Jesus held on the cross with nails in his hands

@kkloo i don’t go along with it either really BUT you claim to be struggling with the theory of it and the theory is not hard to understand. Born with ‘original sin’ which is an acknowledgment that everyone will want to do ‘bad’ things at some point or give in to temptation. If you do, that’s okay to an extent as in an everyday sense the purpose of Jesus suffering and death was to take on our sins and his punishment/death covers it. However, surely there are times when God should be wrathful. You can’t just run around murdering people and go ‘it’s okay, Jesus died for my sins’ so I’m okay in that respect (that’s left for someone who has bad thoughts about their neighbour constantly shoving dog poo in their bin, feeling angry about it and mentally calling them a bitch). That’s where repentance and forgiveness must come in, the murderer is not just forgiven, they must actively and truthfully repent within themselves and ask for forgiveness, then will be forgiven. The Jesus on the cross suffering for our sins is also a ‘visual’ God thought necessary as otherwise it is an abstract concept that’s harder for people.

Lots of potential threads from this:

Who ultimately was responsible for Jesus's death?
What was the point of his death and resurrection - if it was to die for our sins, what does that actually mean?
If someone says they are a Christian and they don't follow the teachings of Christ, are they really a Christian? Looking at a LOT of politicians
If Jesus had been around today, what would have happened to him?

Right I did think in the past that it had something to do with saving us from our sins, so why then are babies still born with original sin (unless they're retracted that) and why are little kids supposed to confess their sins to a priest and why do they go on and on about sins repeatedly?

In what way were we 'saved' from our sins then?

The whole world is a disaster, it would make sense if we now lived in a beautiful peaceful world now and they could say that Jesus saved us from that but it's full of violence and war and torture, and even tiny kids are told that they're sinners so I'm not sure what Jesus was supposed to have saved people from?

It went off the rails for me as a kid. I couldn't understand why we were told God was so loving and all forgiving, yet in the stories they told us he sounded mean and vengeful.

Jesus allegedly died to save us from our sins including ones we had not committed yet, or the original sin of Adam.

This is where Christianity goes off the rails for me , there is a sin Jesus died for, but at end of day god could have forgiven at any time, but nah he killed his son to do it.

I don't really get this though.
What sacrifices is he supposed to have made?
That he suffered pain and lost his life on the cross?

He was resurrected then afterwards for a short time, before going to heaven with God the father who is also Jesus.

Also how did Jesus's sacrifice actually help us?
What would have happened if he didn't die on the cross?

So many plotholes 😅

I don't understand what key values as human beings it's actually supposed to teach?? or that it has been effective in teaching??

Wasn’t it just Christians that were fed to the lions or was it murderers and the likes too. ?
And just women that were stoned…that still happens in some countries very sadly.

Well if they learn about the Romans that's how the crucified 'wrong doers' well that and feeding them to the lions in the circus, and stoning them. The Romans were pretty brutal, then there was the wrack and various other toucher instruments of the middle ages, and then burning people alive or drowning them for being witches. I means humans can be brutal.

It’s not had any effect on my and I was taught this, my 8 and 5 year old have not ‘batted an eyelid’ at being taught this. Unless it’s actually causing them distress you hear and see I wouldn’t address it.

KS1 curriculum
Students investigate Christianity and touch on one other religion.

Teachers are just following the stages in the curriculum.

Which was why it was reported as blasphemous (as original post)
I was responding to MP changing the narrative and ‘getting the memo’.

I'm with you OP. The details of Easter are horrifying and even though I was brought up Catholic now when I take my kid into a church it really hits me how messed up it all is when you see art everywhere that quite literally depict an awful method of torture and everyone's normalised it to the extent that they don't even really notice it. In a non religiously affiliated school I just think there's no need.

Regardless of weather Brian was based on a 'real' religious person. The whole film mocked religion.

I was brought up on the Ladybird books and cassettes (ooh, the nostalgia), but some of them were actually quite horrible, they didn't water them down so much in those days. My mum couldn't bear to hear the story of the Happy Prince, which we had on cassette. "Two boys were huddled under a bridge. A policeman saw them, and told them to go home. He did not know that they had no home to go to. They just walked out, hand in hand, into the rain..." Also the dwarfs mourning Snow White was described very poignantly, accompanied by Beethoven's 6th. "They took it turns to sit always by the coffin, day and night."

I was somewhat traumatised (aged 8) by the comic opera Candide, which my parents were obsessed with, and played all the time in the car. We laugh about it now, but it had a graphic description of the aftermath of war, narrated in a silly comic voice, with the reference "having satisfied the needs of several war heroes", which fortunately went straight over my head, and these words, just as the music rose to a dramatic climax: "Others, so badly burned they begged for their lives to be brought to an end".

Although Brian was the 13th disciple who never made it into the Bible because he was always 5minutes late for everything!

Monty Python did get the memo and changed the narrative by making up Brian
It still made headlines as being blasphemous though.

On the subject of laughing at religion, Don't think Monty Python got the memo!

People do not want to separate them selfs from institution. Well look at the Catholic church, the institution covers up for paedophile priests, look at the nuns and dead children in Ireland, the against contraception in Africa which hinders HIV prevention if you can't separate yourself you are culpable.

Of course we separate the religious believers from from that.

And no not all religious beliefs are valid we have cults and the Westboro Baptist Church the best thing you can do about westboro is mock them.

My brother was upset by the story of Abraham and Isaac. But for a different reason from usual: he wailed "what about the poor RAM?". (The ram that God told Abraham to kill, instead of Isaac.)

In Blackadder's Christmas Carol, Baldrick highlights children loving the gross stuff. After they used a dog for the Baby Jesus in the Nativity, he says "they want us to come back at Easter. They want to see us nail up the dog!"

I don't belive my children never hearing about the Christian easter story will be embarrassingly ignorant ! Religion isn't important to non religious people . I think people forget that! What makes something important to u doesn't mean its important to others. I think that's arrogant in a way.

My comment wasn’t related to posters words used here, as I don’t recall them all, but as a concept.
A person of religion will not separate their religion from their life or themselves as a human being. They are intrinsically entwined.
As I said there are ways of discussing and questioning peoples beliefs without using any form of inflammatory language that could cause harm. It’s a simple courtesy.

There's absolutely no such right, I agree. Nor should there be.
This doesn't mean having a "gentle laugh at" as you call it (others may say taking the piss out of) something people feel strongly about is either necessary or ok.
You're choosing to be offended is just bollocks in this instance, really. Posters not ok with this are hardly shutting down discussion.

Why mock someone else’s knowledge or opinions? We all have different views and perspectives. Some things interest me, others don’t.

But it’s not so extreme as a ‘mockery of someone’s life’ is it. And where are the harmful and insulting words on this thread?

What’s been said that has caused such outrage on this thread amongst some is that we can have a gentle laugh at the stories that are told in Christianity.

That’s not offensive. That’s the offended person choosing to be offended by it. And offence should not be used to shut down a discussion. The problem is that on here and on social media in general people believe they have a right not to be offended but there is no such right.

You’ll love me - I’m a year 6 teacher and told them today that Jesus wasn’t nailed to the cross though his hands - Victorian experiments on corpses showed that the nails must have gone through the wrists as the hands would have just torn through.

?? I'm truly baffled there are people so dumb. So you saw "history programmes, textbooks etc" and in your mind that can only mean Bible and religious texts? Like... you're not aware history exists as a separate discipline, and people/children might learn about historical practices and punishments just in general?

Of course Everyones opinion is valid but some may not see the hurt they cause in others so
There are ways of questioning those beliefs without using potential harmful or insulting words whether directed at the person or religion itself is irrelevant.
It’s simple mockery of that persons life,