Quote:
Sounds like jsus sinned, therefore, according to xian theology, he was not a "perfect sacrifice".



Although the focus is really about Jeesus, let's carry this through to the conclusion. Let's play "what if".

What if Jeesus really didn't sin? What if he were "perfect". Would he still be able to afford atonement? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

To have G-d suddenly divide Himself into another component to offer himself to "redeem" man presents at least six problematic issues in and of itself:

1) If G-d is Infinite and Noncorporeal and non-temporal, then by limiting himself in this way destroys Infinity. One cannot claim that Jeesus is equal to G-d if G-d is incorporeal, infinite and without time. A droplet may contain the same particles as the sea, but it is NOT the sea. An atom may contain the same properties as of a mountain, but it is NOT the mountain. Likewise with G-d vs. Jeesus. How can that which is infinite be finite? How can that which is negative be positive? male be female? dead be alive? Immortal mortal? Contrasting elements cause either conflict or just plain confusion/chaos.

The only way this is plausible is IF you are talking about a DIFFERENT god other than the G-d of Israel. If you are comparing Jeesus to any "hero" in the Greco-Roman world, then this would work. Zeus fathered a godling (well, more than one.. he spread his "seed" all over the Greco world according to legend), and any of the other near east and eastern myths have their hero as the product of a union between the god and a human woman. The Virgin birth cum Immaculate conception is a repackaged version of the god as father of child mythos.

Paul and others were trying to interject the paganism into Judaism to produce their version of a Messiah. And while Polemically and even culturally it sounds like a great story, it is a fallacy from the moment of its inception (or polemic conception).

But even if it were possible it is NOT probable. The G-d they try to make the father of this bastard child Jeesus simply cannot ever be made in the image of man nor can this jeesus be made into G-d. G-d Himself stated more than once that this can NEVER be as G-d is not human and would not be a human and cannot act as a human. The xians take the ALLEGORIES concerning G-d's actions in human terms (known as anthropomorphism) and take them, like the pagan worshippers, to be LITERAL. Herein lies the problem. And it didn't help that Paul furthered this belief. Even though G-d DOES have the power to do something, does NOT mean He ever will or ever has. For one thing it would create a discrepancy with what He had established in the Torah. Since the Torah IS the revelation of G-d's Nature and Will, it IS the gold standard by which all understanding of G-d and His Will is found and judged.

2) That being said, even IF Jeesus was perfect, it still would not make him suitable for any kind of offering.. period. Think about it, if it took G-d to violate his own law to make a cure for a human innate defect (Original Sin) that would result in his own violation of his own law to divide himself to kill himself to "cure" that disease, then we would two major problems:
a) humanity should now be "cured" of this innate propensity towards sin since Jeesus filled the bill. We would see humanity in a much better state because if sin entered to Adam's descendants through no will of their own (as they are now "born with it"), then Jeesus' death should be the cure IN THE EXACT SAME MANNER IF HE IS AS PAUL SAYS "THE SECOND ADAM". This means, that man really doesn't sin anymore as Jeesus cured human nature. But we have seen this is NOT the case! And this cure cannot simply be a matter of faith or belief. No one believed in Adam to "have" sin part of their nature, so likewise, no one should have to believe in Jeesus to have the cure. Otherwise, it's really not a cure on humanity, but a selective "innoculation". But xians, like all humans, still sin. So Jeesus did NOT make the cure in the nature and manner with which apparently Adam "infected" humanity. Unless he cures the nature of humanity, then he did not effect a cure. All you're left with is a psychological/religious "belief", not an actuality. And in fact, since the "cross", more bloodshed and "sin" has been done than prior. If Jeesus was really the "cure", wouldn't we have found that humanity has been moving closer to utopia and godliness rather than to unmitigated hatred and bloodlust and threat of nuclear annihilation? How has jeesus really cured humanity? If he is the cure is this best that it will get?

b) A more damning and far more disturbing issue we're left with is that we are now left with a god who cannot be trusted based on review of his past action regarding the xtian's interpretation of the Torah/Tanakh. Xtians claim that the Torah really did show concepts like Original Sin and "types of shadows" concerning Jeesus, never mind that for 2500 years, G-d was pretty adamant concerning what constituted fidelity to him alone. Never once do we see this mentioning of a person to come. But EVEN IF xtians were right, if G-d used the Torah as "a schoolmaster" to show Jeesus, then G-d appears to be a deceitful Sadist. And if He did it once, he can do it again. How long now until G-d changes his mind again and uses another group to show that the NT was really only a prod or test run to herd the masses into yet another new "revelation" or "covenant"? I mean, when would this god ever be settled with it? In addition, how can we (or should we?) ever have faith in such a god in the future if he lied or kept crucial info from the Jews (His own covenanted people) in the past?? How long until this god casts off the xians (like they say G-d did to the Jews) and bring about another religion or group to be his new improved people? How long until yet another people come on the scene; using the original text, plus the "addition" (GT) to now show the masses and the "blind" that G-d really did not provide an effective cure for the "disease" or worse yet, was never really the true god of the universe until NOW. Do you see how this can morph into something five, ten, 20 generations later? Once a precedent is set, others or maybe this god, can then use it. Regardless, it raises serious issues with the infallibility of the Divine Nature.


3) How can a human, which is the prototype of all that is "sin" (according to xianity) be a "perfect sacrifice"? According to the G-d of the Torah, no human could ever serve as an offering.. PERIOD. Metaphorically, allegorically, symbolically, analytically, polemically, religiously.. no human can EVER be a sin offering.. PERIOD. G-d calls it an abomination and one among several in which G-d personally vows Divine Retribution (offering one's child to M-leck was another). It's NOT that G-d had this in mind when He gave Israel the Torah (i.e. that later HE would make a human sacrifice to Himself), but rather, this was what was in the hearts and minds and even in the hands of those nations around Israel. They believed that human sacrifice was the highest and holiest sacrifice there could be. Not only did G-d not want this as part of HIS worship of Him, but He declared it an abomination and that which would incur the Divine Retribution. Now if G-d who had/has such vehemence against such actions with Israel, why would He 15 or 20 centuries later say "oh, well, since humans are vile, I'll go ahead and subdivide myself to kill myself to redeem man since I gave a Torah no one could keep. But I just won't just do that, I'll seduce and impregnate a man's wife and then when the child is borne, I'll leave them to raise it, despite what my own law says on this.. I'll deal with it when I'm/we're/he's born and once he/I/us/ are killed and resurrected, I/we/he/it can end my own laws". Does this make sense?? If G-d destroyed a whole nation (Northern Kingdom of Israel) for such much less offenses than the one I've outlined, why would He then do that which He found an abomination coming from humans? Does He get a "free pass" since He is G-d? The truth is G-d never contradicts Himself, nor would such a thing ever be necessary or sought from G-d to begin with. [As a side issue, blood was never the sole means of atonement anyway.. many of the offerings weren't animal in nature and did not have a ritual of blood concerning them.]

In addition, if humans can be now be "perfect" sacrifices, then why not offer yourself up if you can't deal with life? Don't call it suicide, call it "a concessional offering" . Can't deal with the slow moving driver in front of you, tell G-d, "oh it's not murder, I'm bringing god a great sacrifice". Why should Jeesus be the only "perfect sacrifice"?? Carry this sick mentality to its gruesome conclusion.. genocide as a "Sacrifice" or, a holocaust-- referring to the offering that was totally consumed on the altar.

If Jeeesus can be a "perfect" HUMAN "sacrifice", then the victims of every atrocity can also be "perfect sacrifices" , since many, many victims of such atrocities have lived far more exemplary lives than what the written accounts of Jesus reveal. Surely their deaths/martyrdom should be able to make atonement for the entire collective for ALL time!



4) Human sacrifice raises yet another disturbing issue. Do we want to have anything to do with a G-d who not only has such little opinion of us, but also was an impotent and corrupt piece-meal Creator to begin with? If the god of NT was so consumed with sin and corruption that it took him to kill himself to redeem us, isn't that an indication of a problem WITH THE CREATOR OF THIS CREATION RATHER THAN THE CREATION ITSELF? Why blame the creation if the creator only after 3500 years (or worse, MILLIONS of years) now says, "oh this isn't working, man is so horrible I have to kill myself or (worse) kill my own son!".. is this divine love or divine exasperation??? So is this sum of what should be ongoing perfecting of creation? Is he like an entity who "plays god" via "trial by creation" until he gets it right? Doesn't this also show that this god does not have the spatial capacity of that which has been attributed to a god? If he knew that man was going to be so wretched that it required him to split infinity to cure it, why waste the energy of humanity and creation? Is he stupid or Sadistic? Maybe he didn't know! Maybe it's like this god is "learning as he goes" and when he doesn't get the required response, he makes "corrections". Do we want a god who has so little confidence in us? If this is the god who rules this universe, I'm thinking he's due for another correction sometime soon.. (2012 anyone? lol) Oh G_D (the real one) help us!

The truth is the Torah's G-d never thinks man so wretched and so pre-disposed for irrevocable action or sin. Yes, there are people who are born with severe limitations. Yes, there are people who are born with severe impediments and developmental issues that limit their potential. But NO ONE is pre-disposed for "sin". In fact, it is G-d who tells Cain (later to be the first murderer) that he (cain) had the ability to SUBDUE sin and make it CAIN'S master! Cain killed Abel NOT because of some inability to control his bloodlust. It wasn't because of some inborn trait (although now science has discovered that some people do have such a pre-disposition to certain behavior), but rather it was a choice. If there were not such choice, then G-d's action is totally unfair and out of place given that Cain (and others) were "born to it".

Later on, He tells Israel that the ability to obey Him (the Torah) is not in heaven, or across the ocean or in some other far reaching place far from view or comprehension. He says "it is nigh unto you, even in your MOUTH to do it!' G-d obviously did not share the xian view of mankind nor did He believe Israel was not able to "keep the Law".

5) the most problematic belief in this "Jeesus as the perfect offering" position is that it absolves anyone from true responsibility because the effects and proof of this "sacrifice" is SUBJECT TO EITHER DENOMINATIONAL OR EVEN PERSONAL INTERPRETATION. How many times when xians even on this forum are presented with the HISTORY of their religion, the FACTS as to the atrocities and the Anti-semitism of their own NT that we hear "oh but they weren't real xians" or "Real xians don't do that' or "you're not understanding the context". But it really does not detract from the FACT that if such actions and violence was and IS being done in the name of Jeesus shouldn't there be an official refutation of this? Shouldn't there be some adamant and deep scouring soul searching and atonement? Should not the collective that is Christendom be held accountable? Or does "atonement" mean instant immunity?

The truth is as long as the atonement of jeesus is personal no one really has the responsibility to act as part of the COLLECTIVE in making amends for the sins that were done in its name. Unlike Judaism which DOES in fact command that one makes restitution and make amends (when and if possible) before one stands before G-d as a community/collective, in xianity, those are seen merely as "works" for which there really is no need to, since Jeesus is the atonement. And even on this matter, there isn't even any cohesion on this. Every denomination and nay, every XIAN has his/her own 'personal law" on the subject. Yes, yes, we hear all the lip service about everyone's responsibility, but you will NEVER hear any COLLECTIVE responsibility for any action on the part of any xian church, denomination or even individually. Granted, there are many, many wonderful, moral, righteous, socially-conscious xians out there who truly do champion a serious re-evaluation of xianity. And yes, the Catholic Church had issue an "apology" for the atrocities committed against Jews (we're still waiting for the one for what was done in the Americas). Were there many more like these. But the fact is (and this is increasing even more) that there are many many more who hold true to the teachings that are being promulgated concerning Jews and other non-xians.

So truthfully, for some, Jeesus is a perfect sacrifice if one does not want to do the work needed to rise above one's lower nature, to effect change for the masses and take responsibility for each and every action. Jeesus is a perfect sacrifice for those who have neither the desire, compunction and nay, the courage to find out who the REAL G-d is and what He requires for humanity. Just because it's free doesn't mean it's worth it.

6) In addition, if he were a sacrifice, since when is a sacrifice still living after it has been sacrificed? If the ACT of death and shedding of blood IS the means by which this "atonement" is afforded, how can he then be resurrected? He isn't dead.. If he did resurrect bodily, that negates the purpose of the sacrifice because if Jeesus rose bodily, then how was it he was able to be animate without blood and without the human processes (including cardiovascular function/respiration/blood flow) to both ambulate (blood circulate to the muscles to move them so he can move and to function) and eventually to eat fish and bread? Where did the blood come from if it was all splattered on the streets of the Via Delorosa and "upon the mercy seat" as Hebrews contends? A sacrifice (in the xian sense) has to be KILLED for it to be effective. If it's still alive, it can't be a sacrifice.

Xians who believe this want the best of both worlds.. the ability to claim the blood and the vicarious atonement, AND the promise of His actual bodily return! They can blame the Jews and everyone else for his crucifixion (and in the case of Hebrews, a second crucifixion by those who leave xianity), [how DO you kill a god?????especially if he resurrected?] , cry and get all lathered up via plays and "Passion"-like dramas, look for a scapegoat for such a thing AND get to have a resurrection, complete with its replete reasons why Jeesus hasn't come back yet (and again, we'll soon hear "the Jews are the hold up" just like in the 1600's and in the 1800s). But the strange thing is that in every scenario, either the crucifixion or the RETURN.. someone is always to blame for it. If it's so perfect, why not accept the tenants of the faith? Why the need to blame anyone for anything concerning him if this was "ordained by god"? Is this part of the "perfect sacrifice" scenario?

The more one investigates the AFTERMATH of such a "perfect sacrifice" to its 'atoned" adherents, the more we find it really wasn't so perfect after all.

So in the end jeesus can never be a "perfect" sacrifice.