It's the moral equivalent of "God can make a rock so big he can't lift it; and also he can lift it anyway."
I think the point I was making was that forgiveness does come with a price. In the case of God - the price is following Christ; with humans, we would and do perhaps look favourably on those who display genuine remorse.
I'm not saying you are wrong - but what about for example:
Not necessarily unlike some of the Christian religions my lot held that everyone would be with god in the end, whether you knew about him, whether you'd rejected him, whether you were the most evil person in the history of the world etc. (albeit my Sunday schoolteachers did struggle with the last one).
Yes, but it very well could have been likely to happen. Actions such as that are common with an occupying force.
Both formulations are extremely common, in my experience. I think the second metaphor happens to be more metaphysically apt, but both of them get you there, if there is where you want to go.
Why would an all powerful and all knowing being require a primitive ritual such as scapegoating in order to wash away or forgive the sins of man? And why would he require men to worship him? (Sounds a bit insecure for a super being, don't you think?) The theology is truly nonsensical if you think about it.
I dunno. It's kind of a good vibe to say "my divine ass walks it like I talk it. I'll make myself human, just like you, and go through the pain and humiliation my own self to show you I got skin in the game. Literally. All I ask is you exercise that free will I gave you and choose good over evil. If you still flip me off, then to Hell with you. Also literally."Why would an all powerful and all knowing being require a primitive ritual such as scapegoating in order to wash away or forgive the sins of man? And why would he require men to worship him? (Sounds a bit insecure for a super being, don't you think?) The theology is truly nonsensical if you think about it.
IMV this theology clearly shows that it is based not on the works of a superior intelligent being, but on the superstitions of the ancient tribal barbarism of man.
God could say to man I forgive man. But instead God decides the best way to do this is to take human form as his son, have himself killed in order to act as a loophole for rules that he made. Yeah , that makes sense.
Now there are lots of things I don't understand because I'm not educated enough. And there are things I don't understand because they are ridiculous. This falls into the latter category.
If you had the power, would you free a murderer? Would it depend on whether they showed remorse - whether they pledged to show love to others rather than hatred?Why would an all powerful and all knowing being require a primitive ritual such as scapegoating in order to wash away or forgive the sins of man? And why would he require men to worship him? (Sounds a bit insecure for a super being, don't you think?) The theology is truly nonsensical if you think about it.
IMV this theology clearly shows that it is based not on the works of a superior intelligent being, but on the superstitions of the ancient tribal barbarism of man.
God could say to man I forgive man. But instead God decides the best way to do this is to take human form as his son, have himself killed in order to act as a loophole for rules that he made. Yeah , that makes sense.
Now there are lots of things I don't understand because I'm not educated enough. And there are things I don't understand because they are ridiculous. This falls into the latter category.
Except he doesn't. God/Jesus didn't die. At worst, Jesus had a bad Friday. Being dead is kind of a permanent condition for man.
Except the Christian God doesn't require that. No, he requires we accept that he exists despite not providing a shred of evidence that he does.
I have doubts like yourself (as this OP demonstrates) but I would hesitate to agree that there isn't a shred of evidence.
I was just using murder as an example.
Such as? Seriously, you say there is evidence. Please tell me because I can't think of any that should be acceptable to any human capable of reason.
Why should we be remorseful? What exactly did we do except not believe in the unbelievable? Oh, was it that we may have lusted after a woman? That we coveted the possessions of another? That we cut our hair or beard? That we had sausage for breakfast? Or crab for dinner? Seriously, why should we turn our lives around? What is exactly wrong with us? Christians think man is broken and bad and need to see the doctor. Non-believers don't.
Personally, I have never found the virtue in "forgiveness." I don't think it means much of anything. I don't agree with the concept of foregoing consequences for action. You wrong me, I will not forgive, I will not forget. That act will inform all of our future interactions. How much it affects us I cannot say, depending on how significant the grievance, but it will be part of us forever. Someone hurts me, why should I pretend it didn't happen? To the extent that forgiveness actually should occur, that would be to be benefit of the one doing the forgiving, to provide them with the peace of mind to allow them to proceed. It's certainly not to benefit the forgiven.
You just contradicted yourself in the first sentence. But I'm with you. I can and do forgive. But that isn't the same as forgetting or washing away your error. But I also think you truly aren't forgiving someone if you hold it over their head. When I forgive someone I do it as much for myself as I do it for them.
In my experience, one's sins are "washed away" when one is baptised.
No, that's the dirt on your knees.