INCOHERENT ATONEMENT
I had an interesting conversation with my mom and dad involving my religious views just recently. I argued that Christianity is outcome based, rather than process based. Sometimes it presents itself as though it were processed based, what with all the treatments on love and relationship, but at its heart are outcome driven impulses involving eternal destinies of indescribable happiness and sorrow. It has no path, just a set of beliefs to regurgitate on command. If it ever did have a path, it turned it into a person and a new set of maxims to believe unquestioningly.
Speaking of this person, the Christian doctrine of atonement is incoherent. If this Christ died for all sin, did he not also die for the sin of unbelief? What is the just reward for unbelief if not death? Then if death has been offered in a perfect sacrifice for sin, how could the sin of unbelief not been atoned for as well? If it isn't, then we're reduced to manifest and incomprehensible injustice based on arbitrary rules of atonement.
Had he wanted to maintain a monarchical-level authority to mete out mercy or condemnation per divine fiat, ostensibly a god could have done so. Instead, he opted to go the juridical route, requiring satisfaction in accordance with the Law. Thus, by the crucifixion, this god has forfeited all opportunities to be merciful. At this point, he can only be just; and it logically follows that should he choose to be just, he would recognize that no debt to sin remains outstanding.