Why did God need to sacrifice Jesus to forgive sin?

Are we talking about different aspects of freedom perhaps?

I wish

 

I will say that it is not contentment that encouraged me to change my mind but still every bit of it is mine to change. There is no conditioned mind apart from your mind to contend with. Yes you can say in the end reality wins, in eternity all things are as they should be but conditions in time are tragic so saving time is of the essence.

The perception of sacrifice represents a conflict in what you desire and is a measure not of enthusiasm but of resistance. To sacrifice is to give up what you prefer to keep in hopes of gaining something of more value. We are hard wired to find our value so renunciation is fundamentally violent toward the self and is in fact never accomplished. Self denial is the improper use of denial, denial being a force for negating what you don't want.
This self denial need not be but is commonly perceived to be the way.

However my joining is easy and my burden light. I desire mercy instead of this sacrificial struggle. It is not renunciation that frees us but the truth that sets us free.

Consider although the world appears substantially rewarding it is not essentially fulfilling. The world is not valuable for what it has to offer. The struggle you describe represents the conviction that it is and so temptation is the desire to have this illusion of value be real.

 

Yeah, I think you are talking more in physical terms and me in more spiritual.

 

Conditions in time are tragic, because they aren't being seen for what they are. They appear through the lense of the past and are intermixed with fear.

By renunciation I meant mental concepts that aren't true. I found that most of the thoughts I had about myself and those that controlled my actions weren't true.

True, but it was renunciation of the way things were that led me to seek the truth.

Wanting a reward is a denial of what is. What is is the only fullfillment. Life doesn't equal future reward. Life = life = sacred.

 

It is your reason that has failed. Condemnation is not a result of free will but of the misuse of free will. Free will is not called "free" because it is without cost but because you can use it "freely". All choices that a person makes with their free will come with consequences some good and some bad thus making some choices more "costly" than others.

 

Just a thought on freedom.
Freedom always is limited. All freedom limited by the freedom of others.

The old example, your freedom to swing your fist is limited by the nose of the other person.

 

Well, anyway, we're being asexual here. The question thus pertains to how private one's religion can be over another's. Now did I have right to write this to you, making the judgments that I do?

 

Actually it your reading comprehension is in question seeing as definitions 3 thru 5 don't apply to what we are talking about but then that is to be expected in any discussion with you.

 

...

 

Vulkans loved me. Klingons raped me :/

 

After 1010 postings, it might be a bit late to address the original topic, but it seems to me that the sacrifice/atonement metaphor has appeal to folks who need relief from obsessive/compulsive pre-occupation with sin and guilt. Saints Paul and Augustine and Martin Luther are good examples. Also important is acknowledgement of our gratitude for divine gifts. In Aztec-Toltec theology, which carries sacrifice to an extreme, the point was payback for what the gods have given us: life-restoring blood from Quetzalcoatl, flesh from Xipe Totec. Both examples were connected with resurrection symbolism. Quetzalcoatl revived the extinct human race by sprinkling his blood on the bones of the dead humans. Xipe's skin provided humanity with sustinence--commemorated by a grizzly ceremony in which the priests would don the skins of sacrificial victims and wear them until they burst, symbolizng rebirth. While human sacrifice is disturbing, a sense of gratitude for our existence gratifies deep unconscious emotional needs. The Christian concept of God sacrificing His Son accomplishes the same purpose without the need for further human or animal sacrifice--no more bloodshed! That seems to me to be a definite step forward. I think atheists sometimes get too analytical about these metaphors that make sense to the unconscious.

 

Christians generally claim this to be literal, not metaphorical.

 

Right. At least the fundies do. They may be right.The Progressive Christians I hang with are into metaphors. I find the fact that Aztecs and Toltecs were into sacrifice and resurrection imagery to be intriguing--especially since there's no reason to think they had any contact with Christians before Cortez. Jung's explanation of archetypes and "collective unconscious" seems to be the most plausible explanation. Of course, God may have implanted these ideas in humans to get them ready for Jesus.