John 3:61

[_harmony]

Seriously, people! can you give me a minute or two to finish editing???

[_zeezrom]

But why should I be grateful to God for sacrificing his son to appease himself? Instead of sacrificing his son, why couldn't he sacrifice his own pride and just forgive us outright?

Does it say in the Bible that Heavenly Father wanted to kill his son? How do we know there wasn't a greater force (i.e. fate and/or chaos) that caused this to happen? Maybe Heavenly Father tried to save his son but couldn't.

[_harmony]

True, he also loves us enough to send his son to die for us. But why should I be grateful to God for sacrificing his son to appease himself? Instead of sacrificing his son, why couldn't he sacrifice his own pride and just forgive us outright?

Never had a child in the Army, have you? Some things are worth dying for.

[_consiglieri]

Never had a child in the Army, have you? Some things are worth dying for.

And, if the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 2) has any truth to it, Jesus died so that all men might be free.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_beefcalf]

Never had a child in the Army, have you? Some things are worth dying for.

And, if the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 2) has any truth to it, Jesus died so that all men might be free.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Who was enslaving them that they needed to be set free?

[_Abaddon]

@ consiglieri

"The only answer I have ever encountered to the conundrum of why Jesus had to be sacrificed in order to offer salvation is the one offered by Mormonism--there was no other way."

---

If you are working within the bounds of a Christian-created theological problem, then yes, it could be argued Mormonism has the best answer.

But if you want the best answer irrespective of Christian, theological boundaries, I think there are more satisfying answers. The Christian God as described not existing being a good one right out of the hat.

[_consiglieri]

Who was enslaving them that they needed to be set free?

If we go by what Lehi wrote in this particular sermon, it is the devil that seeks to enslave us,

27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.

The Mediator who liberates us,

28 And now, my sons, I would that ye should look to the great Mediator, and hearken unto his great commandments; and be faithful unto his words, and choose eternal life, according to the will of his Holy Spirit;

And, in a frequently overlooked passage, our flesh that gives the devil power over us in the first place,

29 And not choose eternal death, according to the will of the flesh and the evil which is therein, which giveth the spirit of the devil power to captivate, to bring you down to hell, that he may reign over you in his own kingdom.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_consiglieri]

But if you want the best answer irrespective of Christian, theological boundaries, I think there are more satisfying answers. The Christian God as described not existing being a good one right out of the hat.

I tend to agree with you here, Abaddon.

I think Muslims have by far the better argument when they ask Christians why their God has to make a bloody sacrifice of his own Son in order to forgive their sins.

My understanding is that the penitent Muslim simply says he's sorry and Allah simply forgives him.

This seems to me the great problem at the heart of all Christian theology.

I have been considering lately, though, that Christians follow a suffering God, and in so doing, should only expect to suffer similarly.

I doubt I am the first to think of this, but it may crack open a window into the problem of evil.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_Jason Bourne]

John 3:62

Whereof this is an addendum to John 3:61: Thou shalt also believe in a penal substitutionary atonement and thou shalt wait until St. Anslem for the first articulation of said atonement theory. I may be "the way, the truth, and the life," but Anselm is the bomb-diggety, therefore thou shalt see Cur Deus Homo for further light and knowledge.

+1

[_Chap]

True, he also loves us enough to send his son to die for us. But why should I be grateful to God for sacrificing his son to appease himself? Instead of sacrificing his son, why couldn't he sacrifice his own pride and just forgive us outright?

Never had a child in the Army, have you? Some things are worth dying for.

The analogy between Jesus and service in the armed forces is a very imperfect one.

Soldiers do not enlist because they want to die for their country. If anyone does try to enlist with that aim in mind, you may be sure that those they are likely to serve with will hope very much indeed that such a candidate will not get through the psychological evaluation. They enlist because they are willing to fight for their country. The people they want to die as a result of their action are their country's enemies. If they are good soldiers and remember their training they will do their very best to stay alive. Dying is a risk soldiers have to accept, and we should be grateful that so many are prepared to accept that risk, but it is an outcome none but the dangerously deranged would actively seek.

In the case of Jesus, the case was very different. He did not come tooled up to take out Satan, got the worst of it, and died a hero's death in glorious combat. Instead we are asked to believe that he came intending to die, because his dying was essential, and God demanded it. That's very different to what soldiers do.