Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-02-2013, 01:49 AM (This post was last modified: 08-02-2013 03:40 AM by EvolutionKills.)
Question Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
This is a work in progress where I have attempted to put my thoughts on the 'sacrifice' of Jesus into a propositional argument. This is more a thought exercise than anything else, and your feedback would be appreciated.




Argument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus Ver1.0

P1: For a sacrifice to have any value, it must have a cost to the one committing the sacrifice.

P2: For a sacrifice to have any value, it must not be a temporary sacrifice.

C1: Therefore a sacrifice that is either temporary or without cost would be without value.

P3: On an infinite timescale with an afterlife, death is not end of existence, merely a transition from one existence to another.

C2: Therefore death is not a sacrifice in and of itself as per C1.

C3: Therefore for death to be a sacrifice, you need to add cost and permanency to death or the existence after death as per C1 and C2.

P4: After death, you either spend eternity in Heaven (paradise) or Hell (torture).

C4: Therefore to have death posses any value as per C3, it must result in going to Hell and not Heaven.

P5: When Jesus died, he spent 3 days in Hell, then returned back to life and then went to Heaven.

C5: Therefore Jesus' death and his time in Hell were both not permanent.

P6: For a being with infinite resources and power, the act of creation has no cost.

P7: A creation with no cost has no value.

C6: Therefore a creation without value cannot be used as a sacrifice as per C1.

C7: Therefore the death of Jesus was a sacrifice with no value as per C5 and C6.






P1: For a sacrifice to have any value, it must have a cost to the one committing the sacrifice.

-If you give up something that means nothing to you, it isn't a sacrifice. Giving up $20 to charity is a sacrifice for a homeless man, but would be meaningless coming from Bill Gates.



P2: For a sacrifice to have any value, it must not be a temporary sacrifice.

-Once again, temporary inconveniences don't count. If you sacrifice a goat to god by killing it, it would be meaningless if you had to power to bring the goat back to life. Lending someone money is not a sacrifice, but giving it away with expectation of return can be.



C1: Therefore a sacrifice that is either temporary or without cost would be without value.

-A sacrifice that doesn't cost you anything isn't worth anything.



P3: On an infinite timescale with an afterlife, death is not end of existence, merely a transition from one existence to another.

-Those who believe in Christianity also believe that we continue to exist after our physical bodies have died. Since we don't truly cease to be, death is merely a transition form one existence to another.



C2: Therefore death is not a sacrifice in and of itself as per C1.

-A transition is not a sacrifice, merely a change. Christians believe we will all die and make this transition someday and is all a part of God's plan for us. In this context there is as much sacrifice in death as there is in walking through the door of your new house.



C3: Therefore for death to be a sacrifice, you need to add cost and permanency to death or the existence after death as per C1 and C2.

-Since the ending of your life is not a sacrifice because you don't lose anything, you just transition to another form of existence. So for death to have any meaning, it must be added to the state of existence after death.



P4: After death, you either spend eternity in Heaven (paradise) or Hell (torture).

-According to traditional Christology, this is how things work, we have Heaven and Hell and no other options.



C4: Therefore to have death posses any value as per C3, it must result in going to Hell and not Heaven.

-An eternity in Heaven is not a sacrifice, but an eternity in Hell would be.



P5: When Jesus died, he spent 3 days in Hell, then returned back to life and then went to Heaven.

-Simple as that, 3 days is not an eternity. Coming back to life means that not even the transition from one existence to another through death is permanent, but can be temporary.



C5: Therefore Jesus' death and his time in Hell were both not permanent.

-This is not a sacrifice. In order to make this a sacrifice, Jesus would have needed to either truly cease to exist or spent eternity in Hell for his death to have value.



P6: For a being with infinite resources and power, the act of creation has no cost.

-If God does have the powers attributed to him in the Bible, then Creation had no personal cost to him. Therefore all of creation is valueless to him, because it didn't cost him anything to create everything.



P7: A creation with no cost has no value.

-This includes Jesus. The only reason Jesus is claimed to be God's only son, is because God hasn't cared to make another one. It is certainly within God's power to do so, thus the creation of Jesus didn't cost God anything and so Jesus is just as valueless. God could have another Son or even clone Jesus at no cost to himself, and thus the creation of Jesus has no value.



C6: Therefore a creation without value cannot be used as a sacrifice as per C1.

-Something that costs you nothing has no value, since it has no value, it is worthless as a sacrifice.



C7: Therefore the death of Jesus was a sacrifice with no value as per C5 and C6.

-Once again, since the creation of Jesus cost nothing to God, killing Jesus didn't cause God to lose anything. Also his death and stay in Hell were both temporary, before spending an eternity in Heaven; not much of a sacrifice. Thus the death of Jesus was valueless, and therefore not a meaningful sacrifice by himself or by God.

[Image: qce9oP7.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 02:04 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
It's not so much about the sacrifice as it's about the fulfilment of a prophecy. Besides, it's the burden of all the sins which is the suffering for God, not the actual death.

That's what I'd answer if I still believed Tongue

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 02:17 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
(08-02-2013 02:04 AM)nach_in Wrote:  It's not so much about the sacrifice as it's about the fulfilment of a prophecy. Besides, it's the burden of all the sins which is the suffering for God, not the actual death.

That's what I'd answer if I still believed Tongue

To which I would point out that death and resurrection are not a part of Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament. Tongue

[Image: qce9oP7.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
08-02-2013, 02:24 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
(08-02-2013 02:17 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(08-02-2013 02:04 AM)nach_in Wrote:  It's not so much about the sacrifice as it's about the fulfilment of a prophecy. Besides, it's the burden of all the sins which is the suffering for God, not the actual death.

That's what I'd answer if I still believed Tongue

To which I would point out that death and resurrection are not a part of Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament. Tongue
LIES!! you go burn in hell!! don't question the word of... oh wait... old habits Hobo

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes nach_in's post
08-02-2013, 02:50 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
I would argue against P7. An creation's value is not based on its cost. Value is assigned based on the object's usefulness and perceived value.

Unless you're a Marxist. In which case carry on.



Another way to approach the Jesus sacrifice is to point out that its primary purpose was to forgive the Original Sin. The Original Sin was committed by Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve did not exist as described in the Bible; humanity did not descend from two individuals and their incestuous children. Nor was there even a single breeding pair of humans to which all man kind could trace their lineage. Thus the Original Sin does not exist. Thus the sacrifice of Jesus is meaningless.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Phaedrus's post
08-02-2013, 03:14 AM (This post was last modified: 08-02-2013 03:46 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
It also makes no sense in the context of Hebrew culture. The Hebrews did not believe in immortatlity, so there was nothing to "save".
(Obviously Saul of Tarsus cooked up "salvation" to compete with the Greek mystery cults). Jebus did not preach "salvation" or that HE himself was the content of his own belief system. He said "come follow me", not "come worship me".) It took hundreds of years to conjure up "original sin", and a cosmic payoff for it.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...=Salvation

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating Yogi, CAAT-LY.
Living daily with the high tragedy of being #2 on Laramie Hirsch's ignore list.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
08-02-2013, 03:38 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
(08-02-2013 02:50 AM)Phaedrus Wrote:  I would argue against P7. An creation's value is not based on its cost. Value is assigned based on the object's usefulness and perceived value.

Unless you're a Marxist. In which case carry on.



Another way to approach the Jesus sacrifice is to point out that its primary purpose was to forgive the Original Sin. The Original Sin was committed by Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve did not exist as described in the Bible; humanity did not descend from two individuals and their incestuous children. Nor was there even a single breeding pair of humans to which all man kind could trace their lineage. Thus the Original Sin does not exist. Thus the sacrifice of Jesus is meaningless.


I see your point, and I admit that it's probably the least fleshed out idea there. It's part of the second prong of the two prong attack, in which I attempt to throw God under the bus along with Jesus. But the finally conclusion (C7) I think is still valid even if only relying on C5, the idea that Jesus' long weekend in Hell follow by an eternity in Heaven is a hollow sacrifice in and of itself.

Still, it's a work in progress. Physcology has shown us that you're better off with a few strong arguments then an army of weak ones. So if I can't strengthen it, I can just drop it.

I'll try to take a separate shot at a formal argument against original sin, that might be a fun exercise. Thanks for the feedback.

[Image: qce9oP7.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 06:04 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
Try taking a look at the youtube series "Sins of the Saviour" - I trotted out bits of it against that Stuckmeyer dude in one of his threads.

Basically it points out that since Jesus' sacrifice would only work if he was indeed sinless, and then lists several cases where he broke Old Testament Law, after building a case for his being subject to it. This made him a sinner, and hence worthless as a sacrifice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes hedgehog648's post
08-02-2013, 06:26 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
(08-02-2013 06:04 AM)hedgehog648 Wrote:  Try taking a look at the youtube series "Sins of the Saviour" - I trotted out bits of it against that Stuckmeyer dude in one of his threads.

Basically it points out that since Jesus' sacrifice would only work if he was indeed sinless, and then lists several cases where he broke Old Testament Law, after building a case for his being subject to it. This made him a sinner, and hence worthless as a sacrifice.

Thanks for the head's up, I'll have to watch those as well then. At this point, I might end up having a number of conclusions that all support a single Über conclusion...

[Image: qce9oP7.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2013, 06:39 AM
RE: Agrument Against the Sacrificial Death of Jesus
You could just cut to the chase and say "The sacrifice of Jesus makes no fucking sense. QED."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: