Loading...

Contradictions in the Christian cross and cognitive dissonance

Contradictions in the Christian cross and cognitive dissonance

There are ideas that, although they are contradictory, we can mentally handle them in different ways to reduce conflict and create harmony. This phenomenon of having ideas that are inconsistent with each other and dealing with them is called cognitive dissonance, and it can occur, for example, when people find a contradiction between their religious beliefs and other ideas. If you are a religious believer and continue reading this article, you will probably experience cognitive dissonance, because here we are talking about three contradictions present in the Christian idea of ​​the crucifixion of Jesus.

If you ask people if they would agree with punishing and killing the innocent to forgive the guilty, most would probably say they do not. Possibly, they would argue that doing so would be patently unfair, and they would be absolutely right. But the central core of Christianity is based on exactly this: punishing and killing an innocent (Jesus) to forgive sinners. That is, although most would say they do not support this injustice, in fact they support it and kneel before it and pay it praise. If you are a Christian, you have to support that the innocent (Jesus) pay for the guilty (sinners), even though you know it is not fair, for the same reason that you would not want to be punished for faults you did not commit.

Though there is something even more amazing than the above. According to Christianity itself, the final judgment and hell still exist. That is, the Christian message is: Christ died for the forgiveness of your sins, but you are not forgiven, since you will go to judgment and could go to hell. If you were truly forgiven, there would be no judgment and no threat of hell. It's like someone told you that they already paid your bill, but when you go out they ask you to pay the bill, and if you don't they threaten to severely punish you. Christianity does the same thing: it claims to have paid your debts, but in reality it has not, since you will have to give an account for them. As unlikely as it sounds, Christianity tells you: you are forgiving, but you are not forgiven.

Contradictions in the Christian cross and cognitive dissonance

But there is even more contradiction. According to the biblical account, Jesus gave up his life, but quickly took it back. That is, he did not lose anything, therefore he did not deliver anything. I think the Christian story invented the resurrecting thing a few days later, so that it wouldn't look very easy or immediate. Can you imagine if he had risen as soon as he was taken down from the cross? It would have been a rather difficult situation for the narrator to resolve, but it doesn't matter for the point here: he didn't die since he was resurrected, that is, he didn't lose his life since he got it back. If you lost the keys to your house and you find them, then you will no longer say that they are lost. Following the Christian account, Jesus' life is not lost, so he did not sacrifice it. No one sacrifices something they didn't lose.

In summary, the Christian cross entails at least three severe contradictions: 1) it is an injustice, 2) it lies about what it promises, 3) it lies about what it claims to deliver.

Does the above mean that Christianity fools its believers? If you believed the story of the cross, in fact they are kidding you and in triplicate. The next time you make the sign of the cross between your forehead, chest and shoulders, I invite you to reflect on these three contradictions. If I'm wrong, correct me. If I'm not mistaken, pay attention to me.

How to deal with these dissonances? According to the theory of cognitive dissonance there are several possibilities to reduce inconsistencies: 1) modify cognitions, 2) trivialize cognitions, 3) add cognitions, or 4) deny cognitions. Let's see examples of each case. To modify them could be to say that one believes in a personal Christ with his own characteristics and not in what the Bible says. To trivialize would be to say that these contradictions are not important because we are nobody to understand or judge God's actions. Adding cognitions would be saying that you know in your heart that you are going to paradise, so this belief is more important than the others. To deny cognitions would be to say that, regardless of the contradictions, your God is above all of them and what corresponds is only to have faith and never question. Will you use any of these strategies?

(*) Pablo Chaverri, academic

Related Articles