Sure. The conclusion I came to is: "I don't think God did the unjust things that people claim he did."
People claim God told Abraham to set out to kill his son. I don't think God told Abraham to do that.
People claim that God gave his Son to die, to satisfy his need for a death, but nobody can seem to explain why God needed a death. Did something over God make a requirement that God needs a death before he can forgive? Or did God decide on his own that he won't forgive unless he sees this dead body? Neither of those makes sense. I don't think God ever required this dead body in order to forgive.
People claim that God told the Israelites to kill all the Mideanites except for some virgins that they kept for themselves. Again, I don't think God did that.
When I read the Bible I see so many contradictions and primitive thoughts, that it is doubtful that a supreme being wrote these things. They look more like the writings of primitive sheep herders. So until I have reason to believe these things were actually written by divine inspiration, I will assume the writers are mistaken when they speak of God sanctioning atrocities.
I was asked this by Muslims with the same issue, over time, they were satisfied with my answer, mainly because they could not find an issue with it.
My answer is different, since I am in complete agreement with your logic. This will take more than one post and I will lead you along with questions:
You see God not having some "problem", so no need for Christ to go to the cross, for His sake?
Which I fully agree with.
It would also help a great deal if you understood the objectives. Everything is done for a reason, so if you understand the reason, it will take you a long way to explaining what really happened.
1. God is Love.
2. The perfect Love would be totally unselfish type Love, so God is totally unselfish (Jesus was totally unselfish).
3. This unselfish Love would thus compel God to make beings that could Love like He Loves, for the sake of those beings that will Love like He Loves (again totally for the sake of others and not His own sake).
4. Man’s objective is thus to obtain this Godly type Love (the most powerful force in all universes since it compels even God to do all He does), so man can fulfill his mission of “Loving God and secondly others with all his heart, soul, mind, and energy.
5. God’s objective as it relates to man and God’s Love would be to do all God can to help humans fulfill their objective. (That is what true Love would do.)
6. The problem with Godly type Love is it cannot be learned, instinctive, earned or can you pay back the giver. God cannot just plant it in humans since that type of love would be a robotic type love. God also cannot just force a person to take this Love (that would be like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun). This Love has to be the result of a free will choice with likely alternatives. The easiest “choice” would then be to accept or reject this Love, but that also means accepting this Love is accepting pure charity and no human likes to humble himself enough to accept pure charity if he does not have to and God will never force him, so he will never have to. Lots of people go to their grave with the little false pride they still have.
Just as the father wanted his sons to be like himself in the prodigal son story, God wants us to choose to humbly accept His Love and become like He is. The only initial way for humans to obtain Godly type Love is as a free gift automatically “...He that is forgiven of an unbelievable huge debt will automatically have an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love)”. That Love can later grow with use, but cannot be developed independently or instinctively possessed by the individual. Thus the need for sin and likely alternatives on earth (the perceived pleasures of sin).
The innocent (Jesus) is tortured, humiliated and murdered by wicked people (really our representatives) with God and Christ both allowing this to happen to help willing individuals (us). We (individually) are both the reason and cause of Christ’s suffering. As we come to the realization of what we caused and accept the responsibility for what we did (another words accept the ransom payment) we experience a death blow to our hearts (the same as those in Acts 2: 37) through our Love for Christ (empathy) we experience the worst possible pain yet are still able to live. This pain would be felt every time we take the Lord’s Super and would be totally debilitating except for the fact the greatest Love is experienced at the same time.
Christ is not trying to “pay off the debt created by our sins” since our sins created an impossible debt to pay. That “debt” cannot be paid (it is totally irreconcilable) but it can be “forgiven”. God’s Love can allow Him to forgive our huge debt without Christ going to the cross. Christ is not trying to make “restitution” for us (that is not possible), but is providing a way for us as children to be disciplined (disciplining is not bringing about restitution) so the disciplining does not have to equal the “restitution” or hell for those that refuse the disciplining in this life. Discipline is not punishment although in scripture negative discipline is often translated punishment.
Christ’s torture, humiliation and murder is described as an actual ransom payment (this is no analogy) and it is an excellent fit to what is happening Christ , Paul, John, Peter and the author of Hebrews all use the ransom payment, but that does not mean the Ransom theory of atonement is correct for many reasons including God not owing satan anything and God not needing to pay satan to get His children back. We, as sinners, are holding captive ourselves; we are the kidnappers of our own self. When we appeal to an unbeliever to become free the person holding him back the person is himself. We do not pray to God to release the individual and we do not perform an exorcism on the individual. The prodigal son was not stolen away and chained to the pigsty, but the prodigal son held himself in the pigsty until he came to his senses.
The “value/ benefit” is only realized by the believer in that this is what the unbeliever has caused Christ to go through and it is purely his individual responsibility that Christ went through this torture and murder. He the individual could have provided “another way” if he had just not sinned and fulfilled his objective without sinning (God could have known a person way in the future fulfilled the objective without sinning (mean there was another way).
When you come to the realization of Christ’s sacrifice because of your behavior you should have the same feeling as those Jews in Acts 2: 37 where you feel a death blow to the heart, but there is this tremendous Love shown in what Christ and God did that keeps the thought of the cross from becoming debilitating. We should look at the cross with mixed emotions.
Prior to Christ going to the cross there was no way for anyone to stand “justified” before God. They could be forgiven and righteous, but justification is a legal term having more to do with “doing the time for the crime and thus you stand just in society.
There is a, one of a kind, Tiffany vase on your parents mantel that has been handed down by your great grandmother. You, as a young person, get angry with your parents and smash the vase. You are later sorry about it and repent and your loving parent easily forgive you. Since this was not your first rebellious action your father, in an act of Love, collects every little piece of the vase and you willingly work together with your father hours each night for a month painstakingly gluing the vase back together. The vase is returned to the mantel to be kept as a show piece, but according to Antique Road Show, it is worthless. Working with your father helped you develop a much stronger relationship, comfort in being around him and appreciation for his Love.
Was your father fair/just and would others see this as being fair treatment? Did this “punishment” help resolve the issue?
Was restitution made or was reconciliation made and would you feel comfortable/ justified standing by your father in the future?
Suppose after smashing the vase, repenting and forgiveness, your older brother says he will work with your father putting the vase together, so you can keep up with your social life. Would this scenario allow you to stand comfortable and justified by your father?
Suppose Jesus the magician waved his hands over the smashed vase and restored it perfectly to the previous condition, so there is really very little for you to be forgiven of or for you to do. Would this scenario allow you to stand comfortable and justified by your father?
What are the benefits of being lovingly disciplined?
Suppose it is not you that breaks the vase but your neighbor breaks into your house because he does not like your family being so nice and smashes the Tiffany vase, but he is caught on a security camera. Your father goes to your neighbor with the box of pieces and offers to do the same thing with him as he offered to do with you, but the neighbor refuses. Your father explains: everything is caught on camera and he will be fined and go to jail, but the neighbor, although sorry about being caught, still refuses. The neighbor loses all he has and spends 10 years in jail. So was the neighbor fairly disciplined or fairly punished?
How does the neighbor’s punishment equal your discipline and how is it not equal?
Was the neighbor forgiven and if not why not?
There is war going on and you as an old man leave your watch post. The crime is punishable by 40 lashes or equivalent, but that will kill you. Your young innocent grandson offers to take your place and explains to the judge (general) that; 40 lashes on him will cause you tremendous pain, and anguish equivalent to him being lashed directly. The judge (general) refuses because that would not be just for him to punish an innocent for the guilty (everyone knows that). The innocent grandson then says: “I will go over to the enemy’s camp for my father’s sake and they will beat me and imprison me until the end of the war”. The judge (general) cannot stop the young man from doing such a thing and knows this will really hurt you, the grandfather, when you find out, so the judge will not have to punish you (justice will have been served). Would you empathize enough for your grandson to equally share in his suffering?
Was the general (judge) fair and just by allowing you to suffer this way without having you lashed?
Was the grandson punished instead of the you?
Do you empathize enough with what Christ did for you to say: “I have been crucified with Christ”?
