Yannriu said,
"The cruxification of Jesus was an act of god."

Response:
Please, Yanniru... cite the legally or scientifically admissable precendent for crucifying someone who is innocent. If you cannot, please explain why you think God does things like that? -- though it might seem unnecessary if your readership are doctrinaire
religionists. Some of us are Rational, Legal, Scientific Friends of Jesus.

Although it may be as you said, that "The cruxification of Jesus was an act of god", Jesus himself did not say so. The closest any rational theology says is that it was necessary due to the fallen nature of humanity... not just because God just liked doing it for the sake of a weird voodoo.

Yanniru wrote:
"So my guess is that it was the Romans tht carried out the execution, and carried out the will of god as well."

Response:
Duh.
Further, the Pharisees who condemned him in their sham trial, called together at night, also said it was God's will that Jesus must die. You're on thin ice when you bring that up.

Yanniru wrote:
"So bottomline, it seems that you have confirmed my view that all religions have considered the basic problem of why bad things happen to good people"

Response:
Not much of a journal thesis if I ever heard one! I had previously assumed you meant the other religions had said something substantial on the topic which basically agreed with the rational view that it is NOT EVER good for the "justice system to condemn and kill someone who is innocent. But in your theology, it can be...shall we assume you are saying it cana be "excellent" to for that to occur?

And you're saying that if you canhave shown that other religions show ANY level of concern for ethics whatsoever ...that you have made your point?

Okay. What a point. Who would have thought it.
Pardon my irony, but you have some developing to do before you can consider your theology the equal of mine.

Mike

• Cruxification was necessary - yanniru - March 30, 2002 - 17:09 UTC
  • dork - spazcon - March 30, 2002 - 18:58 UTC