His Only Begotten Son
I apologize to the faithful for my affront to the insanity of their religious beliefs, but I can't really get all excited about God supposedly sacrificing his only begotten son on our behalf. Why not? God can have as many sons as he wishes. He's omnipotent. He could have saved the first one if he had wanted to and he could create as many more as his heart desires. Forgive me if I lack the empathy towards God that such a show of 'devotion' supposedly inspires. God can't really consider himself THAT lonely since we are all regarded as his children.
Is there a qualified Christian apologist who has rationalized an 'answer' to that conundrum?
Parents of the soldiers killed in Iraq don't have the requisite omnipotent powers to replace their missing loved ones. Those are the people I really grieve for.
Enjoy.
Is there a qualified Christian apologist who has rationalized an 'answer' to that conundrum?
Parents of the soldiers killed in Iraq don't have the requisite omnipotent powers to replace their missing loved ones. Those are the people I really grieve for.
Enjoy.
Advertisement
They have not gotten around to it yet. To many other holes they are trying to batch . . .
December 26, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, lets see ---
Firstly, the Son is an aspect/emanation (part/whole) of God. You're argument would probably be clearer if you changed the word "God" to the word "Father."
Secondly, the sacrifice of the Son cures a major problem that arose as a side effect of YWHW's maturation over the centuries. Originally, no one expected him to be particularly sympathetic. But --
Two thousand, twenty-five hundred years ago, folks started thinking that maybe Job's bullroarer wasn't what they were looking for. It would be nice to have a god who understood what it was like to be a human being and experience pain and fear -- for real.
Thus -- the invention of the "Son" who experiences human pain and fear, the alleviation of which, after all, is what humans require of a useful god. So, maybe He's not very good at his job; at least having had a direct experience he can show a little sympathy.
YWHW goes to school and gets his empathy on!
December 27, 2008 7:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi, Ellen. What's YWHW?
And you say God goes to school and gets his empathy on. But isn't God all-knowing already? Didn't he in fact INVENT human pain and fear and sympathy and all that?
Like Tim, I've never quite understood the transaction whereupon God gets nailed to the cross to relieve me of my sin. That seems rather flamboyant, even for the Creator. Couldn't he just cross the sin off the ledger? I mean, he is God, right? Why, then, all the drama that ends with the hero dying?
Just wunnerin', I guess...
December 27, 2008 8:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
The dying part betrays a lack of imagination of those who put the bible together; the magic in it (rising from the dead) just like previous myths was all they could think up. I would have a better time believing in devine inspiration if it had predicted something like the fax machine, or even the ball point pen!
December 27, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's a perfect God doing creating imperfect creatures in the first place? Was he bored and needing somebody to continually smite?
I don't expect logic from religion, but internal consistency would be a nice bonus.
Enjoy.
December 27, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's YWHW?
This is an attempt to render in English, a formulaic representation of the name of the Canaanite deity (Yahweh) who was so successfully promoted by the Jewish people.
In Hebrew, the convention is to show two adjacent "yud"'s, which is, of course, only described, never pronounced. (Adherents of the Cult of Yahweh believe it is bad luck to call their deity by name. Go figure...)
Thus,either as Hashem ("the name"--very creative...) or Adonai, "The Lord"
In keeping with that tradition, the observant will not write out "Yahweh", but fall back upon this strange YHWH thing.
Which raises for us the question: "Ellen is observant? (Not in the Sherlock Holmes sense, but the Shtetl sense).
Not bloody likely, says I.
December 27, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is that anything like "Yahweh Maria?" Or was that "Oy Vay Maria?" I only remember the nuns singing about her all the time. Didn't know her personally, and especially not in the biblical sense, you know?
December 28, 2008 11:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Yahweh Maria?" Or was that "Oy Vay Maria?"
I am under the impression that the correct formulation was something like:
"Oy, vey, Yahweh, Maria's knocked up."
December 28, 2008 11:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
God gets nailed to the cross to relieve me of my sin
Makes no sense, does it?
Try this:
God's son is sacrificed to expiate the original sin practiced upon Abraham and Isaac, when Yahweh busted his balls like the doublecrossing gangster he is, was, and always shall be at heart.
The sin was in the browbeating humiliation of Abraham that finally got so disgusting his son was obliged to intervene and volunteer for the alter just to shut Yahweh up.
Abe, of course, was forever after a broken man.
That's the balance that was struck at Golgotha.
Jesus pays for Yahweh's sin against Abraham, like Isaac was about to pay in *Abe's mind.
*(Geneva Convention:Mock execution=torture. More so mock execution of your kid.)
December 27, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
The premise of the question is literal and so requires a literal response:
Because the Bible says so, you bloody heathen!
A more nuanced question might be about the origins of judeo-christian mythology. I'd suggest all of Karen Armstrongs books which explore religion with an archioligists eye without ever disrespecting the subject. Then I'd look into John Shelby Spong's books as a follow-up once the basics are there.
You may walk away feeling much as you do now, but at least you'll be informed on the subject.
December 29, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink