Religion: pros & cons pt1 (Religion)

by dhw, Tuesday, October 28, 2014, 19:59 (3678 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

TONY: Ok, let me try a different approach here.-The approach you have tried, as I understand it, is a general survey of the law, followed by a history of human sin and the possibility of redemption through God's sacrifice of Jesus. I'm touched by the time and trouble you've taken to explain the general background to your thinking, but I'm also apprehensive about moving onto this level for fear that I might cause offence. (I hope I haven't offended Casey, as she has not replied and I tend not to hold back in these discussions.)
 
If you do find the rest of my post too objectionable (although I have no doubt you will find answers!), I'd rather we ended the discussion. But I'll reply and we'll see where it leads us. You have said that “only a perfect life could pay the price” for our sins. There is a passage in the “Brief Guide” in which I question the whole concept of ransom, forgiveness, and the value of Christ's death. I shall reproduce it below.-First, though, I'd like to ask a couple of questions. You have reiterated Paul's warning that the wages of sin is death. You also talk of “righteousness leading to everlasting life”. I know you do not believe in hell, but you have also in the past talked of the “development of the world”, which you never explained. Are you then saying that God will condemn everyone he dislikes not only to physical death in this world but to everlasting death, whereas everyone he likes will be resurrected after their physical death and will live for ever on Earth? One more question, out of curiosity: do you share the belief of many JWs that only 144,000 will be “chosen” to do this?-The passage (lightly edited here) from the “Brief Guide” about the sacrifice of Christ is taken from Section 6, on “The nature of a “Creator”:
 
"Christians believe that Christ died his agonizing death on the cross in order to redeem them [...] What precisely is the point and process of this “redemption”? If we are good, we will be rewarded; if we are bad, we will be punished. So where does Christ's agony fit in? Couldn't the designer have “redeemed” us without Christ's blood? Of all the verses in the story of Jesus, there is none so resonant and chilling as Matthew 27, 46: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” -Christians may argue that Christ's suffering is an example to all of us: so long as we have faith and behave ourselves, we will be rewarded for our pain. It is the same message as that given in the story of Job (see "Religion"), but why inflict such suffering? Christ and Job were presumably both "perfect and upright", so they should have been saved anyway. And I, who am not "perfect and upright", will not be made so by Christ's crucifixion or by Job's losses, since it is clear that I too must have faith in God (or Christ [....]) and obey his commandments, or I shall be condemned. We are told by John, in his first epistle general, that if we walk in God's light, "the blood of Jesus Christ his [God's] son cleanseth us from all sin." But if I already walk in God's light, what need is there for Christ's blood? Will I obey the commandments simply because Christ died an agonizing death? And could I not have had faith in him anyway without such a death? -The fact is, I am no closer to "redemption" after Christ's death than I was before it. This is not to deny that he may have been a great teacher, and many of his principles set out a good moral and social basis for living (most religions do). It is simply a comment on the senselessness of the sacrifice. The nature of the "Creator" as it emerges from this story is very much in tune with a haunting line from a Madonna song: “Only the one that hurts you can make you feel better.” God hurt Job and Christ, then made them feel better, but that won't help the rest of us, unless we can live up to their noble standards - and even that is no guarantee of favour."