Saving Jesus

[OutwiththeOutCrowd]

The more I think about the story of the death of Jesus on the cross, the more I feel I want to go back in a time machine and beg him not to go through with it. From what I understand, and assuming for the moment that the story is true, Jesus could have found a way out, but felt it was the will of God and his destiny to allow events to play out without his resistance.

I just wonder, though, if Jesus (and God?) could, in principle, have been persuaded to change his mind on the matter if enough people had understood in advance the fatalism of his thinking and pleaded with him not to do it on their account?

Would there have been a way to convince him that he didn’t have to fulfil prophecies, nor save us from our sins?

You see, my personal feeling is that, if I am intrinsically unworthy of heaven, and ‘boosted’ into the possibility of experiencing it only through the sacrifice of Jesus, I would rather accept that death is the end and have Jesus escape crucifixion. If suffering of an innocent being is the price to be paid for heaven, then I would prefer to give up on such a heaven and take the rap for my own sins.

Am I alone in feeling this way? I really don't think I can be.

Had Jesus lived longer, he would probably have found time to write his memoirs, providing a record of his teachings in a form we could be confident he was happy with. We would not have to worry about the inerrancy, or otherwise, of the New Testament. If he had wanted to start a church, he could have been specific about his intentions for it.

Moreover, there would have been more time for his influence as a teacher to spread and for his life to be documented by the writers of the day in such a way that his very existence wouldn’t be in question. While we wouldn’t have an afterlife in heaven to look forward to, the writings of Jesus would illuminate our path in the life we do have. (I am assuming no afterlife, but if it had to be hell, at least it would be hell with a conscience unburdened by the thought of having been complicit in the suffering of Jesus.)

I know it’s not really possible to change the past, and many will think me bonkers and/or naive for thinking about changing the history of Christianity, but who would come with me in my time machine to try to save Jesus?

But why not use your chosen model of evil for good 'we're all on the nice continuum, not stepping on a snail might differ from running a soup kitchen for the homeless but it's the intention'.

You wouldn't agree with that model because some the things are more positive /negative than others.

prophets of progress

You don't think we have progressed?

Would it seem just if a judge sentenced a murderer and a shoplifter to the same life sentence?

read in a context

What context makes it appropriate to say you're lucky to be discriminated against? How about he says you deserve the same chance to achieve economic independence as everyone else regardless of your gender/ethnicity and so on. But he wouldn't have said that anyway seeing as he initially refused to heal the Canaanites daughter because of her race.

One thing I’ve realised is that if you start a debate on a philosophical subject, you might at times feel like a scout trying to rub two sticks together to get a fire going in the rain. But a debate on a religious topic – that’s more a case of light the blue touch paper and stand well back!

I am not sure what I expected when I started this thread. But I can see that the atheists think trying to change the Jesus story is as silly as trying to change the ending to the Three Little Pigs. Meanwhile the theists are heavily invested in the status quo.

It’s only an MN debate but I feel strangely saddened by some of the posts and sad that no one wants to go back in a time machine with me to try to save Jesus!

I love humanity. I love its imperfections. I don’t believe in evil. I believe only in love and an absence of love. I want more than anything for mankind to have a message of hope, as life can be heartbreakingly hard.

I feel strongly that human beings, whatever their deficiencies, do not deserve for that message of hope to be tied up in such a guilt-inducing contract. I don’t think the torture and death of an innocent being should ever have been made the price for eternal life – it sure takes the sheen off heaven!

There’s more that could be said but I am not sure I am up to it tonight.

Thank you to everyone who has posted.

OutwiththeOutCrowd have not read all the comments but only your opening post.

No way would I be in the time machine with you.

If you are interested read about the resurrection and the story of doubting Thomas. Jesus didn't want to go to the cross but he went. It's not the same as human suffering. It's maybe worse and maybe better. But it has a happy ending. And to me it is very presumptuous to want to change what God chose to do with himself.

OutwiththeOutCrowd I am sorry you feel disillusioned with the thread but maybe it is totally understandable that atheists don't take Jesus seriously and Christians would not want to change such a monumental thing. For the record I struggle with the cross too. But I also believe God knows what he is doing.

I must say it had never occurred to me to go back in time and prevent the crucifixion of Christ, even though I have thought about where I would like to go in time if I had the opportunity.

It feels too huge. The thought of Jesus Christ living to a ripe old age and dying in a bed he built himself, surrounded by his grandchildren, sends a huge earthquake across history and I don't know if it would be better or worse. I guess I would agree with believing theists (I'm a cultural Christian and atheist) that the idea that torturing an individual who has been convicted of blasphemy is wrong, is an idea that exists because of religious thought.

I'm sorry to hear that you're upset by the responses to your OP, Outwith, and that some of the posts made you feel sad. I hope mine weren't among them though I suspect they probably were.

I can see that you felt like you'd had a really good idea, and it's disappointing then that no-one agreed with you. For what it's worth I think this thread has prompted more intelligent debate than you normally see on religion-debate threads, and your OP was characteristically thoughtful. I couldn't agree with you - I hope I explained why in a way that made sense even if you don't like what I had to say. I rarely get involved in debates over religion on MN these days - they are too much like Groundhog Day - but your counter-factual proposition was a really good prompt for me to think about my beliefs, and for that I thank you.

Out, as I understand it, you would not have been able to save Jesus. He made that choice. If he was god, then he could have chosen not to die.

I'm not really a Christian, but I think that is how a lot of Christians see it.

You say that you would go back and save Jesus I'm interested in how you would do it and what you think would be different, both then and now if you had succeeded.

Speaking only for myself as a believer who was not brought up in faith and was an atheist, I experience an ongoing and loving relationship with God. I experience him reaching out to me and know he understands my suffering. His motivation for the cross was love, and that is something that all of us find hard to comprehend. It is not something that a lot of analytical argument will get to the bottom of. All these questions have been discussed and examined for two thousand years they are not new to the 21st century.

For Christians the cross leads to the resurrection. We cannot look only at the cross in Christian theology. Without including the resurrection, the ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit we are not talking about Christianity.

Perhaps that is the issue OP, you are standing at the foot of the cross and seeing the true horror of what we are capable of without the rebirth and new life that the cross opens to us.

We cannot prevent God sacrificing himself for us.

true horror of what we are capable of

I didn't crucify him!

Would you have similar thoughts about God if you could go back in time and watch the babies drowning in the Great flood? Or the babies being stabbed by the Israelites following gods orders?

Headinhands I get the impression you know plenty about what Christians believe but instead prefer to keep up this tone of intense outrage all time. If you don't believe it surely has no meaning for you. I know when I was atheist I was completely oblivious.

Why are you so obsessed with Christianity?

Obsessed with christianity

It's more obsessed with how Christians tally a loving God with the bible and the gulf therein. I have heard some shocking things said on here in my time debating from Christians seeking to justify stuff in the OT. It's fascinating as well seeing the gymnastics. I suppose it's usually Christianity that is discussed because it is the cultural heritage for most MNers and I was a Christian for 30 years

intense outrage

You wouldn't feel upset by babies being drowned? Especially when they are being drowned by a god you want me to think is loving?

Heylilbunny, as I recall HeadinHands used to be a Christian (of quite a conservative kind) but had a conversion experience and is now an atheist. She (or he) has said that her/his participation on these threads is an attempt to understand her/his experience.

Everything that niminy said and I like arguing according to my DH

"I know when I was atheist I was completely oblivious."

Good lord, were you? Weren't you interested in philosophy or ethics or how the country is run or want is taught in schools or what other people believe?

I was oblivious to the beliefs of Christians, well I had a very rudimentary grasp, but did not know about some essentials such as the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, Holy Spirit or the trinity. So I wouldn't say what I was aware of was Christianity but rather vague concepts. I wasn't baptised, never went to church and growing up I knew no practicing Christians at all. I don't think I was that unusual. It is clear from being on MN that many posters have a similar vague idea about Christian beliefs.

Headinhands, our experiences have obviously been completely different. It does seem that you have a lot of anger toward Christianity and I am sad that it is a painful subject for you.

Bertrand I did have friends who were practicing Hindus, Muslims and Jews but I never asked about their faith and in fact had no idea my good friend was Jewish. I think many people are very unaware and uninformed about faith from the strange comments I occasionally get from people. But I understand where they are coming from. I think less than 10% of the UK population are practicing, believing Christians so it's really not that hard to be extremely ignorant of Christianity, historical or otherwise.

Hey I honestly don't feel angry and had no bad experience at church to point to. I think my chippy replies belie my actual demeanour. I'm just in a hurry to get to my point and feel extra words are superfluous.

I see. I guess in this format it can come over as blunt and angry and can discourage engagement from other posters.

I try to take a lot of care wording my replies so they don't come over as aggressive or angry, and I try always to apologise if I have been hurtful. I feel that where we have only words and not our demeanour we can so easily hurt each other needlessly.

My mother, who is a dyed in the wool atheist who can't bear it that I'm a Christian, once said to me: "Don't forget, niminypiminy, that other people's beliefs are like their children - not as good as yours, obviously, but they love them all the same." I've tried to take that to heart ever since, though I'm sure I haven't always succeeded.

I agree Niminy, particularly in this corner of MN we are touching on posters deeply held values (on all sides) and therefore it helps to proceed carefully.

I always appreciate your thoughtful replies Niminy. Kindness is never wasted (or so I believe, others may disagree ).

I also can be horribly blunt and scathing in RL and on here and I am really trying to think about what I say and write.

Firstly, Jesus was a believer. On Earth, he was fully human and lived in relation to God, following and/or interpreting the Jewish belief system in which he had been raised. He had been told from the start that he was ‘special’ and had a great destiny. He was intelligent, perceptive and learned (a scholar by the time of first reading in the Temple). He would do what he believed God wanted. Begging him to do otherwise would have been a waste of breath.
Then, there is the question of ‘oneself’ and responsibility for ‘one’s own sins’. We just aren’t big enough or strong enough to take on what we deserve for the sin we occasion. Only God can do that. He showed that He can and will do it, through the death of Jesus Christ.
Jesus wasn’t starting a church. He was preparing for the end times, which he believed were upon us, in or immediately after his lifetime. That’s why there were no writings in his lifetime or just afterwards – the end was nigh!
His influence as a teacher persists today. Anyone who follows his teachings will be a decent human being. It doesn’t matter if people dispute his existence or not. He is a figure who can point the way to God, guide us on the way, help us when we fall. He who has ears will hear, and he who refuses to hear won’t.
Individuals are not ‘complicit in the suffering of Jesus’. God knew us before he sent his Son. We had the chance to change and didn’t. God might be disappointed but I don’t think He would be surprised.
Jesus didn’t need saving. He suffered, but he chose his suffering. He died, but his teaching lives on. He rose again and defeated death; why deny him that opportunity?
There see, you have my point of view.

"We just aren’t big enough or strong enough to take on what we deserve for the sin we occasion."

Now this is where I have a problem. What sin have I occasioned that I am not strong enough to take on "what I deserve" for?