Sunday, April 8, 2012

He sacrificed his son, so what!

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (KJV) John 3:16

This passage is every Christians favorite text to demonstrate the love of God for mankind and his compassion for humanity. This for all Christians is the measure of God's love. But if this is the measure of God's love then we must also pay homage to others in the bible who themselves were willing to do the same.

Let's start with Abraham who at God's requests was willing to plunge a dagger into his sons heart to prove his faithfulness and obedience to God. Genesis 22:1 states that the reason for this request of the Lord was to "test" Abraham. Genesis 22:12 states that he had passed with flying colors.

1 It happened some time later that God put Abraham to the test. 'Abraham, Abraham!' he called. 'Here I am,' he replied. 12 'Do not raise your hand against the boy,' the angel said. 'Do not harm him, for now I know you fear God. You have not refused me your own beloved son.' (NJB).

This is all good and well but it leads me to question the omniscience of God. Despite free will, doesn't omniscience mean all knowing? If this is truly one of the characteristics of the supreme deity then he must've known whether or not Abraham would pass the test or not. That being the case then what is the point of the test?

Moving on let's not forget good old Lot who was willing to give up his daughters to a bunch of rapists and sodomites in order to protect the well being of his guests who were supposedly two angels disguised as men.

8 Look, I have two daughters who are virgins. I am ready to send them out to you, for you to treat as you please, but do nothing to these men since they are now under the protection of my roof.' Genesis 19: 8 (NJB).

How noble of Lot! This clown was declared a righteous man before the Lord 2 Peter 2:4-8. Right after he was spared being destroyed with the rest of the inhabitants of Sodom he goes out and gets drunk in a cave! There are others in the bible who have put their children in harms way for the Lord and so God giving his son for the world is really not something that is unique to divinity.

History is replete with cultures that sacrificed their children to a God or even people who willingly sacrificed themselves for the sake of God. Today's extremist Muslims are a testament to that truth. Christians and atheist alike have been beaten, tortured, and maimed, for upholding their personal beliefs and convictions. People have given their lives in military conflicts for the love of country (patriotism).

In conclusion, God supposedly giving up his son to die for the sins of mankind is not something that should be admired but looked upon with disdain. More so since the "problem" of sin and the so called decline of man is one of God's own making. If he did not want us to fail then why put the damn tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden in the first place! It seems to me that this fictional deity is as stupid and incompetent as some of the creatures the bible claims he has created.


  1. I have never understood this peculiar fixation they have with John 3:16. For exactly the reasons you give.

    That they imbue that verse with some magical ability to convert the thinking, or convince the skeptic, holding up signs, painting it on their faces, parading it around like a magical elixer.

    Frankly, it is the one verses which so perfectly demonstrates what a bloodthirsty, hideously ugly, and remarkably confused thing their god is. But they lack the analytical ability, and intellectual honesty, to see it for what it is.

  2. The all powerful God, sent His only son to die on a cross, tortured for our sins, and then rose from the dead to open the gates of heaven. He rose, was resurrected. The death wasn't the end, just the begging of a new life, where we can be truly happy. Ask yourself, are you truly happy. Because if you aren't then something is wrong, because you "religion" focuses on happiness. and i am happy. And I know that I will always be happy. And in the end, if all there is, is matter, then nothing really matters.

    1. @Anonymous,that is your opinion based on a book or rather several books about a myth that was prevalent over 2,000 years ago. By the way you don't need God to be happy. Everything you need is right here right now. I am happy to see my kids grow up and lead productive lives, I am happily married for the past 18 years, I am happy about a lot of things and God has nothing to do with any of them.

    2. There it is again... You'd think a god that is all powerful wouldn't have to kill his creations, and torture his "son/self," to attain credibility with all of his creations. Ofcourse, that exceeds the logic quota of believers.

      When studying pscyhology many years ago we visited a mental instutution. While some were manic depressives, catatonics, etc., many were among the happiest people I ever saw. Smiling, laughing, dancing chatting us up... not a care in the world; the very definition of "truly happy". At least one of them exhibited hyper religiosity a symptom of schizophrena.

      Funny how madness and psychotropic drugs can create a state of happiness. Not much different than religionists not institutionalized. But what makes the schizophrenic better than the regualr deluded religionists is at least they don't proselytize their insanity.

  3. There is no evidence that Jesus was insane.

  4. @Anonymous,actually there is no evidence that Jesus existed either. Outside the bible there are very few references to him and most of those are very brief and believed for the most part to be forgeries and later additions to the source documents.

  5. I beg to differ, on the contrary, I believe this site will prove most helpful.

  6. For every site you give me that support the existence of Christ I can give you others that don't. It's just a matter of opinion. But in case you are interested here is a site for you: Trust me there are others.

  7. I wonder-
    when a religionist comes to a site like this and quotes bible verse, defends his imaginary man-god friend, and posts links to sites that support his delusion (excluding all those that do not) as though it is objective and irrefutable evidence -is he doing it to try and convince the thinking who have already examined the evidence and completely rejected supernaturalism & myth?
    Or is he trying to convince himself?

  8. Hump, I think he is somehow trying to convince himself that his arguments could stand up to the fire of reason. Even though he/she in most cases has already made up his mind on the matter.