Does the sacrifice of Jesus honestly make any sense . . .?
This explanation is probably going to be a bit too long. But whatever.
First of all, what did Jesus sacrifice? I mean, I understand he was tortured and killed. But think of the reward. He knew he was getting eternity as ruler in heaven. Right-hand of God in eternal, ultimate paradise. It's a pretty sweet deal - hardly a sacrifice.
And then God. John 3:16 is often cited as people just go "ohhhh, don't you see how much he loves us?!" No, I don't. What the hell did God lose? His son had a few shitty days on Earth. He watched his son live for 30 years, have a few bad days, and then his son was with him, again, in eternal paradise. Also, God is omniscient. Surely an omniscient being doesn't experience things like we would.
Secondly, why did God even sacrifice Jesus? It makes absolutely no sense.
HE set up the system. He knew, before he even did it, that setting it up the way he did would lead to him sacrificing his son. Yet he does it anyway? What?
Also, why didn't he just ERASE mankind's sin and allow them salvation WITHOUT the sacrifice? He is omniscient and set up the rules. Any system created must be exactly as God WANTED it to be. So - he wanted humans to be unable to attain salvation until he had his son sacrificed to . . . himself? Again, what?
In short. It's nonsensical. It doesn't follow logically.
In essence, God sacrifices himself, to himself, to pay himself the price that HE demanded, because HIS creation, couldn't live up to HIS standards.
Can anyone seriously make sense of this?
Tabetha: Yes, but that was HIS own rule. And he is omniscient . . . so, surely he knew what it would lead to.
Liberal Asskicker: No, it doesn't do that at all. And that is an entirely different argument. I'm merely talking about whether or not it makes sense . . .
roadside confessions: Yes, but the reason we CAN'T reach paradise on our own merit is because of God's system in the first place. He knew we wouldn't be able to before we were even created.
So, why make it that way? Where he knew he would have to sacrifice Jesus?
AuroraGodess: But he could've just as easily wiped away our sins in some fashion, rather than requiring the redemptive blood of Jesus. The sacrifice isn't "necessary" - because God is not bound by anything. Whatever happens must be simply a result of his will. Since he is omniscient and omnipotent.
Tabetha: You only confuse it even more. You are saying he created a shitty, imperfect covenant at the beginning. Which is impossible. Unless he did so PURPOSEFULLY.
Saying he screwed it up the first time and Jesus was his patch-up work doesn't make it make any more sense. In fact, given God's attributes (perfect, all-knowing), it makes even less sense.
freebird: I probably like your answer the best. However, it basically just says "God has his reasons" . . . which doesn't really help.
And yes, not everyone will be saved. However, God knows the hearts of men, their minds, their past, their future, etc. He knows who is and is not worthy of being saved.
Why not just go according from that? Why have a paganistic sacrifice of your own child when it is, in essence, totally unnecessary?
I am a voice that cries out: You reduce it to mere symbolism? That makes it worse.
So, it wasn't necessary at all? But God couldn't think of anything better to do? Paganistic sacrifice of his "perfect" and only child seemed the right way to go?
He didn't NEED to - but it sent a good message, in other words?
Annsan: It is NOT perfect. I clearly don't see how it makes any sense at all, let alone consider it perfect.
"His own law declares that the wages of sin is death." YES. HIS own law. The only reason Jesus was sacrificed is because God set it up that way. He didn't just go "Well, I guess I have to" . . . he created the entire sequence of events leading to it.
How does that show he loves us? It just shows he's sadistic, at best.
Boxxjockey: "Basically, He gave out the punishment (death) and He took it!" - - Which makes no sense.
God basically goes "Well, these HUMANS here deserve to be punished . . . so I guess I'll punish myself to make up for it." Are you joking? How does it make sense in any way?
Again, it could've been just as easily accomplished without the sacrifice.
Chris: So, it only makes sense if you believe in Jesus? I fail to see how that works. Logic isn't conditional, really.
You said "God didn't make the system that way." Which is wrong. God also created evil, he says so himself.
It makes sense if you accept it without questioning. But what doesn't?
I am the voice that cries out: Sorry, but it doesn't really help.
Again, you are saying that it was just symbolic. Which means that the cornerstone of Christianity (the sacrifice of Jesus) wasn't necessary at all, but it sent a good message.
Which, I think I'd be right in saying, is a minority view. (Doesn't mean you're wrong, just that it wouldn't work for most Christians.)
On top of that, saying it is only symbolic means God tortured and killed his son because it essentially "looked good." It sounds sadistic.