This idea can have logic and great value even for an atheist.
Not that long ago I offered for some angry people to kick my head in, to prove a point about how men should treat women (i.e. don't bully them). (I guess they didn't have the heart to do it.)
Among the many interpretations which can be placed on the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus, we can say this:
Jesus went to his death willingly - in that he knew it was going to happen, and didn't run away, when he could have done - in order to prove and illustrate a point. That point was his life's work (well, the last 3 years'). One of his main lessons was that we can all be given the chance for our sins to be forgiven, provided we earn it and do the necessary real work involved. Provided we go to our Crucifixion willingly. If he can get himself crucified, we should be up to saying sorry and putting things right when we have to. We should be humble enough to suffer for what we have done. We should be humble enough to let something go instead of escalating to some kind of blood feud.
He also forgave the people who were crucifying him.
By dramatically illustrating the idea that God can forgive our sins, will always give us a second chance to make good: life became possible, life became good, life became fruitful. Instead of nasty, brutish and short. Hence the Resurrection.
But no one even saw or understood wtf he was doing, besides some people thought he was crazy , and they dont even know or understand empathy. First of all no one has the right to take someone else s life, because their life is no better, since we all screwed up somewhere in our lives, its just that some people done more harm than others. But to be honest you dont need religion to understand empathy, compassion and understanding, in fact logic and reason are often keypoints to understand someone, by asking youself the questions, "why did they do it", and thinking to make sense. When you look at crimes 99% of them are done by a reason.
Not to mention that previously Simon said that the point was forgiveness given to those who earn it (as opposed to just carte blanche forgiveness without the person doing anything to earn that forgiveness), but here he's talking about Jesus forgiving people who did not earn that forgiveness. Make up your mind, Simon.
I would go further than that, Danielle, and say 100% - we may not always know what that reason is, and to us, the reason may not always seem logical, but there always is one.
Tiny correction - an anonymous author, writing 30-100 years after the alleged event, SAID "He forgave those people for what they did." You're making it sound as though it actually happened, let's keep it real.
Jesus, the original sin-eater.
Whata piece of crap
After 25 pages of explanation Simon asks "why". This is why I like Simon he is like the EveryReady Bunny, he just keeps going and going and going and going......
It's always a good sign when I cause a commotion among the trolls. Keep trying, trolls. You can't delete my posts. Look, they're still there: