740
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 63:
Line 63: + + + + + +
Talk:Essay: Logic and One View of Christianity (view source)
Revision as of 18:55, December 19, 2009
, 18:55, December 19, 2009Sacrifice was God's idea - & return to main question: why God became man
::::::: Your summary restates a theological metaphor for Jesus as a sacrificial lamb for our sins, which is consistent with the Jewish tradition at the time of making animal sacrifices. Whether that particular metaphor should be translated the same way today, when animal sacrifices are non-existent, is an open question about which I hope you have an open mind. The Gospels themselves rarely mention "lamb", and it was a metaphor used in letters to a Jewish audience in the first century. Why you would choose this as your starting point for analyzing the logic of the Bible itself is inexplicable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:03, 18 December 2009 (EST)
::::::: Your summary restates a theological metaphor for Jesus as a sacrificial lamb for our sins, which is consistent with the Jewish tradition at the time of making animal sacrifices. Whether that particular metaphor should be translated the same way today, when animal sacrifices are non-existent, is an open question about which I hope you have an open mind. The Gospels themselves rarely mention "lamb", and it was a metaphor used in letters to a Jewish audience in the first century. Why you would choose this as your starting point for analyzing the logic of the Bible itself is inexplicable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:03, 18 December 2009 (EST)
''(unindent)'' Great point, Andy, about lambs being a metaphor. But I'd say rather that it was the animal sacrifices that God set up as a metaphor for Christ, rather than the other way around. Let's not forget that it was God Who set up the animal sacrifices; it wasn't just a Jewish tradition. For whatever reason, He thought they would be a good thing to drill into people's minds over thousands of years to prepare them for Christ. (He wasn't just taking the common custom either; He started the whole idea back in Gen. 4 when He accepted Abel's animal sacrifice back before there were any false gods being worshiped.)
Back to the main question: Thank you for raising this intriguing question! Have you read St. Anselm's books [http://www.cla.umn.edu/jhopkins/DeIncarnatione.pdf On the Incarnation] and [http://www.cla.umn.edu/jhopkins/CurDeusI.pdf Why God Became Man] ([http://www.cla.umn.edu/jhopkins/CurDeusII.pdf part 2])? I think he has the best argument: God couldn't just act as if sin had never happened; He abhors sin and therefore refuses to ignore it.
The second issue, it seems to me, is: why require belief? Answer: God refuses to let sin into Heaven. Then why not just fix us so we don't sin, without requiring us to believe in the first place? Well, this seems to get down to the core issue of why God lets anyone sin in the first place, and why He created us with free will. I think C. S. Lewis has the best answer to that: He wants us to love Him freely, and we might as well ask why He created anything at all. --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 13:55, 19 December 2009 (EST)
== problems witht the use of "Logic" ==
== problems witht the use of "Logic" ==