Christianity series on TG4

zaister

anybody seen any good documentaries on christianity recently? evidently there's a 6-part series on christianity starting on TG4 this april. a clip from it can be viewed on You Tube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P27AKEonIWs

Húrin

I don't think that this is at all necessary or even desirable for a Christian, but I find the strength of the faith of those who re-enact the crucifixion to be inspiring.

zaister

It may not be necessary, but the people who undergo this ordeal clearly do so because they believe in it...

JimiTime

I can't view the vid from here in work, but by the way you are speaking, are you saying people are actually 're-inacting' the crucifiction, as in nails in the hand?

zaister

That's right JimiTime. every Good Friday there are ritual crucifixions in the philippines. devotees carry crosses in a procession, then actually undergo crucifixion - they are first tied and then nailed through the palms. one of the crucifixees has done it 13 times.

Akrasia

zaister wrote: »

That's right JimiTime. every Good Friday there are ritual crucifixions in the philippines. devotees carry crosses in a procession, then actually undergo crucifixion - they are first tied and then nailed through the palms. one of the crucifixees has done it 13 times.

it does kind of contradict the claim that jesus' suffering was so immense and that his sacrifice was so great.

JimiTime

zaister wrote: »

That's right JimiTime. every Good Friday there are ritual crucifixions in the philippines. devotees carry crosses in a procession, then actually undergo crucifixion - they are first tied and then nailed through the palms. one of the crucifixees has done it 13 times.

Bloomin eck!! Just seems like self mutilation to me. i see nothing godly about it.

JimiTime

Akrasia wrote: »

it does kind of contradict the claim that jesus' suffering was so immense and that his sacrifice was so great.

Ye know, i see alot of this on these boards. This whole idea, that it was no big deal. Seriously think about it. Fair enough if you believe its a fairy story etc. however, if it did actually happen, you cannot undermine it. It is a completely innocent man, who gets humiliated, spat at, punched, kicked, whipped, has thorns imbedded in his head, then made carry a big wooden beam for miles up to the top of a hill, where he is nailed both foot and hand to it and left there until his blood runs dry, all the while being taunted. That is a huge sacrifice. To think otherwise is to be an idiot, IMO.

Also, these Philipino folk, carry a cross and then put holes in their hand. Its something you'd see on Jackass. It hardly equates to the suffering of Christ now does it. It seems your desire to undermine Jesus Christ has left you blind to the facts.

Akrasia

JimiTime wrote: »

Ye know, i see alot of this on these boards. This whole idea, that it was no big deal. Seriously think about it. Fair enough if you believe its a fairy story etc. however, if it did actually happen, you cannot undermine it. It is a completely innocent man, who gets humiliated, spat at, punched, kicked, whipped, has thorns imbedded in his head, then made carry a big wooden beam for miles up to the top of a hill, where he is nailed both foot and hand to it and left there until his blood runs dry, all the while being taunted. That is a huge sacrifice. To think otherwise is to be an idiot, IMO.

I'm not denying that it wouldn't have been suffering, but there are ordinary human beings out there who are just as innocent as jesus was who suffer a hundred times worse every single day.

Also, these Philipino folk, carry a cross and then put holes in their hand. Its something you'd see on Jackass. It hardly equates to the suffering of Christ now does it. It seems your desire to undermine Jesus Christ has left you blind to the facts.

Jesus was apparently tortured. People are tortured around the world every day. Jesus was humiliated, innocent people are humiliated around the world every day.
Do you think the suffering and humiliation of the 300+ innocent young girls that were raped tortured and killed by Pedro Alonso Lopez was less than the suffering of christ?

JimiTime

Akrasia wrote: »

Jesus was apparently tortured. People are tortured around the world every day. Jesus was humiliated, innocent people are humiliated around the world every day.

Does that somehow make his sacrifice a lesser event?

Do you think the suffering and humiliation of the 300+ innocent young girls that were raped tortured and killed by Pedro Alonso Lopez was less than the suffering of christ?

No. Why would anyone think that? Its not a flippin contest to see who suffered the most If someone laid their life on the line for you, took a bullet lets say. Would you say, 'No big deal, people take bullets all the time'?

Akrasia

JimiTime wrote: »

Does that somehow make his sacrifice a lesser event?



No. Why would anyone think that? Its not a flippin contest to see who suffered the most If someone laid their life on the line for you, took a bullet lets say. Would you say, 'No big deal, people take bullets all the time'?

The point of Jesus' suffering was that it was supposed to pay the debt of attonement for the sins of man.

There is already a long thread on this subject, but It has been argued that the atonement was essential in order to allow God to forgive our sins (in other words, it was more than just symbolism or tokenism, and was a real and necessary act)

It makes no sense that god could accept the short term tokenistic blood sacrifice as payment for thousands of years of torture and suffering.

JimiTime

Akrasia wrote: »

The point of Jesus' suffering was that it was supposed to pay the debt of attonement for the sins of man.

The point of Jesus' Death, not suffering. It was his life that was the sacrifice.

There is already a long thread on this subject, but It has been argued that the atonement was essential in order to allow God to forgive our sins (in other words, it was more than just symbolism or tokenism, and was a real and necessary act)

It makes no sense that god could accept the short term tokenistic blood sacrifice as payment for thousands of years of torture and suffering.

You're changing the subject now. You made little of what Christ went through. I took objection to it, now you are trying to bring us down another road. I'm not getting into the reasons. i posted to bring attention to the fact that such an act being undermined as 'it does kind of contradict the claim that jesus' suffering was so immense and that his sacrifice was so great.' Such a statement was foolish IMO, and i brought attention to it.

Akrasia

JimiTime wrote: »

The point of Jesus' Death, not suffering. It was his life that was the sacrifice.

Then why have the torture at all? And it's not much of a sacrifice to die if you know you're only going to be dead for 3 days

JimiTime

Akrasia wrote: »

Then why have the torture at all?

Who killed him? Who tortured him?

And it's not much of a sacrifice to die if you know you're only going to be dead for 3 days

Yeah, you made it clear you think it was no big deal. Well, here is the thing. I 'know' that i will be resurrected to life on the day of judgement. Now I am safe in that knowledge, but I can tell you this, I would not dream of laying down my life in such an awful manner, and pray it never happens. Now, I 'know' death of the flesh is only a temporary binding, so does that mean that if I took a bullet for you, you'd be, 'Sure its no biggie, he's going to be alive again anyway'. These attempts by people to undermine just smack of desperation. Desperation to show how Christianity is so stupid or whatever. Whatever twist you try put on it, Christ was one of us. A man. With feelings. Fear, Pain, Love etc. He may have had the faith that he was to be resurected in 3 days, but he still had to endure all the pains and humiliations and torturous death. He had to watch his loved ones pain at his pain. His mothers anguish etc. to say, 'thats not much of a sacrifice' is ridiculous. You may try argue that others in history have sufered more etc, but it really does not mean anything.

My goodness, people never fail to disapoint:(

Popinjay

JimiTime wrote: »

The point of Jesus' Death, not suffering. It was his life that was the sacrifice.

There's a whole other thread about this in which many of the Christians are arguing that the suffering was in fact the sacrifice. I'll try to find it and link it if I do.

I think a little meeting is in order until you can all decide amongst yourselves exactly what you all do and don't believe. You can come back to us when you have your stories straight.

EDIT: Found it! http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055136673

Popinjay

JimiTime wrote: »

The point of Jesus' Death, not suffering. It was his life that was the sacrifice.

JimiTime wrote: »

Whatever twist you try put on it, Christ was one of us. A man. With feelings. Fear, Pain, Love etc. He may have had the faith that he was to be resurected in 3 days, but he still had to endure all the pains and humiliations and torturous death. He had to watch his loved ones pain at his pain. His mothers anguish etc. to say, 'thats not much of a sacrifice' is ridiculous. You may try argue that others in history have sufered more etc, but it really does not mean anything.

And is this not contradictory? That's an awful big post about his suffering when it was his life was the sacrifice.

JimiTime

Popinjay wrote: »

I think a little meeting is in order until you can all decide amongst yourselves exactly what you all do and don't believe. You can come back to us when you have your stories straight.

I think you'll be waiting a long time for agreement amongst the world of christendom.

JimiTime

Popinjay wrote: »

And is this not contradictory? That's an awful big post about his suffering when it was his life was the sacrifice.

No its not contradictory. I'm bringing attention to the fact that what he went though is being undermined as 'no big deal', because he knew he'd be back in 3 days. That in no way shows that it wasn't his life that was the sacrifice.

Popinjay

JimiTime wrote: »

I think you'll be waiting a long time for agreement amongst the world of christendom.

That's true but many people of many denominations seemed to be in agreement on this one. You might have to form a new split yourself.

Should have multi-quoted but re: your second post, fair enough. It was an illustration of a seperate point in the same discussion. I'm cool with that.

JimiTime

Popinjay wrote: »

That's true but many people of many denominations seemed to be in agreement on this one. You might have to form a new split yourself.

I'll have to pop in and have a look. As for the split, well i'm not setting up a religion, but i hold to no denomination. Although maybe.....

Jimiism

1. All the good looking Wimins are now my wives
2. Tithes must be payed for the upkeep of my 'temple' etched in the rocks overlooking Dalkey bay. No thats not a swimming pool its ehhhh a baptism chamber.

You want in, i'll split the wimins with ye for a monthly 'tithing' of €199.99

Popinjay

Sign me up. So do we use the titles Bishop, Cardinal, Pope etc. or do we get new ones?

Akrasia

JimiTime wrote: »

Who killed him? Who tortured him?

The romans. but it was all a part of gods plan and jesus knew it was going to happen and could have stopped it at any time

Yeah, you made it clear you think it was no big deal. Well, here is the thing. I 'know' that i will be resurrected to life on the day of judgement.

no you don't. You believe.
Jesus, if he was the son of god didn't have to 'believe' anything, he knew exactly what was going to happen.

Now I am safe in that knowledge,

Belief

but I can tell you this, I would not dream of laying down my life in such an awful manner, and pray it never happens. Now, I 'know' death of the flesh is only a temporary binding, so does that mean that if I took a bullet for you, you'd be, 'Sure its no biggie, he's going to be alive again anyway'.

Nope, because If you took a bullet for me, it would be the ultimate sacrifice. I don't believe in an afterlife. However if I was a devout christian, while I would be sorry to see you go, I would believe that you would be rewarded in heaven 'There is no greater love than to give your life for a friend'

These attempts by people to undermine just smack of desperation. Desperation to show how Christianity is so stupid or whatever. Whatever twist you try put on it, Christ was one of us.

No he wasn't, He was god in a mortal form.

A man. With feelings. Fear, Pain, Love etc. He may have had the faith that he was to be resurected in 3 days, but he still had to endure all the pains and humiliations and torturous death.

If he was really the son of god, then he wouldn't need to have faith, he would already know what was gonna happen. The only thing jesus could have been afraid of was the physical pain he would go through during his torture, but again, if god himself did create man and the pain we suffer from torture is a direct result of the way he designed us.

He had to watch his loved ones pain at his pain. His mothers anguish etc. to say, 'thats not much of a sacrifice' is ridiculous. You may try argue that others in history have sufered more etc, but it really does not mean anything.

God is supposed to love everyone, so if it is suffering to watch people that he loves suffer, then he must have a very miserable existence altogether... but then, he did bring it on himself.

My goodness, people never fail to disapoint:(

I'm only the way god made me... apparently

JimiTime

Popinjay wrote: »

Sign me up. So do we use the titles Bishop, Cardinal, Pope etc. or do we get new ones?

Maybe we should be a bit 'street' to sound trendy. How about i be the 'Pimp Daddy', and you can be the 'The Dude'*:D



*Copyright the big lebowski

Sorry Mods, i'm draggin this way off topic. promise i'll stop now.

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

I think you'll be waiting a long time for agreement amongst the world of christendom.

How come Jesus doesn't seem to have foreseen this?

JimiTime

Akrasia wrote: »

The romans. but it was all a part of gods plan and jesus knew it was going to happen and could have stopped it at any time

The Romans and the Jewish San Headrin. God could have stopped it, but he didn't because it had to take place. The romans and the Jews acted by their own hearts and minds to give Christ this torturous death. God did not make them do it.

no you don't. You believe.
Jesus, if he was the son of god didn't have to 'believe' anything, he knew exactly what was going to happen.

its a difficult concept for you, but I 'know'. What is the difference, if i am certain of it, I know it. you can keep saying 'well its not real knowledge', but it is. You just haven't got it, thats all.

Belief

Faith.

Nope, because If you took a bullet for me, it would be the ultimate sacrifice. I don't believe in an afterlife. However if I was a devout christian, while I would be sorry to see you go, I would believe that you would be rewarded in heaven 'There is no greater love than to give your life for a friend'

Ah, so a Christian laying down their life for someone is no big deal. in fact it was probably some selfish act to find favour with god and get to heaven quicker. Yeah, dem selfish christians ey!

No he wasn't, He was god in a mortal form.

Not all of us are trinitarians. He was a man, begotten of his Father who was God. He knew who he was, but he still had a fleshly body which was like our own.

If he was really the son of god, then he wouldn't need to have faith, he would already know what was gonna happen. The only thing jesus could have been afraid of was the physical pain he would go through during his torture,

Yeah, and? Is this not how people when tortured give up info etc? because of the feeling of pain being so bad? What can I say.

but again, if god himself did create man and the pain we suffer from torture is a direct result of the way he designed us.

not really the point at hand, but must say, LOL.

God is supposed to love everyone, so if it is suffering to watch people that he loves suffer, then he must have a very miserable existence altogether... but then, he did bring it on himself.

I'd say, he is saddened by our idiocy quite frequently, but happy that his son didn't let him down. Yet again though, this is fleing from the topic at hand. that jesus' suffering and death was no big deal for him.

JimiTime

robindch wrote: »

How come Jesus doesn't seem to have foreseen this?

What makes you say that?

Akrasia

JimiTime wrote: »

The Romans and the Jewish San Headrin. God could have stopped it, but he didn't because it had to take place. The romans and the Jews acted by their own hearts and minds to give Christ this torturous death. God did not make them do it.

Creating the conditions in which you encourage a crime to take place is called entrapment and then blaming them for it later, and it's illegal for the police to do because it's inherently unjust and unfair

its a difficult concept for you, but I 'know'. What is the difference, if i am certain of it, I know it. you can keep saying 'well its not real knowledge', but it is. You just haven't got it, thats all.

You don't know what will happen to you when you die. All you have is a theory that you believe in very strongly. You call it knowledge, but it's not.
Knowledge is "justified True Belief" You have a belief that you justify through christian theology, but the 'truth' part is something you can not know for certain or prove to anyone else.

Faith.

is not the same thing as knowledge.

Ah, so a Christian laying down their life for someone is no big deal. in fact it was probably some selfish act to find favour with god and get to heaven quicker. Yeah, dem selfish christians ey!

I didn't say it was no big deal. I referred to jesus' when he said there was no greater love... It is not as big a sacrifice as an atheist who dies for his friend however. The atheist is giving up everything, the christian is giving up something but expects to receive something better in return.

Not all of us are trinitarians. He was a man, begotten of his Father who was God. He knew who he was, but he still had a fleshly body which was like our own.

This is why discussing religion is so frustrating. Everyone keeps changing the rules.
The vast vast majority of christians consider the trinity to be a central part of their religion. There are probably even some christians on this board who would suggest that you won't get into heaven unless you believe in the trinity. (and they'd probably 'know' that fact just as strongly as you 'know' that you're definitely getting to paradise)

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

What makes you say that?

Curiosity, since you ask.

Christians tell me that the their deity is omniscient and, in some cases, that this infinite store of knowledge is available to them. Whether or not that's true -- and I don't believe for one second that it is -- as a minimum requirement for omniscience, I'd have at least expected that Jesus would have known how people would react to what he had to say. He certainly didn't make many predictions about that at a global level, but the one that sticks in my mind is the one in which he says that he's come to set a man against his father and so on.

So perhaps, that suggests instead that Jesus knew that he was going to cause trouble and didn't seem much bothered by it.

PDN

Christian doctrine teaches that the physical pain of the crucifixion, or the mere fact of death, were not in themselves the most important elements of the atonement. In some way that we cannot fully understand, Christ carried the punishment of the sins of the entire world and endured the suffering of Hell. When He was on the Cross He cried out "My God! Why have you forsaken me?" For one who was God the Son and had existed indivisibly with God the Father for all Eternity this was the real torment.

robindch

Akrasia wrote: »

Creating the conditions in which you encourage a crime to take place is called entrapment and then blaming them for it later, and it's illegal for the police to do because it's inherently unjust and unfair

Not quite true. Entrapment is commonly used by the cops in the USA, entirely freely, as far as I'm aware -- hence all those "real" crime telly shows about kerb-crawlers being nabbed, and alleged child-molesters being lured by TV crews and handed over to police.

I believe entrapment is permissible here, but under much tighter conditions, though I couldn't tell you what they are.

PDN

robindch wrote: »

Curiosity, since you ask.

Christians tell me that the their deity is omniscient and, in some cases, that this infinite store of knowledge is available to them. Whether or not that's true -- and I don't believe for one second that it is -- as a minimum requirement for omniscience, I'd have at least expected that Jesus would have known how people would react to what he had to say. He certainly didn't make many predictions about that at a global level, but the one that sticks in my mind is the one in which he says that he's come to set a man against his father and so on.

So perhaps, that suggests instead that Jesus knew that he was going to cause trouble and didn't seem much bothered by it.

Christian belief does not teach that Jesus was omniscient during His incarnation. No more than He was omnipresent.

However, it hardly takes omniscience to see that the human race is so screwed up by sin as to ensure that many would reject Christ's message, others would pervert it for their own purposes, and that His followers would be persecuted. All of which, of course, Jesus accurately predicted.

robindch

PDN wrote: »

Christian belief does not teach that Jesus was omniscient during His incarnation.

John tells us that Jesus is reported to have carried out many miracles -- heavens above, there were so many that the world would not have room for all the books that would be written to describe them -- so it's clear from the context that he could do far, far more than any normal human.

Hence, I'm curious to hear why you believe that his abilities as a deity extended that far, but did not actually extend to the normal property of omniscience that's associated with the christian deity?

PDN

robindch wrote: »

John tells us that Jesus is reported to have carried out many miracles -- heavens above, there were so many that the world would not have room for all the books that would be written to describe them -- so it's clear from the context that he could do far, far more than any normal human.

Hence, I'm curious to hear why you believe that his abilities as a deity extended that far, but did not actually extend to the normal property of omniscience that's associated with the christian deity?

We are told that Jesus grew in wisdom as a child, and that He did not know the day or the hour at which He would return.

The theological term for this voluntary self-limitation of Christ's divine attributes is kenosis - or emptying. It is a standard Christian belief referred to in Charles Wesley's hymn 'And Can It Be' in the following lines:

"He left His Father's throne above
So rich so infinite His grace
Emptied Himself of all but love
And bled for Adam's sinful race"

The Bible is full of accounts of others who did miracles yet were not divine.

JimiTime

Akrasia wrote: »

This is why discussing religion is so frustrating. Everyone keeps changing the rules.
The vast vast majority of christians consider the trinity to be a central part of their religion. There are probably even some christians on this board who would suggest that you won't get into heaven unless you believe in the trinity. (and they'd probably 'know' that fact just as strongly as you 'know' that you're definitely getting to paradise)

Its only frustrating when you are trying to prove something. If you are trying to learn something its not so. Learning of your creator is not like reading a book. Its a personal journey which can take some years. Its not about ticking boxes and QED. Science has its own meaning for proof. Well i have my spiritual 'Knowledge'. I 'know', not believe, when i look at the flowers, the ants, the birds, the sky, my wife etc, that there lies the Physical proof of my creator. In his fulfilled prophesies in the book of Daniel and Isiah, I see his divinity. Although you cannot fathom the concept, i have knowledge. but how could you fathom it, you have not had it bestowed on you. you limit your being to the physical and neglect and sneer at the spiritual for you haven't experienced the spiritual. People like you are spoken of in the bible. If the mere sight of the dawn does not show evidence of your creator to you, then there is little i can do.

robindch

PDN wrote: »

We are told that Jesus grew in wisdom as a child, and that He did not know the day or the hour at which He would return.

Fair enough -- christian belief is that Jesus was not omniscient.

So, that implies that christians believe that Jesus' homoousion with god did not extend to an homoousion of mind, hence, christians must believe that, in the "spirit world" they are said to inhabit, Jesus and god are entirely separate entities.

Is that how the belief is expressed?

PDN

robindch wrote: »

Fair enough -- christian belief is that Jesus was not omniscient.

So, that implies that christians believe that Jesus' homoousion with god did not extend to an homoousion of mind, hence, christians must believe that, in the "spirit world" they are said to inhabit, Jesus and god are entirely separate entities.

Is that how the belief is expressed?

No. To describe the Persons within the Trinity as seperate entities would, in my opinion, be going too far. God is still one Substance.

Maybe it would help to see Jesus' laying aside of omniscience as being comparable to His temporary laying aside of omnipresence. When God the Son became incarnate in the womb of Mary He was confined to being in one place at one time. In the same way He voluntarily limited His knowledge.

I should add, in the interests of accuracy, that not all Christians will agree with me regarding Jesus not being omniscient. It would have been more accurate for me to say that Christian belief does not necessarily involve believing Jesus to have been omniscient. Apologies if I inadvertantly created the impression that I am speaking on behalf of all Christians.

JimiTime

^^ PDN, when Jesus was on earth, was God the Father still in heaven?

PDN

JimiTime wrote: »

^^ PDN, when Jesus was on earth, was God the Father still in heaven?

Absolutely.

zaister

Popinjay wrote: »

There's a whole other thread about this in which many of the Christians are arguing that the suffering was in fact the sacrifice. I'll try to find it and link it if I do.

Yeah, the whole reason i started this thread was to see if we could talk about Christianity-related documentaries on TV. the clip that started this debate is from a series that's going out on TG4, starting on April 16 I think. I personally think that series like this add to our knowledge of the diverse ways in which Christianity is practised around the world, and don't find the crucifixion scenes offensive as such, but maybe some people disagree?

PDN

zaister wrote: »

Yeah, the whole reason i started this thread was to see if we could talk about Christianity-related documentaries on TV. the clip that started this debate is from a series that's going out on TG4, starting on April 16 I think. I personally think that series like this add to our knowledge of the diverse ways in which Christianity is practised around the world, and don't find the crucifixion scenes offensive as such, but maybe some people disagree?

I don't think they are offensive at all. I find them pointless, as i do most religious ceremonies, but as long as they are just harming themselves and nobody else then by all means let them continue. Whatever turns you on.

JimiTime

PDN wrote: »

I don't think they are offensive at all. I find them pointless, as i do most religious ceremonies, but as long as they are just harming themselves and nobody else then by all means let them continue. Whatever turns you on.

Do you not find it offensive that this self mutilation is done in the name of Christ? Like the monks who punish themselves with various instruments. Does it not once again send out a message that Christians are freaks? I personally hate this kind of carry on, I think rather than being inocuous, it sends out a bad message.

Puck

People already think I'm a freak for doing something as simple as having the audacity to believe something that they don't. It doesn't bother me. People think Christians are freaks/idiots/whatever, always have, always will.

JimiTime

Puck wrote: »

People already think I'm a freak for doing something as simple as having the audacity to believe something that they don't. It doesn't bother me. People think Christians are freaks/idiots/whatever, always, have always will.

Yeah i know what you mean, however would it not be a bad example to the non believer, to have someone sticking nails in their hands in the name of Christ? Is it not just another reason to be stumbled away from the truth? I personally think that such carry on is harmful to the message.

Puck

It would be a bad example if people thought that this behaviour was a requirement of the faith or that it was a common practice but I don't think anyone will come away with that idea. While I might disagree with this practice I don't have the right to stop it.

PDN

If a nutjob wants to stick nails through his own hands then that is preferable to him sticking them through someone else's hands.

JimiTime

^^ I suppose i don't find this behaviour innocuous, especially when its presented as representitive of Christ. I think the same of catholocism. Every Phelps-like madman etc is just another stumbler. It could be argued I suppose that the people who would be stumbled by such antics would be just looking for reasons anyway, but hey, I don't like it. If someone was doing these things in my name, I'd be annoyed anyway.

Puck

I see worse behaviour from myself. This behaviour hurts the practitioner themself. I hurt other people.

wolfsbane

Akrasia wrote: »

The point of Jesus' suffering was that it was supposed to pay the debt of attonement for the sins of man.

There is already a long thread on this subject, but It has been argued that the atonement was essential in order to allow God to forgive our sins (in other words, it was more than just symbolism or tokenism, and was a real and necessary act)

It makes no sense that god could accept the short term tokenistic blood sacrifice as payment for thousands of years of torture and suffering.

Sorry not to have had time to post until now.

The physical suffering of Christ was indeed great, but the prime suffering was of the wrath of God on His soul. Christ was imputed with the sins of His people; God the Father struck Jesus with all the wrath they were due - the hell-fire they would have suffered in eternity. That is the essence of the atonement.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul,and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.