He also made morals. Thus, God can't do anything immoral because he made them. It's like saying that a portion of a Bach piece is Un-Bachian. It can't be, as Bach was the one who made the piece! This means that God cannot be immoral.
Also, I don't understand what you're trying to prove here:
"The other option in scriptures, a moral one, is shown here. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Scriptures indicate that God prefers repentance to sacrifice and as God’s will is supreme and cannot be thwarted, this will come to pass."
You're quoting scripture, which means you have to abide by it's terms, and I can't find anything that this proves in your favor. You're basically saying that God is saving us, who are sinful, and wants no more to
perish (there's a difference between perish and sacrifice) without being saved. But, He gave us free will (as covered in the last post), and humbled Himself to the point where He sent His perfect son (who is also Him) to come to Earth in flesh, and die for our sins.
I agree with you, it's ridiculous for a god to do that, why would he?
The answer? It's out of love for us.