If you had to make a decision, such as allowing your son to die to save a couple hundred people, who would you choose? Your son, or the people you don't know.
Did you base your answer off of God's choice with Jesus Christ's sacrifice? Or was it based off of compassion?
2007-05-19 08:55:17 · 8 answers · asked by Joe S. 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Crystallinectar, I think you just called God an ****..
2007-05-19 08:59:48 · update #1
First off, I highly doubt this would happen, making this a "hypothetical question". Secondly, to Deof Movestofca; you've assumed that I assume that God didn't know all the people then. According to my long-past time at Church a few years ago, all the people back then were spiteful(as we are still today, hmm... Apparently we learned nothing..), arrogant, and wanted Jesus dead because he challenged their religion... So, yea..
2007-05-19 09:16:16 · update #2
well now, i would leave that decision up to my son.
but i certainly wouldn't REQUIRE a human sacrifice to save hundreds of people. that's just being an ********.
2007-05-19 08:57:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
OK. Here's the thing. The only reason Jesus' sacrifice "saves" other people is because God has this arbitrary rule that "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins." So He's agreed to suck the blood of His own son rather than demand animal sacrifices from us in order to get us off the hook for our own personal faults, as well as the "Original Sin" of our primeval ancestors.
(All this according to Christian dogma. It's not my, or any sane person's belief.)
In other words, this isn't really the same question. If there were some situation in which the life of your own child could be sacrificed in order to save others, and it was somehow your decision, you would obviously have to weigh the question of the relative values of life - but I can't imagine many people would be willing to let their own children die. In God's case, the overriding concern was apparently His appetite for blood. Apologists can call it a "mystery of God" all they want; but all that means is that God wanted it that way. He could've arranged matters any way He saw fit.
2007-05-19 16:09:37 · answer #2 · answered by jonjon418 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither. It wouldn't be my choice, but my son's. It is not my decision to make.
Now, if it were my life, or that of others, woud measure it by who these people were. Genrally, I'm compassionate, but if these people were going to promulgate hatred rather than love, I certainly wouldn't lay my life down for them. For example: If the people who would die were loving and kind and compassionate, like most Pagans that I know, I probably would. If, on the other hand, they were the sort that blame gays for 9/11, some fundamentalists, those from the Westboro Baptist Church and such, I wouldn't.
2007-05-19 16:00:16 · answer #3 · answered by Deirdre H 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Unless I get a permission from God, I will make no unwritten sacrifices whether be it my son or someone else. Whatever God asked me to do, is always ready to be done!
2007-05-19 16:04:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Naturally I would save my son if it were me deciding. But God made the choice to let His only son die for our sins
2007-05-19 16:00:56 · answer #5 · answered by Gerry 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Invalid question for two reasons:
1) If I sent my son off to die, it wouldn't save anyone (especially not spiritually); and
2) You assume that God did not know the people whom Jesus died for.
2007-05-19 16:02:01 · answer #6 · answered by Deof Movestofca 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
God is the most compassionate person ever to live. I understand your question. and i dont know what i would do. Because God is God and that is part of the reason why he was able to do this. Not everyone can do this, it was a God thing.
2007-05-19 16:01:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I would do what I feel is right.
2007-05-19 15:59:46 · answer #8 · answered by Nijg 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋