Friday, 24 July 2009


Let us read from the book of Mark
The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

Yea verily.

So, let's get this straight, shall we? Jesus has to die. In fact, that's the whole backing to the Xian religion. If Jesus doesn't die, then no human/deity/blood sacrifice is made to allow god to allow himself to convince himself to forgive us for the sins that we commit by being made that way by god. Anyway, Jesus dying is a good thing.

Jesus has to be turned over to the authorities so that he can be tortured, because apparently that's a good thing too. god requires lots of blood, so Jesus needs to be sacrificed.

In order for that to happen, someone needs to betray Jesus. If someone doesn't betray Jesus, then none of the sacrifice stuff happens and Xianity has no reason to exist.

But, that person, Judas, that betrays Jesus, "woe to that man...good were it for that man if he had never existed." What? Judas does Xians a favor! Judas makes it possible for Xianity to have a reason to exist. Judas makes it possible for god to allow himself to forgive us, since he can sate himself with his own divine blood. Judas should be a hero. But, what does he get for setting the whole thing in motion? "Woe to that man." I can only surmise that Judas gets hell for doing what is a good thing according to the Xian tradition, a necessary thing.

Xianity is full of contradictory ideas such as this, which is why I'm surprised that people take it seriously.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Judas did not betray him to achieve this purpose. Just because Jesus prophesied he would do it does not mean that it was God's will for him to do it. Jesus said it was going to happen. He did not MAKE it happen.

Judas could have chosen not to do so, and Jesus could have been taken by the High Priests guards anyway.

GCT said...

"Judas did not betray him to achieve this purpose. "

If he had not done so, however, would Xianity exist? No.

"Just because Jesus prophesied he would do it does not mean that it was God's will for him to do it."

Actually, it does.

"Jesus said it was going to happen. He did not MAKE it happen."

Free will is an illusion if god is omni-max. Either way, it was essential to the story. Judas is a hero, because he opened the way for all you later Xians to be saved.

"Judas could have chosen not to do so, and Jesus could have been taken by the High Priests guards anyway."

Not according to the story.

ethinethin said...

Anonymous...
Just because Jesus prophesied he would do it does not mean that it was God's will for him to do it.


But if it wasn't God's will then wouldn't that make Jesus a false prophet?

GCT...
Judas is a hero, because he opened the way for all you later Xians to be saved.


A friend and I have talked about how people use the term "Judas" when talking to or about betrayers, how it's become first nature to look at him that way, but without that character, there'd be no crucifixion.

Indeed, in the same way, look at all the violence committed against jews through the centuries for "killing jesus". Well, come on, christians. Wasn't that a good thing that jesus died?

GCT said...

e,
Yes. Which is why I am calling out the inconsistency. I am glad that you too have called it out.

Anonymous said...

I'm with Anonymous1.

Jesus would not have been a false prophet, because he would have never said Judas would do it if he, being omniscient knew Judas was going to make the other choice.

Yes, Jesus had to come and die for our sins. However, the people who crucified him did not do it for that purpose. God's way of working, as evidenced in many Biblical accounts is, the devil works in people to do something for evil, and God uses it somehow for the ultimate good of his people.

Lurkr said...

Could you please remove the pic with this blog post? Even if you think Christianity is dumb, the picture is gruesome and disrespectful. It's just wrong on a human level.

Compassionate Heathen said...

Have you read the newly translated Gospel of Judas? It actually makes him out to be a hero for being the only one to understand the big picture and turn in Jesus according to "God's plan".

It's pretty funny to read...someone long ago thought the same thing you did and actually wrote an entire Gospel to explain it.

Christians are so goofy :)

GCT said...

"Jesus would not have been a false prophet, because he would have never said Judas would do it if he, being omniscient knew Judas was going to make the other choice."

And, hence Judas had no choice. In order for Jesus to be 100% sure of Judas's actions, those actions had to be determined, meaning Judas did not have free choice. He did what god programmed him to do and then god punished him for it.

"Yes, Jesus had to come and die for our sins."

And, it had to be fore-ordained, so the fall was pre-determined to happen, and we are all "tainted by sin" due to the actions of god causing it to happen. Your own arguments are convicting your god.

"However, the people who crucified him did not do it for that purpose."

god caused them to do it for his purpose, so they had no choice in the matter.

"God's way of working, as evidenced in many Biblical accounts is, the devil works in people to do something for evil, and God uses it somehow for the ultimate good of his people."

So, now it's Satan's fault? Why is god so powerless against Satan? Why must god always play defense? For an omniscient being, god is pretty stupid.

Anonymous said...

"And, hence Judas had no choice. In order for Jesus to be 100% sure of Judas's actions, those actions had to be determined"

That's not true no matter how many times you repeat it. Jesus could see the end before the beginning. That doesn't mean he forced it to get from A to B. He could just see B ahead of time. Seeing it does not equal determining it.

GCT said...

Welcome Compassionate Heathen. I have not actually read the gospel of Judas, although it sounds like I should.

GCT said...

"That's not true no matter how many times you repeat it."

Wow. Pot, kettle, and all that. Look, I've given supporting arguments on this blog for my position. All I get back from theists is, "Nuh uh."

"Jesus could see the end before the beginning."

OK, so let's try something. Don't you think Jesus knew that he would be crucified? I'm sure you do. So, that had to happen. Didn't he see that Judas would betray him? I'm sure you think so, so that had to happen. Since that had to happen, then Judas had to betray him in order for Jesus to be right about what he knew would happen. As soon as Jesus knew what would happen, it was determined. Judas had no choice in the matter, or else Jesus would have been wrong about what he thought would happen. Since you claim that god can't be wrong and knows all, you have no out for this. You can continue to whine about it, but those are the logical conclusions of your arguments.

"He could just see B ahead of time. Seeing it does not equal determining it."

Yes, actually it does. If god sees everything that you think, feel, do, etc. That means that you must think, feel, do, etc. everything that god has foreseen and that you will do so from the moment that god has foreseen it, which would be at the time of universe creation! From the moment that god created the universe, every though, action, feeling, etc. that you would and will ever have was seen by god, meaning that you can not deviate from that path. You do not have a choice in the matter according to your own theology. I'm sorry that your beliefs preclude you from understanding this concept and cause you to have contradictory thoughts on the matter, but that's something that you'll have to work out.

ethinethin said...

Lurkr said...
Could you please remove the pic with this blog post? Even if you think Christianity is dumb, the picture is gruesome and disrespectful. It's just wrong on a human level.


Eh? Looks like a legitimate christian painting to me.. with "PWNED" at the bottom. How is that "just wrong on a human level"? Are you really this sensitive? Crikey, never go to 4chan or you'll die from the shock.

Lurkr said...

I just think it's like showing someone's head getting blown off. Very disturbing.

ethinethin said...

What's disturbing about it? Is it the painting itself or the "PWNED" at the bottom?

If it's the painting, then I'd have to figure that you've never seen any renascence christian art before, since pretty much every renascence painting of christ looks like that.

They are usually somewhat gross (they seem to sexualize the dying jesus in a lot of them) but I wouldn't call it "just wrong on a human level", nor would I compare it to "someone's head getting blown off".

What is your justification for getting so upset over this?

Anonymous said...

It's the combination of the brutal artwork and the crass nature of the "PWNED" statement. Bad taste.

GCT said...

"It's the combination of the brutal artwork and the crass nature of the "PWNED" statement. Bad taste."

And yet, according to Xians, if Jesus hadn't been pwned, then Xianity would not exist. Oh, the irony.

And, for the record, I fully supported PZ during Crackergate. There, I said it. If you want to get all offended over pictures or actions that have no effect on you, that's your problem, not mine. Don't try to make it mine either.

Anonymous said...

Just not sure why you mock something if you feel it has no power at all. It's like beating up a retarded kid. You don't really look like a big man for doing it.

Anonymous said...

And yet you're too ashamed of your own words to even sign your name to them. Makes you feel like a big man when you type anonymously, doesn't it?

GCT said...

"Just not sure why you mock something if you feel it has no power at all."

Because it's funny, and because religion is pretty absurd.

"It's like beating up a retarded kid."

I'm glad that you equate your religion with a retarded kid...

"You don't really look like a big man for doing it."

I'm not trying to look big by posting pictures. That's what my arguments are for.

"And yet you're too ashamed of your own words to even sign your name to them. Makes you feel like a big man when you type anonymously, doesn't it?"

Coming from someone who left an "anonymous" comment...

Anywho, I don't condemn people for not putting their full names on the internet for all to see. Some of us like our privacy a bit too much to do that. It, however, doesn't make a lick of difference as to what pictures I post and what arguments I make.