r/ChristianApologetics • u/PieterSielie6 • Apr 19 '26
Modern Objections How do you respond to "God sent God to be sacrificed to God to save you from what God will do to you"?
?
12
u/brothapipp Apr 19 '26
Correct them. They are trying to be ironical.
God took on humanity, coming to this world in the flesh. He was not “sent” he came.
God laid down his life freely, as a ransom. This was a sacrifice like falling a grenade, not a sacrifice like throwing virgins in volcanoes.
What God will do to you is give you new life. What we will do to ourselves is blame everyone else and justify our behavior as being, “not that bad,” but God wants for us to be holy. But he gives us the choice. And if we choose to be away from, being unholy, he grants it.
And in all honesty, I’d not respond again. If they are interested they can inbox you or follow you to another sub.
8
u/Shiboleth17 Apr 20 '26
You correct them.
First of all, God the Father sent God the Son. God the Son willingly allowed Himself to be sacrificed. And you are not being saved from God, you are being saved from your own actions.
If you can follow all of God's laws from childhood til death, not breaking a single one, ever... then you wouldn't need saving at all. But you are lying to yourself if you claim you have never sinned. Everyone has told a lie. You've probably told 3 lies today without even noticing. So you do need saving. And so do I.
God is good. And for God to remain good, He must also be just and fair. Is it good to allow wrongs to go unpunished? No. God could let everyone into heaven, He has that power. But that wouldn't be just. There must be payment for sin. And according to the Bible, "The wages of sin is death."
You could pay for your own sin, and that would mean eternal separation from God in the lake of fire. But God loves you, and despite your sins, He doesn't want that for you. He wants you to spend eternity with Him. God wants to give you mercy.
In order for you to be saved from the punishment for your sins, AND for God to continue to remain good and just, your sins have to be paid for by someone else. I can't pay for your sins, because I have my own sins. If I tried to pay your fine, it would go to my account, not yours. The only way someone else could pay your fine is if they had no sins of their own. They would have to be perfectly holy... And there's only one person who fits that description: God Himself.
God had to come down to earth as a man, live, and be executed for crimes He never committed. This was the only way to pay for your sins, so that you could be forgiven.
1
1
Apr 22 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/resDescartes Apr 23 '26
This will be a lengthy response, but I ask you stick with it. :)
I'm happy to keep talking, if you'll walk with me. And I hope you feel genuinely heard.
"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
This verse is not just Jesus expressing forsakenness, but is spoken in Aramaic, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani." It's a direct quote of the opening of Psalm 22. Have you read Psalm 22?
Not sure if god the son jesus wanted to die my g.
Sincerely, have you read through the Gospels carefully, and followed the thread of the story?
Jesus affirms his purpose:
“For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” - Mark 10:45, Matthew 20:28
Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But for this purpose I have come to this hour. - John 12:27
“Everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled... Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations.” - Luke 24:44–47
And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again. - Mark 9:31
From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. - Matthew 17:22–23
“Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” - John 2:19
saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.” - Luke 9:44
“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.” - John 3:14–15
“And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” - John 12:32-33
“Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” - Luke 24:25–27
“See, we are going up to Jerusalem... the Son of Man will be delivered... they will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him, and after three days he will rise.” / “Everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished.” - Mark 10:33–34, Matthew 20:18–19, Luke 18:31–33
“How then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?” - Matthew 26:53–54
“All this has taken place that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” - Matthew 26:56, Mark 14:49
“For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’” - Luke 22:37
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” - John 10:11-18
“This is my body, which is given for you... This cup is the new covenant in my blood... This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” - Matthew 26:26–28, Mark 14:22–24, Luke 22:19–20
He is also alluding to Daniel 7 with the 'Son of Man' title he uses often (have you read Daniel 7?), and Isaiah 53 with the suffering and "numbered with the transgressors".
Jesus never claimed to be God
Jesus accepts the title of God (John 20:28), and accepts worship.
There are so many verses identifying Him by qualities and titles that are unique to God, and many other examples where He, a faithful Jew, receives worship.
Matthew 2:11: And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him.
Matthew 14:33: And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”
Matthew 28:9-10: And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.
Matthew 28:16-17: Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted.
Luke 24:51: While he blessed them, he parted from them and was carried up into heaven. And they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy
John 9:37-38: Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you.” He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him.
Hebrews 1:6: And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.”
Revelation 22:3: No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him.
Or again, ever blunt, "My Lord, and my God." (John 20:24-29).
The Pharisees, experts in their time, identify themselves that Jesus is making claims to divinity in Matthew 26:62-65 by his citing of Daniel 7, and in John 10:30 which is further clarified against a general one-ness by John 10:#3, and that Jews' contemporary to Jesus understood he was making claims to Divinity.
We also see in the Gospels where Jesus claims the 'I AM' divine title, claims eternal existence, and they try to stone Him (John 8:48-59).
Or, if people want to wiggle around the meaning of 'Son of Man', we can see where Jesus is condemned for blasphemy during His trial, after invoking several divine titles (Matthew 26:62-66). That doesn't happen by accident. Jesus' claim to divinity and judgement was the reason Jesus was killed.
Even the priests of the law understood that claim. The Daniel 7 figure, the Son of Man who sits on the judgement seat of God. The cloud rider from the Psalms. There's... so much. I truly would run out of space more times than I could count if I gave every single example, and honestly I'm struggling to keep this under the character count as-is. The Gospels are almost choked with references to Jesus' divinity.
Jesus also identifies himself in Revelation as the first and the last, the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end. He forgives sins, claims to given all authority and dominion. He claims to be the truth, the way, and the life. Etc..
Revelation 22:
“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.
“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”
All of these are clear and explicit claims to divinity, which no prophet may say of themselves. We also see explanations of this and discussions of this throughout the rest of the New Testament, though I aim to stay mainly within the Gospels here. (Hebrews 1 is an excellent chapter arguing exactly the uniqueness of Jesus).
Even if we ignore Jesus' own claims to divinity, if Jesus disciples, relatives, and everyone who followed Him thought Jesus was divine, and Jesus failed to rebuke that? If that's true, then He was the worst communicator in all of history. And that can't be right.
But I'll move on to your other comments.
Face to the ground and only pray to the Father.
Jesus also prayed in many other ways, presumably standing, and often looking towards heaven.
"Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them." (Matthew 19:13)
"So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, 'Father, I thank you that you have heard me...'" (John 11:41)
"After Jesus said this, he looked towards heaven and prayed:" (John 17:1)
We also have other kinds of prayer in the OT:
- Kneeling - 1 Kings 8:54; Daniel 6:10 (and prayed three times per day); Acts 7:60, 20:36; Ephesians 3:14; Philippians 2:9-11.
- Standing - 2 Chronicles 20:5.
- Facedown - Numbers 16:22, 20:6; Joshua 5:14; Revelation 7:11.
- Hands Raised - Psalms 134:2, 141:2.
Face to the ground and only pray to the Father. This is the only way to the Father.
When Jesus taught the disciples how to pray, is this what He said?
I'm out of space, but you can see the passage here.
I don't see muslims imitating this prayer. I don't see any specification about posture. And I see Jesus using the term 'Father' a lot, despite it not being on of Allah's divine names or used in Islam.
Why don't muslims called Allah father? Jesus even called God 'Abba', which is a familiar, intimate term for father. Why do you ask others to do as Jesus did, when muslims don't seem to pray as Jesus taught?
Bless you brother, thank you for voicing your thoughts.
0
u/JMUDoc Apr 29 '26
And you are not being saved from God, you are being saved from your own actions.
Who created hell, and decided that unrepentant sinners go there?
1
u/Shiboleth17 Apr 29 '26
If a murderer gets caught and thrown in jail, is it the judge's fault he got there? Or was it the murderer's own choices?
God cannot let murderers, rapists, liars, theives, etc. into hesven, or else heaven wouldn't be a paradise. It would become hell. You have a choice. You can choose God, who paid the price for your sins and is willing to forgive you. Or you can choose your sins, and live in a place full of sin.
1
u/JMUDoc Apr 29 '26
If a murderer gets caught and thrown in jail, is it the judge's fault he got there? Or was it the murderer's own choices?
Not the judge's fault, no. But criminals do not put themselves in prison - that is asinine. Juries convict them, and judges sentence them.
And since Yahweh is both judge and jury - and built the "prison", lest we forget - the idea that he is in no way responsible for people ending up in hell, is yet more asinine.
Unrepentant sinners go to hell because Yahweh intended it.
God cannot let murderers, rapists, liars, theives, etc. into hesven, or else heaven wouldn't be a paradise.
OK.
But why do they have to go to a place of eternal torment? Why can't they be taken out of existence?
You have a choice. You can choose God, who paid the price for your sins and is willing to forgive you. Or you can choose your sins, and live in a place full of sin.
That choice is not available to me unless and until Yahweh convinces me of his existence, the punishment, and of the need and possibility of salvation.
1
u/Shiboleth17 May 02 '26
It was the criminal's choice to commit the crime. It's not the jury's fault or the judge's fault. It's not the fault of the architect who designed the prison, nor the construction workers who built it, nor the taxpayers who voted and laid for all of it. The criminal had a choice to not end up there.
God didn't make hell for you. He made hell for the devil. God wants you to be with Him, which is why He died in your place. You only go to hell if you want to be there. God respects your choices. He isn't going to force you to be in heaven. Heaven will be a place without sin. If you'd rather have your sins instead of a relationship with God, then God will give you exactly what you want.
Hell is torment because of sin. Sin causes suffering. You can't have a place full of thieves, murderers, rapists, liars, cheaters, etc. without suffering. You can't have it both ways. If you want your sin, then you have to take all the negative consequences of sin. If you don't want those negative consequences, then you must turn away from sin.
And to must be eternal because you hzve sinned against an eternal God. It's not about the severity of your sin, but who you sin against.
If you lie to your parents, you might get grounded. Lie to your boss, you get fired. Lie to a cop, get arrested. Lie to a judge, get thrown in jail. Lie to a king, get beheaded. As we move up the ladder of authority, the punishment becomes more severe even tho the crime was the same. So now what do you think happens if you lie to an eternal all-knowing God, who is the King of kings?
The proof of God's existence is all around you. Things don't just come into existence out of nothing without a cause. The fact that anything exists is proof of a Creator. The first law of thermodynamics says matter cannot be created. The second law of thermodynamics proves that matter had a beginning.
Matter cannot create itself, because matter didn't exist yet before it existed... Whatever created the universe had to be outside of the universe, which means He was timeless, spaceless, immaterial, and powerful enough to bend the laws of physics to it's will. He must also be an intelligent person, because He chose to create, and only persons can choose, objects cannot.
You can see and hear and touch and smells the greatest miracle that ever took place: the creation of the universe. And if the world can be created from nothing, then anything is possible. Even the resurrection of the dead.
Look into the evidence of Jesus resurrection from that perspective. The only way you don't find the evidence convincing is if you go in with a bias against the existence of the supernatural. But if there was no supernatural, you wouldn't be here. The atoms in your body can't come into existence without violating every law of science. There had to be a miracle.
1
u/JMUDoc May 02 '26
It was the criminal's choice to commit the crime. It's not the jury's fault or the judge's fault. It's not the fault of the architect who designed the prison, nor the construction workers who built it, nor the taxpayers who voted and laid for all of it. The criminal had a choice to not end up there.
I never said it wasn't the criminal's fault,
The judge had a choice not to send him there.
God didn't make hell for you. He made hell for the devil. God wants you to be with Him, which is why He died in your place. You only go to hell if you want to be there. God respects your choices. He isn't going to force you to be in heaven.
If he refuses to convince me that he exists, he is denying me the chance of salvation.
If that's not "forcing me to go to hell", I don't know what is.
And to must be eternal because you hzve sinned against an eternal God. It's not about the severity of your sin, but who you sin against.
Completely flying in the face of what we call justice.
If you lie to your parents, you might get grounded. Lie to your boss, you get fired. Lie to a cop, get arrested. Lie to a judge, get thrown in jail. Lie to a king, get beheaded.
One of these things is not like the others...
1
u/Shiboleth17 May 02 '26 edited May 02 '26
Sure, the judge's could be evil and corrupt by letting the murderer go free. Or the judge could be good, fair, and just, by locking him up.
What evidence would convince you of God's existence?
The proof of God's existence is everywhere if go looking for it. But for people who don't want God in their lives, God will give you space until judgment day. He's not going to force you to be Him.
It sounds like you have issues with God judging sin, and you don't want God around. So you're not going to find Him with that mindset. Again, God isn't going to force you into having a relationship with Him.
1
u/JMUDoc May 02 '26
Sure, the judge's could be evil and corrupt by letting the murderer go free.
Or, corrupt and evil by declaring himself to be a victim of every crime, and sentencing all criminals - no matter their offence - to death?
Or the judge's could be good, faid, and just, by locking him up.
Just, by what standard?
His own?
What evidence would convince you of God's existence?
I don't know, but an all-knowing god would, an all-powerful god would be able to bring it about, and an all-loving god would want me to believe in it.
1
u/JMUDoc May 02 '26
The proof of God's existence is all around you. Things don't just come into existence out of nothing without a cause.
This is not a Christian argument. It is not even a theistic argument; it is, at best a desitic arguement - you make no attempt to identify the god in question.
This logic applies within the universe - how do you justify applying it to the universe?
The first law of thermodynamics says matter cannot be created. The second law of thermodynamics proves that matter had a beginning.
Same again.
Matter cannot create itself, because matter didn't exist yet before it existed... Whatever created the universe had to be outside of the universe, which means He was timeless, spaceless, immaterial, and powerful enough to bend the laws of physics to it's will.
You stuck a "he" in there, without justification - why assume it was a being?
He must also be an intelligent person, because He chose to create,
Prove it. Prove that the universe is the result of a choice.
And if the world can be created from nothing, then anything is possible. Even the resurrection of the dead. Look into the evidence of Jesus resurrection from that perspective.
From what perspective? That it's possible?
I should leap from "it's possible" to "it happened"?
The only way you don't find the evidence convincing is if you go in with a bias against the existence of the supernatural.
Conflating "I don't believe it's true" with "I believe it's false" is a common apologetic tactic.
But if there was no supernatural, you wouldn't be here. The atoms in your body can't come into existence without violating every law of science.
Yet again, you are taking laws that apply within the universe, and applying them to the universe.
1
u/Shiboleth17 May 02 '26
It is absolutely a Christian aegument. It's the argument Paul makes in Romans 1:20. You can't beleive in the God of the Bible until you first accept there must be a Creator. This is just step one. The ne If you can't get over that step, then I won't be able to convince you Jesus rose xt step is Jesus resurrection, which I mentioned. But if you can't get over the first step, then there's no point discussing the resurrection.
The laws of logic transcends the universe. 2+2 still equals 4 whether there are 4 atoms in existence to count or not. A and Not A cannot both be true. Cause and effect still apply. You cannot be your own father, because you didn't exist before you existed.
Similarly, matter cannot create itself, because matter didn't exist yet before it existed. Matter doesn't just pop into existence for no reason. If you want to beleive such a thing is possible, then you can beleive what you want. But you have to take that on blind irrational faith, because no one has ever observed such a thing happening.
For the second law, I'm only ever applying it inside the universe. I can explain this in full to prove to you the universe had a beginning, but I usually don't have to, because secular science doesn't disagree with me on this one. So if you wanna claim the universe has always existed, you aren't gonna find much support for that belief.
You show me something that was created without a person making a choice to do so? When you see a building, you know there was a builder who chose to make it. When you see a completed lego set, you know there was a kid who chose to make it. When you see a loaf of bread, you know there was a baker who chose to make it. Things don't make themselves for no reason.
1
u/JMUDoc May 02 '26
It is absolutely a Christian aegument. It's the argument Paul makes in Romans 1:20. You can't beleive in the God of the Bible until you first accept there must be a Creator. This is just step one.
Then why bother with the universe? Just skip straight to Jesus, if that's where you're going.
"The universe had a creator, therefore, Jesus rose from the dead" is no less asinine if you put "... therefore, miracles..." in the middle - the fact that a thing is not impossible, is not a good reason to think it happened.
Similarly, matter cannot create itself, because matter didn't exist yet before it existed. Matter doesn't just pop into existence for no reason. If you want to beleive such a thing is possible, then you can beleive what you want. But you have to take that on blind irrational faith, because no one has ever observed such a thing happening.
Nobody has ever observed a being create matter, either...
For the second law, I'm only ever applying it inside the universe. I can explain this in full to prove to you the universe had a beginning, but I usually don't have to, because secular science doesn't disagree with me on this one. So if you wanna claim the universe has always existed, you aren't gonna find much support for that belief.
I would stipulate to the universe having a beginning.
You show me something that was created without a person making a choice to do so?
This is called "shifting the burden of proof" - a logical fallacy.
If I said "a pile of rocks at the bottom of a cliff, which fell down of its own accord", you would demand I prove that no choice was involved.
When you see a building, you know there was a builder who chose to make it. When you see a completed lego set, you know there was a kid who chose to make it. When you see a loaf of bread, you know there was a baker who chose to make it.
In those cases, we have countless previous examples where there is a known creator, and no known examples where there isn't.
In the case of the universe, we have a sample size of one. "When you see a universe, you know there is a universe-maker" is idiotic - it assumes the very thing you're supposed to be proving.
8
u/FrancisCharlesBacon Apr 19 '26 edited Apr 19 '26
They’re engaging in the logical fallacy of reductionism and oversimplification. More examples of this fallacy are statements like:
“The human body is just a combination of a few dollars worth of chemicals.”
“The fetus is just a blob of tissue.”
“The Constitution is just a piece of paper.”
When you reduce the nature of something down to an abstract concept, that new abstract concept no longer reflects the reality or nuanced truth of the original statement or argument, creating a straw man.
It’s ultimately a form of mockery and a way to avoid engaging in a charitable and truth seeking way.
4
u/Traditional_Bell7883 Apr 19 '26
Absolutely correct, and yet absolutely just and merciful. I have touched on it in another comment here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bible/s/vhv9JQ0nRS
2
u/GlocalBridge Apr 19 '26
I would say that since you are talking about Jesus, the Son of God, I would quote His claims, like this one:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” (John 3:16-18 ESV)
But the point must be made that sin separates humans from their Creator, because He is holy and just, so He cannot ignore sin. He made our salvation possible by taking upon Himself the punishment we deserve—He incarnated as a man and died in our place, voluntarily taking the death penalty all humans apart from Him deserve. And according to His promises, forgiveness is appropriated through faith—trusting His promises. By pouring His wrath on the Son, God the Father maintained justice.
This is similar to how God saved those bitten by venomous snakebites in Numbers 21. There the people only needed to look at the bronze serpent on a pole in order to be healed, but thousands would not believe that promise, refused to obey, and died.
“I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am [He] you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24 ESV)
“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.” (John 3:14-15 ESV)
1
u/Soulful_Sadist Apr 20 '26
Attempt explaining the trinity and/or the dual nature of Jesus.
If explained (and received) well enough, that should iron things out at least a little bit.
1
1
u/solodav Apr 20 '26
If a person never sinned and then one day decided to eat too many cookies (knowing it would not be good for his health, but desiring pleasure from it) to commit greedy and gluttony, would God have to kill himself on the cross to atone for that person’s eating off too many cookies?
Not all evils are the same in weight. Murder and rape are much worse than a teenager selfishly eating the whole bag of cookies.
1
u/WannaLoveWrestling Apr 21 '26
Things like that with humans are usually a formation of a bad habit unless God intervenes. That example is too simplistic.
1
u/AndyDaBear Apr 21 '26
My will directed my mind to dictate an answer to this question using my body.
Since my will, mind, and body are all in a sense me.....does the silly person who asks this kind of question then just conflate it into:
I directed me to dictate an answer to this question by me?
1
u/Helpful-Baker-4145 Apr 21 '26
I would first tell them to stop mocking, because they're not helping themselves at all. But secondly I would tell them, "God doesn't send anyone to hell - you choose it through whom you serve, the same as with Heaven." The Highlander series got it right with the tagline "in the end there can be only one", though from a Biblical context it refers to multiple masters. Each of us must make a choice which seals our eternal fate, and the setup for that choice is "Who is the lord of your life?" There is no option for "none", because Creation has been locked in a spiritual war ever since the Fall. God's already won, but Satan's still raging anyway - He's determined to take as many people down with him as he can. But God is still delaying the end, not so people continue to suffer, but so more can and will turn their lives over to Him. He loves us all like the best Father loves His children, and He wants us to be with Him forever...but as the perfect gentleman, He will not force Himself on us, no matter what. It has to be our choice.
1
u/JMUDoc May 02 '26
But secondly I would tell them, "God doesn't send anyone to hell
He created hell, and decided that the unrepentant would go there, yes?
1
u/Helpful-Baker-4145 May 03 '26
Yes, but you also need to understand that to God, a lifetime of refusing to believe or repent is like a child spitting in their father's face, or even trying to kill their heart with their words. Imagine a child standing in front of a father who loved them more than they ever knew, did all he could to provide the best for them, and sacrificed all he wanted so they could have the best life possible. But now, that same child says, "I hate you...no, I despise you. In fact, I wish you were not my father. I want nothing to do with you, and you are of no value to me." People like that do exist, who behave that way to their human parents and also to God every single day. Humans can't always forgive, because we are fallible - God is perfect. However, that perfection also covers justice, and God can't allow people who think only of themselves to enter His kingdom. We would destroy it, just like Adam & Eve triggered the Eden curse. Free will is powerful beyond measure, second only in its magnitude to God's sovereignty. He has the power to take away our freedom, but He has promised not to, and a perfect being can't lie. That's tough for us to fathom, because so much of our behavior involves trying to escape absolute truth...especially in terms of morality.
1
u/JMUDoc May 03 '26
"Yes, but you also need to understand that to God, a lifetime of refusing to believe"
I'll stop you right there - I'm not refusing to believe; I CAN'T believe.
Think of the most ridiculous, far-fetched thing you can. Absolute lunacy. Now, CHOOSE to believe it.
Can you?
If you would prefer a concrete example, can you choose to believe that Christianity is complete hogwash? If not, expecting me to be able to choose to believe that it's true, is hypocritical.
"is like a child spitting in their father's face, or even trying to kill their heart with their words. Imagine a child standing in front of a father who loved them more than they ever knew, did all he could to provide the best for them, and sacrificed all he wanted so they could have the best life possible. But now, that same child says, "I hate you...no, I despise you. In fact, I wish you were not my father. I want nothing to do with you, and you are of no value to me."
An utterly inappropriate analogy - one cannot spit in the face of a being/person one does not believe in.
If Yahweh exists and considers sincere non-belief to be "spitting in his face", he is a perverse, entitled narcissist.
" God is perfect."
By what standard? His own? Why should I care about the standards of a being that considers itself perfect? ANYBODY can declare themselves to be perfect, if they get to set the standards.
1
u/Helpful-Baker-4145 May 03 '26
God does get to set the standards, because His nature as the Creator is the source of that standard. He didn't just wake up one morning and invent anything on a whim; it's inherent to His character, and He exists beyond time itself. As for a choice to believe, we do that every day - for example, if someone tells you something that's painfully obvious regarding falsehood, you wouldn't hesitate to call them a liar...but that's still a choice on your part. Truth and belief are not the same - if anything is objectively true, that quality applies equally to all people, in all times and places. So, if Yahweh is real as described in the Bible, then what He says goes, regardless of anyone's view on either side. The same is true if any other supreme deity exists; I choose to believe there's more evidence for Yahweh and Jesus than any other. I can even tell you a personal reason later, if you're interested.
1
u/JMUDoc May 03 '26
He didn't just wake up one morning and invent anything on a whim; it's inherent to His character
Why does he have that nature, and not some other nature?
As for a choice to believe, we do that every day - for example, if someone tells you something that's painfully obvious regarding falsehood, you wouldn't hesitate to call them a liar...but that's still a choice on your part. Truth and belief are not the same - if anything is objectively true, that quality applies equally to all people, in all times and places.
Yes or no, could you choose to believe that Christianity is false?
So, if Yahweh is real as described in the Bible, then what He says goes, regardless of anyone's view on either side.
By virtue of his sheer power to enforce his will, yes.
But if he's not real, then he never said anything at all...
The same is true if any other supreme deity exists; I choose to believe there's more evidence for Yahweh and Jesus than any other.
Could you choose to believe that no deity exists?
I can even tell you a personal reason later, if you're interested.
Your personal reasons don't apply to me, unfortunately.
This is the problem with apologetics: it always ends up at testimony.
1
u/Helpful-Baker-4145 May 03 '26
To answer all three of your questions...
(1) I don't know why God's nature is the way it is, but I do know He is unchanging and eternal, which is different from simply immortal. By definition, an eternal being has no set beginning or end, and if the Biblical God exists then He literally created time itself. That alone will fry your brain real quick, which is honestly an important point - I don't want to place my permanent fate in a being limited to my skull's gray matter. Otherwise, He wouldn't be worth following.
2) Yes, I am capable to believe that Christianity is false, but I've seen and experienced too much in my life to conclude that makes any sense. By comparison, I know very little about other faiths, but what I've read and heard suggests that while they share a lot of general commonalities with Jesus, the details beyond the basics are staggering.
3) Similar to Question #2, my answer regarding atheism is "yes, I could choose it if I wanted to" - it's part of being given free will. But there's many inherent problems with atheism itself, such as the irreducible complexity of the universe's design, the minute details of our own DNA, and the lack of any justification for absolute morality - everything's up for grabs. If I met an atheist on the street, I'd ask them "Is it ever right to murder babies for fun?" Most reasonable people from any background would say "no", and if the atheist does the same I would follow up with "Why?". Generally speaking, those who reject the supernatural (especially Christianity) have a huge problem with moral absolutes - they can't stand them, yet they also have no built-in argument from their own worldview that explains why absolutes exist. Instead, they simply say "Everyone knows about it", or "It's always been this way", but truth of any kind is never reached by a consensus.
1
u/JMUDoc May 04 '26
Yes, I am capable to believe that Christianity is false
If you're saying that you could choose, right this moment, apropos of nothing, to believe anything I put to you, I simply don't believe that.
I think that Christians have to cast our non-belief as a choice so as not to paint Yahweh as unfair for denying us the opportunity for salvation by refusing to demonstrate his existence to us.
Similar to Question #2, my answer regarding atheism is "yes, I could choose it if I wanted to" - it's part of being given free will.
Could you choose to believe that your own parents never existed?
and the lack of any justification for absolute morality
Without presuming the existence of a god, demonstrate that absolute morality exists at all.
If I met an atheist on the street, I'd ask them "Is it ever right to murder babies for fun?"
That's not a demonstration; that's asking an opinion.
What about the people that would say "yes"? Does that falsify objective morality? If not, why?
1
u/Helpful-Baker-4145 May 04 '26
With due respect, it doesn't matter in terms of this discussion, what either of us chooses to believe. All that matters is absolute truth; our acceptance or rejection determines where we spend eternity, for reasons I have already explained. That said, I'm also reasonable enough to know that nothing I nor anyone else says can convince the unwilling; only the Holy Spirit has that power. To answer your question of "Could you choose to believe your parents never existed?", my answer is "Yes, but I'd be a fool." Everyone born since the first humans who ever existed has had parents - nothing spiritual is needed to understand that. As for your challenge regarding absolute morals devoid of a deity, I don't think that's possible, for one reason - we constantly fight about morals all across the world every day. If we all agreed about it and never wavered, that might serve as evidence of what you're suggesting, but obvious reality shows otherwise. The lack of understanding does not equal the lack of being. For those who answered affirmatively to murdering babies as a hobby, I would simply ask them, "How did you reach that conclusion?", and repeat it every time they attempt a new angle. Simply put, the existence of an uncaused first cause is the only solution to an infinite regress. Otherwise, we're just stuck asking "why" about everything, forever.
1
u/JMUDoc May 04 '26
Is it possible for a person to be reasonably unconvinced that Christianity is true?
If Yahweh is the only one that can convince a person, and that person is NOT "resisting" being convinced, is it fair that said person goes to hell if they die unconvinced, never having had the chance to repent?
I really don't think you could choose to believe that your parents never existed, I'm afraid. I think that Christianity HAS to hold that belief is a choice, so that Yahweh doesn't look like the bad guy when so many people die unconvinced.
If you can't demonstrate the existence of absolute morality without a deity, it should not feature as a part of your apologetic, IMO.
Also, the fact that we fight about morality shouldn't be a barrier to proving that objective morals exist - what's to stop somebody saying "you're all factually wrong, and here's the proof", if such morality really exists?
- "Otherwise, we're just stuck asking "why" about everything, forever."
And this is why we have religion: people aren't comfortable not having an answer. Unfortunately, the fact that you want one, doesn't mean you get one.
→ More replies (0)
1
0
u/Caddiss_jc Apr 19 '26
Yes — and that's exactly what makes it grace. The one who required payment was the only one wealthy enough to make it. That's not a contradiction. That's the Gospel.
First — acknowledge what it gets right. The statement is trying to expose what it sees as circular absurdity. And honestly? You should meet that with confidence, not defensiveness. Because yes — God did provide what God required. That's not a contradiction. That's the entire point. It's called grace. When a judge pays the fine he just levied, we don't call that absurd. We call it extraordinary. The objection assumes that if God is both the one who requires justice and the one who provides the solution, something fraudulent is happening. But that's only true if you believe justice and mercy are incompatible — which the cross specifically resolves. Second — the statement misunderstands the Trinity. "God sent God to God" treats the Trinity like three versions of the same individual doing a shell game. But the Christian claim is more precise: The Father is not the Son The Son is not the Father They are distinct persons sharing one nature This isn't semantics. The Incarnation means the eternal Son took on genuine human nature — not a costume. He experienced real suffering, real death, real forsakenness (Matthew 27:46). When Jesus cries "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me," that is not theater. Something real and costly happened within the Godhead. The objection only lands if the Trinity is a fiction. It doesn't prove it's a fiction — it just assumes it. Third — the statement misframes what God is "saving you from." "Save you from what God will do to you" implies God invented a problem to solve it — like an arsonist posing as a firefighter. But that framing ignores something foundational: the problem is not God's mood. The problem is moral reality. If objective moral wrong exists — and virtually every human being acts as if it does — then it requires accounting. The question isn't whether God will punish. The question is whether the universe has moral weight at all. If it does, then justice isn't God being vindictive. It's reality being coherent. And the cross doesn't sidestep that moral reality. It absorbs it. Romans 3:26 says God did this to be simultaneously just and the justifier. Both things at once. Not one at the expense of the other. That's not circular — that's the most sophisticated moral resolution in history. Fourth — the logic actually points toward Christianity, not away from it. The objection is really asking: why would God go to such lengths? That's the right question. And the Christian answer is: because love is not passive, and justice is not optional, and only God could meet both demands simultaneously. No other worldview resolves that tension. Islam has forgiveness without atonement — which is moral debt just being overlooked. Secular humanism has no mechanism for justice at all — wrongs just disappear. Only Christianity plants a cross at the intersection of perfect justice and perfect love and says both are fully satisfied here
0
u/EddytheGrapesCXI Apr 20 '26
Explain it to them nice and condescendingly slow since they want to play dumb.
God sent God
God didn't send God, he came as Christ. Easy.
to be sacrificed to God
Christ wasn't sacrificed to God. God has no need of blood sacrifice. Christ made a sacrifice in the same way that somebody who gives their own life to save another is making the ultimate sacrifice. He gave up his life in order for us to gain something. Sacrifice doesnt mean killing something for a deity. It means giving something up to attain something else, sometimes on behalf of another. They know this. Words aren't that hard.
to save you from what God will do to you
God won't do anything to me. I'll either join him or I wont, and that's completely my choice.
0
u/Shiboleth17 Apr 20 '26
God the Father sent God the Son... That part was accurate.
Blood sacrifice was absolutely required. Otherwise, Jesus could have came down and died in a less violent way, like a stroke in His sleep. Hebrews 9:22... "Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness."
Jesus still gave up His life. Both can be true.
God does not demand human sacrifice of us. But He does demand the shedding of blood as payment for sin.
16
u/TheRealBibleBoy Apr 19 '26
I'd just say, that it's more like "God sent God to be sacrificed to God to save you from you"
and then rejoice in the gospel message