crucifixion

Christian theology teaches that the only way mankind can attain salvation is through the Crucifixion of Jesus. According to the New Testament, the death of Jesus echoes the blood sacrifices that were part of the Mosaic Laws of Atonement in the Old Testament. Blood sacrifices are apparently needed in order to cleanse us of our sins because God cannot just forgive sins without some form of penalty. Therefore Jesus was a substitute for mankind in that he took our place, suffered our punishment and ultimately paid the penalty of sin on our behalf, thus reconciling us with God. The writings of Paul in particular heavily support this dogma:

In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. [Hebrews 9:22]

God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith… [Romans 3:25]

He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. [Romans 4:25]

The theology behind the Crucifixion is problematic from many angles. From a rational point of view, is God not effectively committing suicide by sending himself to be sacrificed? From a morality point of view, why would a Just God punish Jesus, an innocent party, for the sins of the guilty? This article, however, is going to tackle the Crucifixion at a much more fundamental level. If it can be shown in the Bible that God is capable of forgiving sin without the need for blood sacrifice, then the foundation upon which the Crucifixion depends, that of blood atonement, comes crashing down.

JONAH AND THE PEOPLE OF NINEVEH

The Old Testament describes the people of Nineveh as a wicked nation. God sent Prophet Jonah to warn them:

The word of the Lord came to Jonah son of Amittai: “Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me.” [Jonah 1:1-2]

This was a nation of considerable size, numbering over 120,000 inhabitants:

And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?” [Jonah 4:11]

This entire nation was spared God’s punishment in the end because they repented from their wicked ways:

When Jonah’s warning reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. This is the proclamation he issued in Nineveh:

“By the decree of the king and his nobles:

Do not let people or animals, herds or flocks, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. But let people and animals be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.”

When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened. [Jonah 3:6-10]

An entire nation of over 120,000 who were condemned to destruction were forgiven by God when they simply repented and fasted, without ever offering any sacrifice. In fact even though they had many animals at their disposal, which God could have easily commanded them to sacrifice, they weren’t sacrificed, but rather were made to fast as well!

DAVID’S BREAKING OF THE COMMANDMENTS

The Old Testament alleges that David committed some major sins in his pursuit of a married woman called Bathsheba:

One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “Isn’t this Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite?” Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (She had purified herself from her uncleanness.) Then she went back home. The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.”… In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. In it he wrote, “Put Uriah in the front line where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.”… When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. [2 Samuel 11:2-26]

From this we can see that David violated three Commandments, “Thou shalt not kill”, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” and “Thou shall not covet your neighbour’s wife”. The severity of these violations is highlighted by the fact that at least one of them, the act of adultery, carries the death penalty:

If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel. [Deuteronomy 22:22]

Another devastating blow to blood atonement is the fact that David was spared the death penalty and completely forgiven by God merely on the basis of having confessed his sin:

Then I acknowledged my sin to you and did not cover up my iniquity. I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord.” And you forgave the guilt of my sin. [Psalms 32:5]

SOLOMON AND THE TEMPLE

While dedicating the Temple of Jerusalem to God Almighty, Solomon makes a special plea on behalf of the Israelites:

“When they sin against you—for there is no one who does not sin… and if they turn back to you with all their heart and soul in the land of their enemies who took them captive, and pray to you toward the land you gave their ancestors, toward the city you have chosen and the temple I have built for your Name; then from heaven, your dwelling place, hear their prayer and their plea, and uphold their cause. And forgive your people, who have sinned against you; forgive all the offenses they have committed against you, and cause their captors to show them mercy” [1 Kings 46-50]

This entire passage seems to have foreshadowed the exile of the Israelites into Babylonian captivity which took place in the 6th century BCE. With the fall of Jerusalem and the Temple in ruins the exiled Israelites no longer had the means for performing sacrifices. Their circumstances raise some awkward questions for proponents of blood atonement – were the Israelites then completely cut off from God’s mercy for 70 years until the eventual reconstruction of the Temple? How about those who died whilst in exile, did they pass away in an unavoidable state of damnation? These are just some of the implications of the Christian theology of blood atonement. The words of Solomon represent a total refutation of this view – rather than being cut off from God’s mercy, the exiled Israelites would be able to attain forgiveness through repentance and prayer.

CHRISTIAN REBUTTAL

Christians attempt to legitimise their claims about blood atonement by looking to the Old Testament for support. This is the most commonly cited passage:

“For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” [Leviticus 17:11]

But if you read this verse in context, you will find that it refers to abstaining from eating or drinking the blood of a sacrifice, and nothing more. God commanded this prohibition in order to maintain the distinction between the Jewish people and the pagans.

This mistake that atonement requires a blood sacrifice comes from a misreading of Leviticus where Jews are forbidden from eating blood. This can be clearly seen when one considers the passages immediately before and after:

“I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.” [Leviticus 17:10]

“For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” [Leviticus 17:11]

Therefore I say to the Israelites, “None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood.” [Leviticus 17:12]

So, the context is dietary laws, not atonement. Moreover, the passage says only that blood is used to obtain atonement; not that blood is the only means for obtaining atonement. All of the verses above could be summed up as saying, “Don’t eat blood, because blood is used in atonement rituals; therefore, don’t eat blood.”

WHAT THE QUR’AN SAYS ABOUT ATONEMENT

This concept of God is very different to that of Islam, and even Judaism, which believes Him to be Merciful and Just. This Christian dogma is not only a denial of the Mercy of God but also of His Justice. To demand the price of blood in order to forgive the sins of mankind is to show a lack of mercy, and to punish an innocent party for the sins of others is the height of injustice.

The Qur’an teaches that so long as one sincerely repents from their sins then God will forgive us. It is the Qur’an that does true justice to God Almighty’s Merciful and Forgiving nature:

Their meat will not reach Allah, nor will their blood, but what reaches Him is piety from you. Thus have We subjected them to you that you may glorify Allah for that [to] which He has guided you; and give good tidings to the doers of good. [Chapter 22, verse 37]

And whoever does a wrong or wrongs himself but then seeks forgiveness of Allah will find Allah Forgiving and Merciful. [Chapter 4, verse 10]

“Verily, Allah forgives not (the sin of) setting up partners (in worship) with Him, but He forgives whom He wills, sins other than that.” [Chapter 4, verse 116]

CONCLUSION

As we have seen throughout the Old Testament, the atonement relationship between God and man was never limited to blood sacrifices. There were many means by which a human being obtained forgiveness from God for wrongdoing, including fasting, repentance and prayer. Therefore to limit God’s forgiveness to blood atonement is not only unbiblical but also a gross injustice to God’s merciful nature.

Written by Many Prophets One Message
A CALL TO THE TRUTH

    31 Comments

  1. m0stafa1 April 5, 2014 at 11:07 pm Reply

    Reblogged this on ilmsharif.

  2. mrquestioner2013 April 6, 2014 at 11:54 am Reply

    god is the one WHO created blood. BLOOD is beneath him. VIOLENCE is BENEATH him. is god such a god that the only way he can cool off is through VIOLENT bloody suffering? he is the one who PUNISHES. is his punishment such a thing that he has to turn it ON himself? just think about this, blood and flesh is CREATED by God. WHAT does it mean that the giver and taker of life RETURNS his life back to himself through bloody violent suffering?

  3. mrquestioner2013 April 6, 2014 at 12:07 pm Reply

    yhwh says,

    “I will not hear you NO MATTER HOW MANY‘Prayers’You say”

    reason for not listening ,

    “because your hands are covered with blood!”

    then he says,

    “Wash, purify yourselves, remove the badness of your deeds from before My eyes, stop doing wrong!*Learn to do*right, seek justice, protect victims, treat orphans justly, support the claims of widows”

    yhwh says,

    “I am fed up with olah-offerings of rams and the offals of fattened calves, and the blood of oxen, lambs and goats does not give Me pleasure”

    there is a lot of BLOOD and flesh wasted. i just don’t see in the verse where a bloody cross is prefered over animal blood.

    i don’t see where flesh of human is preferred over flesh of animal.

    god who takes NO pleasure in animal flesh , takes pleasure in his own bloody flesh?

  4. John goggin April 8, 2014 at 12:18 am Reply

    I was raised Christian and converted to Islam. There are differences between Islam and Christianity, regarding the concept of the trinity. However, as far as belief in a loving and merciful God, both religions believe in a merciful God. I understand your point but you may wish to check your understanding of Christianity. The Prophet (PBUH) and the Hadith tell us he cautioned the believers not to worship him, as the Christians worshipped Isa bin Miryam (PBUH). But that is the beginning and the end of the differences in our faith, to the best of my knowledge and experience.

    • manyprophetsonemessage April 8, 2014 at 12:30 pm Reply

      As-salaamu ‘alaykum John,

      Jazak Allah khayr for your feedback.

      I’m sure Christians personally believe God to be forgiving and merciful. But what the article tackles is the theology that the New Testament puts forward, namely that God cannot forgive sin without some form of blood penalty. This not only goes against the Qur’an, but even the Old Testament. This dogma is an injustice to God’s Merciful nature and goes against His attributes of being ar-Rahman, ar-Raheem.

      • mrquestioner2013 April 13, 2014 at 6:44 pm Reply

        ” From a rational point of view, is God not effectively committing suicide by sending himself to be sacrificed? ”

        yes

        “it was his will to CRUSH him” (isiah)

        there r some problems with the christian beliefs.

        jesus was punished by FINITE human beings

        sin = punishment by an everliving and eternal being

        logically, FINITE punishment by finite pagans CANNOT compare to ETERNAL separation/punishment by eternal and infinite being.

        this begs the question

        who and WHAT received PUNISHMENT from DIVINE being?

        romans MURDERED the flesh

        who punished WHO and what ?

        so you are right

        god is PUNISHING himself to save from himself and his laws which emanated from his knowledge.

      • mrquestioner2013 April 13, 2014 at 7:27 pm Reply

        jews ,as you know , don’t find jesus in isiah, but here is something interesting ,

        “In verse 53:10 we see that God was pleased to cause suffering to the servant, and I quoted in part two from Deuteronomy where it says explicitly that God is joyful at the suffering. We see nowhere else where it is the case that God has joy in causing suffering I would like to point out we also have NO SOURCES where God has joy in the suffering of the Messiah.”

        okay, but christians want to see thier god in verse 53:10, so this means that thier god was not only willed to CRUSH himself but he was PLEASED in his suffering

      • heathcliff2013 April 15, 2014 at 9:28 am Reply

        salaam, do you think we can add to this:

        The theology behind the Crucifixion is problematic from many angles. From a rational point of view, is God not effectively committing suicide by sending himself to be sacrificed?

        and you know what is strange, christians, someof them, believe that thier god LITERALLY became rapist, murderer, fornicator, adulterer, con artist, think of all the worlds sins on the cross

        god, according to these christians, became a thinker and ACTOR of these sins

        la howla wala QUWATA ILLA BILLAH

        • manyprophetsonemessage April 18, 2014 at 4:23 pm Reply

          Wa alaykum as-salaam wrwb akhi,

          Jazak Allah khayr for your thoughts. Yes, there are many absurdities and paradoxes to be found in their theology.

      • mrquestioner2013 July 6, 2014 at 5:34 pm Reply

        salaam

        So Samuel took a sucking lamb and offered it as a
        whole burnt-offering to Yahweh; Samuel cried out
        to Yahweh for Israel, and Yahweh answered
        him. As Samuel was offering up the burnt-offering,
        the Philistines drew near to attack Israel; but Yah-
        weh thundered with a mighty voice that day
        against the Philistines and threw them into confu-
        sion; and they were routed before Israel. (1 Sam
        7:9-10)

        christian apologists must answer

        when that lamb was burnt did it APPEASE yhwh?
        what does this sacrifice symbolize in jesus’ loan to his father? do christians admit that sacrifice can help one win and KILL enemies?

  5. mrquestioner2013 April 20, 2014 at 1:43 pm Reply

    ***Video removed***

    Although I appreciate your intention behind posting the YouTube video, I had to remove it because the YouTube channel behind the video is full of blasphemous content that goes against Islam and religion in general. Sorry.

    – ManyProphetsOneMessage

  6. mrquestioner2013 April 20, 2014 at 2:26 pm Reply

    i shouldn have seen that before posting . i made the mistake of not clicking on the link which took me to the channel. you are right.

  7. mrquestioner2013 April 20, 2014 at 2:27 pm Reply

    i should*

    • manyprophetsonemessage April 20, 2014 at 2:34 pm Reply

      No worries brother, an easy mistake to make. The video made some excellent points but I think it’s better not to promote a channel of that nature. May Allah reward you for your good intentions, ameen.

      • manyprophetsonemessage April 20, 2014 at 2:35 pm Reply

        You have made some really good points throughout your comments masha’Allah, have you thought about starting a blog?

  8. heathcliff2013 April 22, 2014 at 2:01 pm Reply

    definition of SUFFER

    : to experience pain, illness, or injury

    : to experience something unpleasant (such as defeat, loss, or damage)

    how does a being who creates PAIN receptors experience pain, illness and injury?

    how does a being who made and owns everything experience DEFEAT , loss and damage?

    either god LIES to himself and does a puppet stage play or he becomes INCOMPLETE god by leaving his attributes in heaven

    how was god the flesh giving up his life when he had an infinite one?

    god gave up his FINITE life to his infinite persons?

    this is a LOAN

    : an amount of money that is given to someone for a period of time with a promise that it will be paid back : an amount of money that is borrowed

    : permission to use something for a period of time

    god is LOANING to himself something he created for himself to reduce anger from one of his persons in the trinity.

    • manyprophetsonemessage April 23, 2014 at 12:03 pm Reply

      Thanks for your comment.

      To stick with your debt/loan analogy, the article explains why there is no need for a ‘loan’ to be repaid in the first place. In the Old Testament God forgives (or ‘writes off’) debts without the need for blood payment. Therefore this entire concept of blood payment comes crashing down, much like the recent banking finance collapse.

      • heathcliff2013 April 23, 2014 at 5:15 pm Reply

        isn’t it strange akhee that they say that god is powerless because he CAN’T incarnate and yet they believe that god CAN’T forgive because his justice asks for his CREATED flesh to battle it out with death? what? god made god to battle it out with DEATH? his forgiveness is DEPENDANT upon who wins ROUND 2?

        round 1: DEATH

        round 2: 1 person in god

        you know akhee, they love to talk about death, suffering , pain etcetra etcetra

        i ask,

        in a world of suffering , your god can’t have a LITTLE compassion and forgives the one who SUFFERS?

      • heathcliff2013 April 23, 2014 at 8:55 pm Reply

        another thing

        the christian god seems to have a plan A, b and c

        quote:
        1Peter 1:20 0 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.

        isn’t it funny that they talk about god’s justice and here we have god wrecking his justice by thinking to himself that he thought about his “sacrifice” before the creation of the world?

        plan A was Laws which came from god’s mind. plan A failed.

        plan B was punish guilty for thier sins. plan B failed

        plan C was god dreaming about punishing himself . plan C failed, christians go on to sin and break every rule in the book.

  9. heathcliff2013 April 23, 2014 at 5:08 pm Reply

    you know akhee, if you think about it , christians MUST admit that god IS powerless being in his PRE-incarnate version.

    actually EACH person in trinity is powerless

    think about this

    imagine if we NEVER died and were cursed with a severe skin condition

    so NO death, but SUFFERING

    so how would a christian god solve this problem?

    he would have no choice but to JOIN/wear/ADD a disease/skin condition to his being.

    he would need to add a temporary disease for the weekend before he could remove the disease

    what does this mean?

    disease is ANOTHER power which WILLS disease in to existence and it can THINK besides god.

    any christian who says that god did NOT create disease must ADMIT that disease is ANOTHER concious independant power which demands to BATTLE it out with god.

    DISEASE ALWAYS needs to FLoor god (1 person from among the 3) and take round 1.

    if you think about it carefully , the trinity gods are POWERLESS in thier pre-incarnate form.

  10. mrquestioner2013 April 26, 2014 at 1:35 pm Reply

    you know when these guys talk about their god being just , i think they really don’t know thier bibles.

    for example, jc said,

    32‘Every one, therefore, who shall confess in me before men, I also will confess in him before my Father who is in the heavens; 33and whoever shall deny me before men, I also will deny him before my Father who is in the heavens.

    no CONDITION attached. whoever DENIES is denies before the father of jesus.

    NO condition

    now lets talk about peter

    i quote,

    “One is during the resurrection of the daughter of Jairus, where Peter, James and John are the only ones he allows to come with him, and the other is the Transfiguration, where he only took Peter, James and John with him to the mountain. Both of these the major foreshadowings of what is to come – showing that jesus can conquer death, and having god himself endorse him as his own son. That makes their betrayals all somewhat WORSE than the rest of the disciples, as they should have known better because they had better evidence. ”

    so will all the evidence right before them, peter says,

    68 But Peter denied it. “I don’t know what you’re talking about,” he said, and he went out into the entryway. Just then, a rooster crowed.[b]

    69 When the servant girl saw him standing there, she began telling the others, “This man is definitely one of them!” 70 But Peter denied it again.

    A little later some of the other bystanders confronted Peter and said, “You must be one of them, because you are a Galilean.”

    71 Peter swore, “A curse on me if I’m lying—I don’t know this man you’re talking about!” 72 And immediately the rooster crowed the second time.

    you see brother? thier god is “just” and peter who saw amazing miracles took an OATH and DENIED jesus.

    yet jc makes peter the big fish in christianity.

    this “whoever shall deny me…” god makes THE DENIER the big fish in christianity . notice that his words make NO condition after “deny me…”

    what is WORSE is that pete LIES and takes an OATH.

    • mrquestioner2013 April 30, 2014 at 4:14 pm Reply

      peter asked the father to CURSE him if he was lieing. the ‘just’ father knew that pete was lying and according to the father’s justice/wrath peter should be next to judas in the depths of hell. jesus’ statements also indicate, WITHOUT condition , that peter should be DENIED. pete didn’t deny any man, but according to christians, pete denied a god who was co equal with the father who pete wanted to get cursed by if he was lying.
      but pete , THE LIAR, believed that jesus was PUNISHED for peter’s LIES and pete got made into the big fish in christianity.

      • mrquestioner2013 April 30, 2014 at 4:25 pm Reply

        “Peter did lie according to NT stories (e.g., Matthew 26:30-35, 69-75), and he was characterized a hypocrite according to writings attributed to Paul (e.g., Galatians 2:11-14)”

        “11When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

        14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?”

        it seems that FEAR creates the ALLERGY called LIE, deny and SILEnce , “they did not tell anybody for they were AFRAID”

  11. mrquestioner2013 April 26, 2014 at 1:40 pm Reply

    now here is something interesting

    jesus DIDN’T know the future

    “27Peter answered him, “We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?”

    “28Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wifee or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. 30But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.”

    what is interesting is that the denier who will denie jc asked jc what he will he get in RETURN. jesus told him that he WILL receive lofty rewards.these words seem to be words of guarantee. when jesus said, “… you WILL ALSO sit…” he didn’t know that peter would DENy him.

    it is no surprise that scholars think that jc’ knowledge of peter’s denial was an INVENTION to make it look like jesus wasn’t ‘taken OFF guard’

  12. mrquestioner2013 April 30, 2014 at 6:31 pm Reply

    jesus did not DIE as a substitute for you. god for thousands of years has been using sharp pointed KNIFE on sinners . then one day god decided to use his wrath / ‘KNIFE’ unto his CREATED flesh just to experience/feel how suffering feels like so then he can put a CONTROL on his knife usage. god ,who according to jesus, can “destroy flesh and soul” temporarily destroyed his created flesh and temporarily abandoned himself so he can figure out how suffering feels like. this is not love , but anger management and control on gods OWN wrath. you are SO ANGRY with creation that turning the knife on them is not WORKING FOR YOU, so you temporarily turn the knife on a created PUPPET. I SAY puppet because u say that god walks out of it and CONTROLS it.

    god has MORE power to VIOLENTLY punish himself THAN power to forgive without PUNISHING himself.

    conclusion: one he in trinity is full of wrath and another he in trinity is controlling the 1st he wrath. there is no love here
    there is only love for a diety to did ACTIONS in the flesh. the unknown father , who is FAR away, didn’t become known.

  13. mrquestioner2013 May 1, 2014 at 1:37 pm Reply

    christians love to downplay animal flesh sacrifices to yhwh.

    but animal flesh sacrifices were good intermediaries between yhwh and man, here is proof

    “The fact is, Hess has acknowledged that kings in the ancient world sacrificed their sons. (Hess: “Clearly sons and sons of kings were sacrificed to gods.”) Further, the fact is that the ancients believed that sacrifices could be offered to a deity in exchange for aid in battle. As I’ve shown, we see this in 1 Sam 7:7-11, where Samuel offers a burnt-sacrifice (‘olah) to Yahweh in order to secure Yahweh’s aid in battle against the Philistines. The result was that Yahweh “thundered a great sound” upon the Philistines, scattering them and forcing them to retreat, just as Mesha’s sacrifice to Kemosh wrought “great wrath upon Israel,” forcing them to do the same. We see this paradigm at work again in 1 Sam 13:5-12, where Saul offers a burnt-sacrifice (‘olah) to Yahweh, again to secure Yahweh’s aid in battle against the Philistines. And we see this in Judges 11 with Jephthah, who vows to offer a human burnt-sacrifice (‘olah) to Yahweh in exchange for Yahweh’s aid in battle against the Ammonites.”

  14. mrquestioner2013 May 2, 2014 at 5:49 pm Reply

    some interesting points

    “A mood swing is an extreme or rapid change in mood. Such mood swings can play a positive part in promoting problem solving and in producing flexible forward planning.[1] However, when mood swings are so strong that they are disruptive, they may be the main part of a bipolar disorder”

    You can’t help being naughty and god sent the law to help, but it didn’t, meaning you have to die, so he sent his son to die in your place because god couldn’t just send functional laws or change his mind or know what he was doing in the first place.

    “But the manner in which the Christian presents this ‘promise’ in fact shows another blasphemy against God. It is said that God promised death, without further stipulations, for the human race if the fruit from the forbidden tree was eaten. Later on, when the consequences of such a sin and of evil in general became obvious, then a second plan of action was put into effect which included the incarnation of ‘the Word’ and so forth.

    Again this shows God as a being whose knowledge is increased from time to time, and who undergoes mood swings as he sees his creation carry out their deeds. We know that this is what the Christian thinks because he is showing a ‘softening of God’s heart’ vis-à-vis the situation of mankind: First He unconditionally sentences mankind to death, but then His ‘Love’ wins out which leads to the supposed ‘incarnation’, crucifixion, and resurrection.”

    The corrupt justice of god

    1Peter 1:20 0 he (one he , trinity has 3 he’s) was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.

    The above quote shows this as gods first actual judgement and shows the setting and accepting of a bribe or human sacrifice to corrupt his justice. That justice usually stated that only the punishment of the guilty was acceptable to justice and that it would be unjust for the just god to punish himself and release sinners from himself/his punishment . That corruption of his usual justice is what the bribe or sacrifice of himself bought. Injustice.

    This corrupted judge is the judge you would vote for is it?

    1. If God’s justice cannot be upheld unless sin be punished, and if Christ did not suffer the precise punishment which man’s sin deserves, then God’s justice is still not satisfied.

    He writes:

    Some hold that Christ suffered in degree, but not in kind what all for whom he died would have suffered in time and eternity. This is not substitution in any proper sense. If I am required by law to do a particular thing, and engage another man to do it in my place, and he, instead of doing it, does an equal amount of other work, he does not act the part of a substitute; nor will the law release me. If, however, the governor choose to accept what is actually done, in lieu of what I am required to do, then this is a matter of sovereign prerogative, and not of law or justice.

    But substitutionists reverse this natural order of the relation between crime and punishment, making the removal of the “reatus poena” antecedent to the removal of the “reatus culpae”—that is, exemption from punishment is the antecedent of deliverance from criminality.

    Hence, the sinner is pardoned, released from all liability to penal suffering, when Christ became his substitute, but is left in his criminal and polluted state; morally corrupt, but not liable to-the divinely ordained consequence of his corruption! At enmity against God, yet not liable to the consequences of that state of enmity. Such a state of things, it is self-evident, is impossible in the sphere of either physical or moral law. It would be possible only in the sphere of human law, and possible here only because of the inherent weakness of human law. Thus, a man commits a malicious murder, is indicted and tried by the proper court; but, by the bribery or death of witnesses, or by corrupting the court, he procures a verdict of acquittal, and is set free. This verdict operates as a barrier against subsequent prosecution and punishment. This is exactly the state in which substitutionary satisfaction puts all for whom Christ died. His death absolutely delivers from “reatus poena,” but leaves them in the meshes of “reatus culpae,” from which, however, they are at some indefinite time to be wholly or in part relieved (pp. 113-14).

    DID this god in human form make the 6 hours of suffering eternally a part of his essence?

    he who takes my place in suffering does not, and cannot, take my sufferings. These cannot be the same for him as they would be for me, simply because he is not I.

    In his place I should not feel precisely as he did; I might feel more, I might feel less; I should certainly feel differently; my penalty, therefore, cannot be transferred to him..

    Xianity is like a pinball game where there’s only two types of things in the gameboard: “Sin,” which earns you negative points, and “Communion” which brings your score back to zero. It is possible to earn a positive score, but only if you cheat. But in order to cheat, you have to be a god. If you don’t happen to be a god, forget it. Why would anyone in an arcade waste a quarter playing this silly game?

  15. mrquestioner2013 June 7, 2014 at 8:40 am Reply

    do you know that in judaism the DEATH of the righteous is NOT important. the jews believe that guilt and repentance (something a human DOES) is more important. without guilt and repentance , atonement is NOT triggered .

    on the other hand, christians say that the death of jesus is MORE important than ANYTHING a human DOES.

    unless christians want to believe that guilt and repentance is of a higher status than jesus’ weekend death, othewise, they have nothing in common with what the jews believe

    so can you see the difference?

    http://judaismsanswer.com/Righteous.htm

    quote:

    The Rabbinic Concept of the Death of the Righteous Atones

    There probably is not any Jewish concept that Christians have distorted to make appear consistent with their beliefs then the one dealing with the suffering or death of the righteous. They try to imply that the Jewish idea of the suffering of the righteous is the same or close to the Christian idea of a single man dying to bring individual atonement to all mankind who will believe in him. From this it is a short jump to saying that the messiah dies for our sins. The truth is that this cannot be further from the truth. The two ideas are significantly different, and neither implies the other.

  16. Paul Praveen July 11, 2014 at 7:22 am Reply

    Well argued article. There are a few things missed out though.

    Firstly, this is totally one-sided. The merciful nature of God is very well accounted. But what of the Just nature of God? Shouldn’t that too be considered for a balanced understanding?

    “And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
    Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. (Exodus 34:6-7)

    I wonder if there is a more complete description of God’s nature towards man.

    Justice demands a penalty. The thing that brings the judgment is then the guilt of the sin. A person can be forgiven and still guilty. The blood sacrificed in the Old Testament had a problem. Their source of life was the earth, and the source of man’s life was form God. Therefore the blood of animals could not cleanse the conscience of evil. Therefore a better sacrifice was needed that could not only cover sin, but also remove it and cleanse the conscience.

    Why crucifixion? It was the worst kind of capital punishment known to man, the most torturous, shameful and horrible. It was given only to the worst of criminals. So to cover a punishment suitable for the worst criminal (or read it as Sinner), the worst form of death was needed. Since it is not justice to punish two people for the same offense, it is within God’s justice to forgive someone based on an INNOCENT person taking on the death penalty, though it was on behalf of a guilty person.

    The other aspect to it is the exercising of authority. In the Garden of Eden, Adam was given authority over the whole earth, and all that God created on it. That authority was handed over to Satan when Adam and Eve believed his lie and did as he directed them. That authority had to be taken back. Jesus taught about walking the second mile. A Jew under the Roman rule was required to carry a load for a roman any time he was demanded to. But to avoid unnecessary oppression of the folk, the Roman could only demand the Jew to carry the load for 1 mile. Walking the second mile brought the Roman under the Jew’s mercy. Similarly, the worst death possible brought the devil under Jesus’ mercy, because it was not necessary seeing that He was innocent.

    Open your eyes. This IS TRUTH. It’s time to face it.

    Jesus died, He had to die, and Crucifixion was necessary. This is the BIBLE.

    • manyprophetsonemessage July 12, 2014 at 8:26 am Reply

      Hi Paul,

      Thanks for taking the time to leave your thoughts.

      Regarding this passage of the Bible you posted:

      “And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. (Exodus 34:6-7)

      You conclude from this passage that “Justice demands a penalty. The thing that brings the judgment is then the guilt of the sin. A person can be forgiven and still guilty”. I think this understanding is incorrect if you consider the fuller context as stated earlier in Exodus 20:

      “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. [Exodus 20:4-6]

      As you can see, the context is a particular sin, idolatry, and there is a mention of those who “hate” God – and these are contrasted with those who “love” God. So the point of the passage is that the guilty are those who hate God, and it is them upon whom God’s punishment descends. So God completely forgives those who love and repent to Him, which is the point of the examples I provided in the article.

      Which brings me onto my next point. Now, you mentiond the merciful and just nature of God. This is exactly the issue at hand, why can God completely forgive the Israelites (e.g. David) and non-Israelites (e.g. people of Jonah) without the need for any penalty? Why can’t God be fair and consistent and completely forgive me in the same manner? Why do I need the atoning blood of Jesus if they didn’t need any blood? This is exactly why I conclude that the Crucifixion has no foundation, it goes against the essence of what we both agree about God’s nature – His justness.

      Finally, you mentioned that the Crucifixion is the truth. Would you agree that the truth from God, whatever and wherever it is, should not contain any contradictions? Yet this is exactly what we find with the Crucifixion and its surrounding events when we analyse them in detail. There is at least one irreconcilable contradiction in the accounts provided by the writers of the New Testament:

      http://manyprophetsonemessage.com/2014/01/16/does-the-new-testament-contain-contradictions/

      Now what is incredible is that the Qur’an states that those who believe that Jesus was crucified “differ about it” and are “in doubt”:

      And [for] their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. [Chapter 4, verse 157]

      In other words, the Qur’an asserts that the claims of the New Testament about these events surrounding Jesus are not reliable. It is truly remarkable that the Qur’an’s claims about the reliability of the Crucifixion is correct, when not only is the Qur’an in direct opposition to multiple eyewitnesses of the Crucifixion (as the New Testament claims), but the Qur’an was also revealed much later than the New Testament. This is evidence that the Qur’an is from God Almighty. Indeed the Qur’an corrects the Bible in many other places as well:

      http://manyprophetsonemessage.com/2014/06/11/how-the-quran-corrects-the-bible/

      If the writers of the Gospels can’t get the details of the Crucifixion right, and the Crucifixion is the bedrock of Christianity, then why should anything that they recorded about Jesus be taken as absolute truth? Mankind should rely on the Qur’an as an accurate and reliable source of information about the life and teachings of Jesus, peace be upon him, because the Qur’an is free of contradictions.

      Thanks for taking the time to listen.

  17. Abdulhadi Musa Said Abu Aishat March 18, 2017 at 11:29 am Reply

    Ma Shaa Allaah, till we meet in my email account.

Leave a Comment