God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ott15j2 ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqP_fjBk ... re=related
I think that the notion that punishing the innocent instead of the guilty perpetrator is immoral. Be it a willing sacrifice as some believe with Jesus or unwilling victim.
I also think that God, who has a plethora of other options, would have come up with a moral way instead of an immoral and barbaric human sacrifice.
I agree with scriptures say that we are all responsible for our own righteousness as well as our own iniquity and that God cannot be bribed by sacrifice.
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
I believe as I do because I believe that the first rule of morality is harm/care of children.
Do you agree that the notion of substitutionary atonement is immoral and that Gods first principle of morality is hare/harm and that this would prevent him from demanding the death of his son?
Their morality is warped.
Strangely they think they have a monopoly on the issue.
Our education system is having a bit of an upheaval at present where people are trying to substitute ethics for morals in school syllabus.
Morals (particularly christian morals) are a poor alternative, I think.
You've just highlighted one of the problems. They are barbarian in their genesis.