Is the Christian cross a symbol representing Scapegoating?

[Augustus]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt.

My guess, purely speculative of course, is that it grew out of the unexpectedness of Jesus' death before the eschaton. As such his death became recast as the reason the eschaton didn't arrive.

 

[icehorse]

I don't think you understand what scapegoating is.

Here, Scapegoating - Wikipedia

Christians don't blame Jesus for their sin.

It boggles my mind how some of the non-christians here come up with such whacky ideas.

LoLz

I'm sorry, you're misunderstanding the OP. I never said that Xians blamed Jesus for their sin.

 

[InChrist]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

The death of Jesus for the sins of the world is not about scapegoating... it is about Love. Jesus' death on the cross and the resurrection are the center point of history. You may not think that, but from a biblical perspective everything before the cross is leading up to the cross and everything after the cross is in light of the cross, because the cross was an event God had planned from eternity past to bring freedom for humanity from the bondage and damage of sin, because of His Love and into His Love for eternity.

By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us. And we also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 1 John 3:16

 

[Enoch07]

I'm sorry, you're misunderstanding the OP. I never said that Xians blamed Jesus for their sin.

Really?

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

You clearly are saying that we chose to put our sins on Jesus.

Which is putting the cart before the horse.

Christians did not chose to sacrifice Jesus or for him to die for our sins. So to say we are scapegoating Christ is false.

Now, had Christians made the decision to crucify Christ, you would have a valid scapegoat argument.

 

[Kemosloby]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

Because Jesus wanted to be a scapegoat. I remember reading in the old testament, while the Israelites were at Mt. Sinai being led by God himself, the Lord told the Israelites to put all their sins on a goat and send it into the wilderness. Obviously a prophetic analogy of Jesus, and probably where the word scapegoat originated.

 

[Sanzbir]

You accuse me of ethnocentrism and then end it with "the world outside your homeland is a big place",

Huh?? I thought you didn't read past the first sentence??

which implies that I'm a sheltered idiot. It's very passive aggressive and rude. But if you want to be one of those people who is rude and snobby without self-awareness of your behavior, that's your issue and I don't have the time nor the patience for that. Good day.

Well come on man!! Certainly you can see the unintentional humor you yourself caused by replying to a post that mentioned ethnocentrism with a rebuttal of "Well I've never heard of such cultures." Whether you intended it or not, do you not see how your reply is essentially a punchline to a joke when the setup of my post includes a complaint about ethnocentric thinking and a lack of awareness of other cultures??

which implies that I'm a sheltered idiot.

That's certainly not my intent. You're reading into things.

All it implies is that you possess the degree of ethnocentrism and lack of knowledge to the wider world that you yourself admitted to. And as I've repeatedly stated it is a really common trait shared by the majority of mankind, and should be nothing to be ashamed of.

Intentional or (more than likely) not, what you did with your reply was an example of, and admission of, ethnocentric thinking in your initial reply.

What you posted was an admission to having no knowledge of the certain cultures in the world and an implication that they must not exist because you had not heard of them!! If I am not allowed to call that attitude "ethnocentrism" then what am I allowed to call ethnocentrism?!

 

[DennisTate]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

Your theory would be especially true if
Judas Didymus Thomas, Joseph of Arimathea..... Cephas / Peter and Judas.........
took a disciple named Saul who was a cousin of Rabbi Yeshua - Jesus who resembled him... especially at night............

and.........

pages 137 - 170 tells the rest of the story.......

The Thomas Book

 

[Fool]

My guess, purely speculative of course, is that it grew out of the unexpectedness of Jesus' death before the eschaton. As such his death became recast as the reason the eschaton didn't arrive.

it is representative of the nehushtan in the desert.

It symbolizes union. the cross is the same thing as a yoke and represents friendship/love.

friendship is two bodies being of one mind - mencius

there is no love in all the world greater than that of a man who would lay down his life for his friend.


Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke on you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy to bear, and my load is not hard to carry.”

 

[osgart]

I think the message is that Jesus defeats sin for mankind at the cross. To say that Jesus did this of His own will and not man's. And that Jesus satisfied his own justice by bearing sin for all.

So it is some sort of a rescue mission.

 

[Kemosloby]

Scapegoating is a symbol of the Christian cross.

Leviticus 16:22 New International Version
The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place; and the man shall release it in the wilderness.

 

[Grandliseur]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

The number of people rejecting the Christian faith is large. Those standing anti-Christ in our society are numerous. You have your beliefs and we have ours. That is all it comes down to.

If the message is not understood from A to Z naturally, there can be no acceptance of it.

 

[Glaurung]

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

God became man and in so by doing redeemed us from our otherwise inescapable estrangement from Him.

Christians believe that as a consequence of sin entering the world humanity became estranged from God. Since God has infinite dignity (and all sin being an insult against that dignity) no possible means of recompense was available to us. (The finite cannot cover for the infinite). Thus humanity was barred from its ultimate end which is happiness with God.

God as man alone possessed the means to make good on our debt, since God even as a man still retains His infinite dignity as God. The incarnation in no way whatsoever diminished who the Son is as God. Jesus did not scapegoat for us so much as He paid our debt on our behalf, again being capable of doing so as a consequence of the incarnation. Since sin has a price and since God is just, all accounts must eventually be settled. Christ settled ours, but it is still on us to accept and cooperate with that grace. When one rejects Christ, one rejects the only means of mediation with God.

As for the Cross, it is a symbol of Christ's triumph over sin and death. Two seemingly omnipotent forces of human reality rendered impotent at the very moment of their seeming victory over the God man. As it will ultimately be for the eventual triumph of the Church over the world. Matthew 16:18

 

[allfoak]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

The message was perverted into something ugly.
The message is that we can become our own messiah.
The spirit of perfection, no matter how small, lies deep within everyone.
This spark can become a great light just as it did in Jesus.

 

[blü 2]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

The question is really, Why was it necessary for Jesus to die?

In terms of Judaism in 30 CE Judea, the scapegoat is a respected and ancient idea, mentioned in Leviticus 16:18 ─ the sacrificed animal takes with it the blame for deeds offensive to Yahweh which members of the community have committed.

And getting god, or the gods, onside with animal sacrifices is found in very many ancient religions ─ not only Judaism but in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Canaan, Greece, Rome, Persia, among the Celts, Germans and Norse, and so on.

In all those cultures the top of that scale is human sacrifice. In the Tanakh we have Abraham and Isaac (apparently as a test of faith, called off), Jephthah's daughter (in return for military victory, carried out), the seven descendants of Saul (blood price, carried out) and Jonah (appeasement to stop the storm, initiated but transformed).

According to the NT, Jesus knows from the start of his mission that he's going to be killed at the end of it. Since Jesus is a circumcised Jew, the only coherent explanation appears to be that he too is such a sacrifice.

In Mark (the earliest gospel and the basis of Matthew and Luke and more loosely John), Jesus doesn't become the son of Yahweh until his baptism, expressly in accordance with Psalm 2:7, so the argument is available that his sacrifice is consistent with his culture. However, in (Matthew and) Luke he's recast as the literal son of Yahweh, with Yahweh's Y chromosome, so the sacrifice concept goes rather off the map.

To the modern mind, the idea that an omnipotent omniscient benevolent god would expiate the sins of mankind by sending the son of his loins to be killed is absurd. If Yahweh wants to forgive the sins of mankind, he has only to snap his omnipotent fingers and voilà!

But this is now. That was then.

 

[Augustus]

The question is really, Why was it necessary for Jesus to die?

Not really much of a question.

It was necessary because he did die. Start with that and work back.

 

[james bond]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

Jesus died for our sins, so that we could have life everlasting. God sacrificed his only son to save us because he loved us. This is the best gift that I can think of, so I would not call it "morally bankrupt." What happened afterward is his Resurrection which is the gift all of us could have. A second chance at God's gift of eternal life. Otherwise, this is all there is and all there will be. To me, what you claim to be morally bankrupt seems morally bankrupt on your part.

 

[blü 2]

Not really much of a question.

It was necessary because he did die. Start with that and work back.

As the NT tells it, that overlooks Jesus' awareness that his mission from the start was to die (Mark 3:20). And in the garden scene near the end (Mark 14;36, copied in Matthew 26:39, Luke 22:42), he asks to be relieved of this fate (ie knew the intention all along), but is refused, and rejects subsequent chances to escape.

But the plain story of a scapegoat is confused by a variety of factors, such as the portrayal of Judas as a vile traitor (which appears to be a later addition, since Paul hadn't heard of it) who as Jesus Christ Superstar pointed out was instead manipulated into doing what Jesus wanted; and the rewrite in John, where Jesus coolly commands the crucifixion scenes and dies in the style of an unruffled hero but not for any readily intelligible reason; and a later Christian dislike for the scapegoat idea, as incompatible with a benevolent god.

 

[Akivah]

...took a disciple named Saul who was a cousin of Rabbi Yeshua - Jesus who resembled him... especially at night............

Where in your bible do you find a detailed description of how jesus looked?
Where did you find a detail description of how Saul looked?

 

[Thief]

It strikes me that the idea that "Jesus died for our sins" is morally bankrupt. It seems to be a pretty clear example of scapegoating, which in other cultures is viewed in a very negative light.

Why do Christians think that making Jesus a scapegoat is a good message? And given that, why would the cross be seen as a good symbol of the faith?

I agree....believing the Carpenter died for our sins is incorrect
He died because of them

I wear a ring with a cross engraved
my own handiwork

I do so as I have belief the Carpenter was a figure of....correction
and correcting your fellowman is something your fellowman doesn't like

His ministry got Him killed....by crucifixion

I wear this ring to remind me.....speak softly
and remain anonymous

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

As the NT tells it, that overlooks Jesus' awareness that his mission from the start was to die (Mark 3:20). And in the garden scene near the end (Mark 14;36, copied in Matthew 26:39, Luke 22:42), he asks to be relieved of this fate (ie knew the intention all along), but is refused, and rejects subsequent chances to escape.

But the plain story of a scapegoat is confused by a variety of factors, such as the portrayal of Judas as a vile traitor (which appears to be a later addition, since Paul hadn't heard of it) who as Jesus Christ Superstar pointed out was instead manipulated into doing what Jesus wanted; and the rewrite in John, where Jesus coolly commands the crucifixion scenes and dies in the style of an unruffled hero but not for any readily intelligible reason; and a later Christian dislike for the scapegoat idea, as incompatible with a benevolent god.

Paul does not name Judas or give any details about the betrayal, but in 1 Corinthians 11:23 he refers to the night Jesus was betrayed. This is in the context of the Eucharist formula institution which appears in the three Synoptic Gospels.