Was there ever even the slightest chance of failure?

[Mock Turtle]

Times were different then. Nowadays we have quite a few instances of people being proclaimed dead but who weren't actually - although some do die later because they were actually near to death. And likewise, many females become pregnant whilst being unconscious for various reasons (drug induced perhaps) and who will have had no recollection of what happened. Just some explanations as to how perhaps some beliefs become entrenched and not based on facts.

 

[PureX]

So, HE COULDN'T HAVE FAILED BY DYING AND NOT RISING AGAIN, could he? There was absolutely NO CHANCE that he would have failed...and whether that's literal or metaphorical, the story is of The Son of God (Trinitarians certainly seem to think he was divine, as do many others) was a sacrifice that could not have failed. That is God would have had to choose to NOT resurrect Jesus in order for the mission to fail...

He rose again as a divine spirit because he didn't fail to embody the message and promise of God when he was a man. Why are you trying SO HARD to make this story into something that it's not?

Not 'cheapening that sacrifice'...Questioning how it could be a sacrifice if Jesus could not remain dead and not raised.

What makes you think he could not have failed to embody the message of love and forgiveness and redemption as a man, and so remained dead?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

He rose again as a divine spirit because he didn't fail to embody the message and promise of God when he was a man. Why are you trying SO HARD to make this story into something that it's not?

What makes you think he could not have failed to embody the message of love and forgiveness and redemption as a man, and so remained dead?

My point is that, according to the story, HE COULD NOT HAVE FAILED.

Oh, yes, it's so wonderful that he sacrificed himself for us...even though all he gave up was a few days, and he didn't even really lose them...because he was able to go preach to the dead and was back in time to be raised by his father from the dead...

Even in Mark, the earliest version, he experiences temptations in the desert, and suffers a little doubt while he's on the cross. The later versions less of that. By John, he's large and in charge of the whole affair, which is being choreographed according to a pre-written script...one in which there is NO CHANCE of his failure...

So far, no one has been able to establish what would have happened had he failed? What would it mean to say that God was unable to raise his son from the dead?

 

[Audie]

The recent thread on how much you disbelieve in God thread touched off a line of thought in me...

It's interesting to me that this line of thought was actually one of the first things I realized after my born-again experience, which occurred while I was 12. It has been present in my thinking ever since, and is a good portion of the reason for ceasing to be a Christian and eventually becoming an agnostic.

It seems fairly obvious (and defensible in scripture) that Jesus' passion and resurrection is both a sacrifice for atonement (as of a lamb), as well as a sacrifice of a scapegoat. Okay, fine and good.

The question is, was there ever even the slightest, tiniest, minuscule possibility that Jesus' sacrifice would have failed, that he would not have 'conquered death' and risen again on the third day?

I don't see any chance of that being able to happen. After all, if Jesus is the Son of God, fully backed by his Father, the omnimax creator deity of the cosmos, what is the chance that the gambit would fail? That Jesus would have died just like billions of other humans, who also would not be resurrected on the third day.

As far as I can see from the Book (and all the interpretations that have explained it), no chance of failure at all.

In which case, all Jesus engaged in was a magic ritual, just like the priests in the Temple...

And the question is, what is the meaning of a magic ritual that cannot fail? What is the counterfactual situation, that is, what would have happened if the passion had happened, and the resurrection had not occurred? Was there REALLY any sacrifice, if he he couldn't fail, couldn't really die and stay dead? What does it mean that Jesus could not have failed?

I continue to wrestle with the question from time to time.

although this is in a debate forum, I really am not interested in hearing lots of citations from scripture about how and why Jesus couldn't have failed...yeah, I get it...been there, done that, got the t-shirt and wore it out. But if he couldn't have failed, what was the point? What meaning can a sacrifice that could not fail have?

NO chance to fail?


Try 100 precent.

What meaning?

A try- that worked as it happened-
to snatch victory, of any kind, from defeat.

Their guy is dead, but,tell everyone he isnt.
( half god kings who die and will return
show up in other religions)

And about the time the Jews lose their everything,
the sayings get remembered and finally written down.

Tell me that's not more likely.

And why the story has more merit than others' simolar god- stories..

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Forget about Jesus and ask yourself "if someone voluntarily endures great suffering for the benefit of others, how can that be 'like some rich wanker'"?

That's healthcare workers, teachers, social workers and others who endure tremendous amounts of stress for the benefits of others. But they are mortal. Unlike Jesus, those who died of things like covid or ebola or other diseases or violence done unto them while caring for others are still dead, they had no knowledge and assurances of what happens next.
Jesus had a very brief trip to Earth that culminated with a very lousy weekend. But he knew that was it and it would get better after that. That's not like teachers and social workers who tend to get sick more than the rest of us by the very nature of their job.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So far, no one has been able to establish what would have happened had he failed? What would it mean to say that God was unable to raise his son from the dead?

A Family Guy joke?

 

[soulsurvivor]

But if he couldn't have failed, what was the point? What meaning can a sacrifice that could not fail have?

Jesus came with a message. The point of his life and sacrifice was to get the message across. The message of loving your enemies, of caring for 'the least of these', of turning the other cheek. I think he managed to convey this message successfully.

BTW, even though the success of his mission may have been pre-ordained, he did have to suffer and undergo pain to carry it out - the sacrifice was real.

 

[PureX]

My point is that, according to the story, HE COULD NOT HAVE FAILED.

There is nothing in the story to indicate that. That's just a religious interpretation of the story by religious interpreters and proselytizers.

Oh, yes, it's so wonderful that he sacrificed himself for us...even though all he gave up was a few days, and he didn't even really lose them...because he was able to go preach to the dead and was back in time to be raised by his father from the dead...

He didn't know that would happen. And you don't know that the same might happen for you. Also, he was brutally tortured and murdered. But I guess you think that's an irrelevant sacrifice since he didn't stay dead.

Even in Mark, the earliest version, he experiences temptations in the desert, and suffers a little doubt while he's on the cross.

A little???

The later versions less of that. By John, he's large and in charge of the whole affair, which is being choreographed according to a pre-written script...one in which there is NO CHANCE of his failure...

Again, these are all depictions written long after the events. And again, this IS A STORY intended to convey a message and a promise to us.

So far, no one has been able to establish what would have happened had he failed?

How could anyone possibly do that? And why would anyone bother?

What would it mean to say that God was unable to raise his son from the dead?

It would mean that the story isn't functioning as it was presumably intended to function.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

There is nothing in the story to indicate that. That's just a religious interpretation of the story by religious interpreters and proselytizers.

He didn't know that would happen. And you don't know that the same might happen for you. Also, he was brutally tortured and murdered. But I guess you think that's an irrelevant sacrifice since he didn't stay dead.

A little???

Again, these are all depictions written long after the events. And again, this IS A STORY intended to convey a message and a promise to us.

How could anyone possibly do that? And why would anyone bother?

It would mean that the story isn't functioning as it was presumably intended to function.

No, it would be a DIFFERENT STORY. I'm not saying that it was a meaningless sacrifice because he didn't stay dead...how exactly would his staying dead have been meaningful? That's not what I'm looking at at all. As the current stories stand, it acknowledges Jesus experienced in his 30 whatever years of life only temptation and physical discomfort, but never sinned, because he was really a mostly or completely divine being who couldn't possibly sin...actually had a preacher tell me that once...and therefore he experienced enough of being human that it means something that he gave himself up to an unjust torture and death...

You SAY that he didn't know what would happen...actually, the texts say he knew exactly what was to happen...even in Mark, the earliest version that exists, he KNEW that he would suffer and would die...and he knew he couldn't fail...and would rise on the third day.

I think all of that was written into the story later, by people who just couldn't accept the simple story that an everyday man who experienced every aspect of life like everyone else--including sin--could be picked out by God to bring a message and then, only AFTER he died unjustly--be exalted to divine status. That's actually a sensible tale; people can relate to it.

But later storytellers needed to add that Jesus knew in detail the path he was riding...and then that he was born of a virgin...and was actually not just a peasant laborer but of royal or at least respectable blood...and that indeed, he was really the creator of all that is from before the beginning of the world...It's really hard for everyday people to relate to the tale of a perfect and sinless divine being lowering itself to our level for a short period of time, before returning to its own heavenly environs...

And in all those versions, there is never any doubt about the final result: Jesus will be resurrected and exalted to heaven. God and his Son, his plan, cannot fail. So what is the victory? God was able to defeat one of his own creations, death? What kind of omnimax God wouldn't be able to do so?

How does God defeating death mean anything to us mortals who still have to suffer and die? (Oh, sure, it a promise for the future, after you've suffered through this moral coil, if you're good, you get a reward...). If God/Jesus couldn't help but win...because God is the omnimax creator deity and Jesus is his divine Son from before the earth was formed...then there was never a time when the universe hung in the balance, where there was any real chance that Jesus would NOT be raised, where there was NO chance that he might remain dead and God fail to raise his son. How can his death have meaning if there was no chance at all of the resurrection not happening?

This is one of the questions that occurred to me within months of having my born-again experience, when I was 12, and which has stayed with me, which I continue to wrestle with more than five decades later. And it applies whether the story is considered literally or figuratively.

So, over the years when I've meditated and prayed on this question, I see Jesus the same way I did on that day in 1971: He shrugs his shoulders, smiles, and says, "Come, follow me."

 

[Audie]

No, it would be a DIFFERENT STORY. I'm not saying that it was a meaningless sacrifice because he didn't stay dead...how exactly would his staying dead have been meaningful? That's not what I'm looking at at all. As the current stories stand, it acknowledges Jesus experienced in his 30 whatever years of life only temptation and physical discomfort, but never sinned, because he was really a mostly or completely divine being who couldn't possibly sin...actually had a preacher tell me that once...and therefore he experienced enough of being human that it means something that he gave himself up to an unjust torture and death...

You SAY that he didn't know what would happen...actually, the texts say he knew exactly what was to happen...even in Mark, the earliest version that exists, he KNEW that he would suffer and would die...and he knew he couldn't fail...and would rise on the third day.

I think all of that was written into the story later, by people who just couldn't accept the simple story that an everyday man who experienced every aspect of life like everyone else--including sin--could be picked out by God to bring a message and then, only AFTER he died unjustly--be exalted to divine status. That's actually a sensible tale; people can relate to it.

But later storytellers needed to add that Jesus knew in detail the path he was riding...and then that he was born of a virgin...and was actually not just a peasant laborer but of royal or at least respectable blood...and that indeed, he was really the creator of all that is from before the beginning of the world...It's really hard for everyday people to relate to the tale of a perfect and sinless divine being lowering itself to our level for a short period of time, before returning to its own heavenly environs...

And in all those versions, there is never any doubt about the final result: Jesus will be resurrected and exalted to heaven. God and his Son, his plan, cannot fail. So what is the victory? God was able to defeat one of his own creations, death? What kind of omnimax God wouldn't be able to do so?

How does God defeating death mean anything to us mortals who still have to suffer and die? (Oh, sure, it a promise for the future, after you've suffered through this moral coil, if you're good, you get a reward...). If God/Jesus couldn't help but win...because God is the omnimax creator deity and Jesus is his divine Son from before the earth was formed...then there was never a time when the universe hung in the balance, where there was any real chance that Jesus would NOT be raised, where there was NO chance that he might remain dead and God fail to raise his son. How can his death have meaning if there was no chance at all of the resurrection not happening?

This is one of the questions that occurred to me within months of having my born-again experience, when I was 12, and which has stayed with me, which I continue to wrestle with more than five decades later. And it applies whether the story is considered literally or figuratively.

So, over the years when I've meditated and prayed on this question, I see Jesus the same way I did on that day in 1971: He shrugs his shoulders, smiles, and says, "Come, follow me."

Now why would anyone (everyone) decline
such an invitation?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Now why would anyone (everyone) decline
such an invitation?

For me, the invitation is to start to do the work he preached: feed the hungry, heal the ill and injured, comfort the afflicted, and so on...to be like little children and not to worry about the future or death or resurrection...

I can't say I've followed him that well, but I try...and I'm trying to stop worrying about the future and death and whether or not there will be a resurrection. Christianity has focused almost exclusively on Death, whereas I think Jesus' message was to focus on Life...

 

[The Hammer]

It's just another death and resurrection myth, just like any other. Demigod/a God sacrifices themselves. They die and after a time are "reborn", often times bringing back knowledge and wisdom for humanity to better themselves.

 

[Audie]

For me, the invitation is to start to do the work he preached: feed the hungry, heal the ill and injured, comfort the afflicted, and so on...to be like little children and not to worry about the future or death or resurrection...

I can't say I've followed him that well, but I try...and I'm trying to stop worrying about the future and death and whether or not there will be a resurrection. Christianity has focused almost exclusively on Death, whereas I think Jesus' message was to focus on Life...

Many of the values expressed are ones held in common
with other cultures. Certainly nothing new to China.

A couple of them though....super bad advice
Tomorrow wont take care of itself. Or rather,
it will, but it sure won't take care of you.
Love enemies? Turn other cheek?

It won't work, and , follow the example of a guy who got
himself killed?

But then I don't believe more than maybe .02% of the story.

 

[Sargonski]

The recent thread on how much you disbelieve in God thread touched off a line of thought in me...

It's interesting to me that this line of thought was actually one of the first things I realized after my born-again experience, which occurred while I was 12. It has been present in my thinking ever since, and is a good portion of the reason for ceasing to be a Christian and eventually becoming an agnostic.

It seems fairly obvious (and defensible in scripture) that Jesus' passion and resurrection is both a sacrifice for atonement (as of a lamb), as well as a sacrifice of a scapegoat. Okay, fine and good.

The question is, was there ever even the slightest, tiniest, minuscule possibility that Jesus' sacrifice would have failed, that he would not have 'conquered death' and risen again on the third day?

I don't see any chance of that being able to happen. After all, if Jesus is the Son of God, fully backed by his Father, the omnimax creator deity of the cosmos, what is the chance that the gambit would fail? That Jesus would have died just like billions of other humans, who also would not be resurrected on the third day.

As far as I can see from the Book (and all the interpretations that have explained it), no chance of failure at all.

In which case, all Jesus engaged in was a magic ritual, just like the priests in the Temple...

And the question is, what is the meaning of a magic ritual that cannot fail? What is the counterfactual situation, that is, what would have happened if the passion had happened, and the resurrection had not occurred? Was there REALLY any sacrifice, if he he couldn't fail, couldn't really die and stay dead? What does it mean that Jesus could not have failed?

I continue to wrestle with the question from time to time.

although this is in a debate forum, I really am not interested in hearing lots of citations from scripture about how and why Jesus couldn't have failed...yeah, I get it...been there, done that, got the t-shirt and wore it out. But if he couldn't have failed, what was the point? What meaning can a sacrifice that could not fail have?

The sacrifice is meaningful only if the one making the sacrifice is not the one who is the sacrifice. .. and thus the question is flawed from the start in assuming a meaningless proposition.

The question of "no chance of failure" comes up in the Adam and Eve Story as well -- here we have two individuals with the mind of babies .. not knowing good from evil .. pure innocent and trusting .. and on the other side of the ring we have a God .. and very powerful God at that . Chief God over all the earth if we are including first page of the NT .. tester of Souls .. the greatest deceiver the world has ever known .. on the other side of the ring .. and I don't have to be a God to accurately predict the outcome of this battle 100% of the time now do I .

So Moral of the Story --- would a just God .. throw two innocent individuals in a battle he knew they would lose 100% .. and then punish them for losing .. harsh punishment ... takes away their immortality .. hard labor .. toil the earth .. increase pain of procreation .. and then put this Ha Satan creature as Chief God over the earth ..

Now that Old Dragon --- the Serpent .. what do we make of this God .. The Sophia .. primordial God of Wisdom .. on the side of order as opposed to the Chaos Gods and make the correction from God to Goddess ... the books of Solomon and Proverbs are the physical embodiment of this Goddess .. well maybe not to you .. but to the Israelites round Solomons time .. and for centuries after..

Don't know which of the Gods the bad God is .. one who thrust the human's out of the garden because they had become "Like US" .. my best guess is that this is the God named Jealous .. definitely not El Oliun .. God Supreme .. nor El Elyon .. God Most High .. nor Lord YHWH .. certainly not the God of Judaism .. nor the God of Jesus .. which rules out the God of Abraham .. but we already ruled him out in ruling out El Oliun.

 

[PureX]

No, it would be a DIFFERENT STORY. I'm not saying that it was a meaningless sacrifice because he didn't stay dead...how exactly would his staying dead have been meaningful? That's not what I'm looking at at all. As the current stories stand, it acknowledges Jesus experienced in his 30 whatever years of life only temptation and physical discomfort, but never sinned, because he was really a mostly or completely divine being who couldn't possibly sin...actually had a preacher tell me that once...and therefore he experienced enough of being human that it means something that he gave himself up to an unjust torture and death...

Preachers preach what THEY believe. But I can make up my own mind. I don't need them to tell me what to believe. And neither do you. The story never actually claims Jesus never sinned. And even if it did, the stories were written, interpreted, and reinterpreted long after the events, and by people that werent even there. So there is likely going to be a good deal of exaggeration involved, people being people.

You SAY that he didn't know what would happen...actually, the texts say he knew exactly what was to happen...even in Mark, the earliest version that exists, he KNEW that he would suffer and would die...and he knew he couldn't fail...and would rise on the third day.

I think all of that was written into the story later, by people who just couldn't accept the simple story that an everyday man who experienced every aspect of life like everyone else--including sin--could be picked out by God to bring a message and then, only AFTER he died unjustly--be exalted to divine status. That's actually a sensible tale; people can relate to it.

Most mythical stories involve some fact and some fiction. And many years on it's impossible to know how much of which is which. What is important to understand that the the purpose of the mythical story is to convey an important ideal. So the degree of fact and fiction in the story really is not important. When religiosity becomes cultish, however, this is often ignored, as blind obedience to the dogma becomes the most important factor.

But later storytellers needed to add that Jesus knew in detail the path he was riding...and then that he was born of a virgin...and was actually not just a peasant laborer but of royal or at least respectable blood...and that indeed, he was really the creator of all that is from before the beginning of the world...It's really hard for everyday people to relate to the tale of a perfect and sinless divine being lowering itself to our level for a short period of time, before returning to its own heavenly environs...

And in all those versions, there is never any doubt about the final result: Jesus will be resurrected and exalted to heaven. God and his Son, his plan, cannot fail. So what is the victory? God was able to defeat one of his own creations, death? What kind of omnimax God wouldn't be able to do so?

How does God defeating death mean anything to us mortals who still have to suffer and die? (Oh, sure, it a promise for the future, after you've suffered through this moral coil, if you're good, you get a reward...). If God/Jesus couldn't help but win...because God is the omnimax creator deity and Jesus is his divine Son from before the earth was formed...then there was never a time when the universe hung in the balance, where there was any real chance that Jesus would NOT be raised, where there was NO chance that he might remain dead and God fail to raise his son. How can his death have meaning if there was no chance at all of the resurrection not happening?

This is one of the questions that occurred to me within months of having my born-again experience, when I was 12, and which has stayed with me, which I continue to wrestle with more than five decades later. And it applies whether the story is considered literally or figuratively.

What matters is the ideal that the story is intending to convey. Tat ideal is being presented to us in the form of a revelation and a promise. The revelation being that God's divine spirit of love, forgiveness, kindness, and generosity exists within us all, as we are "God's children". And the promise is that if we will set aside our own fears and desires, and allow that divine spirit within us to become us, we will be healed and saved from ourselves. And that when enough of us choose the way of being, the whole world will be healed and saved from us.

This is not an ideal that i can reasonably argue with. Nor do I want to. It is the truth from my own experience. And it continues to prove itself to be a valuable ideal to live by. So however imperfect the story may be, or the religious expressions based on it, I can just stick with the ideal I found within it. And let the rest go.

So, over the years when I've meditated and prayed on this question, I see Jesus the same way I did on that day in 1971: He shrugs his shoulders, smiles, and says, "Come, follow me."

Yes, and we hope that in our cases, this won't be nearly so difficult or traumatic as it was for him.

 

[1213]

...What meaning can a sacrifice that could not fail have?

I think the sacrifice of Jesus was that he used his life for to help others. Similarly as it can be said a soldier sacrificed his life in defending his nation. To me the meaning is, that even I got his message.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The recent thread on how much you disbelieve in God thread touched off a line of thought in me...

It's interesting to me that this line of thought was actually one of the first things I realized after my born-again experience, which occurred while I was 12. It has been present in my thinking ever since, and is a good portion of the reason for ceasing to be a Christian and eventually becoming an agnostic.

It seems fairly obvious (and defensible in scripture) that Jesus' passion and resurrection is both a sacrifice for atonement (as of a lamb), as well as a sacrifice of a scapegoat. Okay, fine and good.

The question is, was there ever even the slightest, tiniest, minuscule possibility that Jesus' sacrifice would have failed, that he would not have 'conquered death' and risen again on the third day?

I don't see any chance of that being able to happen. After all, if Jesus is the Son of God, fully backed by his Father, the omnimax creator deity of the cosmos, what is the chance that the gambit would fail? That Jesus would have died just like billions of other humans, who also would not be resurrected on the third day.

As far as I can see from the Book (and all the interpretations that have explained it), no chance of failure at all.

In which case, all Jesus engaged in was a magic ritual, just like the priests in the Temple...

And the question is, what is the meaning of a magic ritual that cannot fail? What is the counterfactual situation, that is, what would have happened if the passion had happened, and the resurrection had not occurred? Was there REALLY any sacrifice, if he he couldn't fail, couldn't really die and stay dead? What does it mean that Jesus could not have failed?

I continue to wrestle with the question from time to time.

although this is in a debate forum, I really am not interested in hearing lots of citations from scripture about how and why Jesus couldn't have failed...yeah, I get it...been there, done that, got the t-shirt and wore it out. But if he couldn't have failed, what was the point? What meaning can a sacrifice that could not fail have?

It's not even a sacrifice. If one sacrifices something it means it's never going to return.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

The recent thread on how much you disbelieve in God thread touched off a line of thought in me...

It's interesting to me that this line of thought was actually one of the first things I realized after my born-again experience, which occurred while I was 12. It has been present in my thinking ever since, and is a good portion of the reason for ceasing to be a Christian and eventually becoming an agnostic.

It seems fairly obvious (and defensible in scripture) that Jesus' passion and resurrection is both a sacrifice for atonement (as of a lamb), as well as a sacrifice of a scapegoat. Okay, fine and good.

The question is, was there ever even the slightest, tiniest, minuscule possibility that Jesus' sacrifice would have failed, that he would not have 'conquered death' and risen again on the third day?

I don't see any chance of that being able to happen. After all, if Jesus is the Son of God, fully backed by his Father, the omnimax creator deity of the cosmos, what is the chance that the gambit would fail? That Jesus would have died just like billions of other humans, who also would not be resurrected on the third day.

As far as I can see from the Book (and all the interpretations that have explained it), no chance of failure at all.

In which case, all Jesus engaged in was a magic ritual, just like the priests in the Temple...

And the question is, what is the meaning of a magic ritual that cannot fail? What is the counterfactual situation, that is, what would have happened if the passion had happened, and the resurrection had not occurred? Was there REALLY any sacrifice, if he he couldn't fail, couldn't really die and stay dead? What does it mean that Jesus could not have failed?

I continue to wrestle with the question from time to time.

although this is in a debate forum, I really am not interested in hearing lots of citations from scripture about how and why Jesus couldn't have failed...yeah, I get it...been there, done that, got the t-shirt and wore it out. But if he couldn't have failed, what was the point? What meaning can a sacrifice that could not fail have?

Well He couldn’t have failed because He is God and God doesn’t fail.

I believe you are missing the point of what Jesus did however.

It wasn’t that He would succeed it was that He took on human form and sacrificed Himself for us.

Of course He would still be in Heaven and a God if He just said, “screw this”, but we wouldn’t have had a pathway to Heaven then.

Gods entire “human experiment” would have failed because none of us would be worthy to enter Heaven.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Well He couldn’t have failed because He is God and God doesn’t fail.

I believe you are missing the point of what Jesus did however.

It wasn’t that He would succeed it was that He took on human form and sacrificed Himself for us.

Of course He would still be in Heaven and a God if He just said, “screw this”, but we wouldn’t have had a pathway to Heaven then.

Gods entire “human experiment” would have failed because none of us would be worthy to enter Heaven.

except maybe an omnimax creator deity might be able to just snap his fingers, so to speak, or say something, and it'd all be fixed, without the drama and without the delay...

It wasn't really a sacrifice, since his death and resurrection couldn't fail, and he was back in heaven within hours or weeks of his death...usually in a sacrifice, you give up something permanently...like Odin giving up an eye to gain true-sight...

And of course, there's the whole God sacrificing himself to himself, to keep himself from banishing all humans to Hell forever...

Basically, I because of the nonsensical details like these, I simply can't accept the cosmogony and cosmology offered by Christianity...most of which is human construction upon metaphoric sand or less...

 

[Tinkerpeach]

except maybe an omnimax creator deity might be able to just snap his fingers, so to speak, or say something, and it'd all be fixed, without the drama and without the delay...

It wasn't really a sacrifice, since his death and resurrection couldn't fail, and he was back in heaven within hours or weeks of his death...usually in a sacrifice, you give up something permanently...like Odin giving up an eye to gain true-sight...

And of course, there's the whole God sacrificing himself to himself, to keep himself from banishing all humans to Hell forever...

Basically, I because of the nonsensical details like these, I simply can't accept the cosmogony and cosmology offered by Christianity...most of which is human construction upon metaphoric sand or less...

The sacrifice was a God allowing Himself to be tormented, tortured, and killed by His own creation in order to save that creation.

As Jesus said, He could tell God to send a thousand angels to come save Him and it would happen but then what would be the point.

Jesus still had to endure what He did and the amount of effort it must have taken to not snap His fingers and end it is amazing.