At any point in time, the “Cross” remains the place and moment of where the sacrifice overcomes everything. This is not only in the Christian perspective but also in the ordinary fault finding situation or an attempt to make any individual a victim of one thing or the other. In its final analysis, this culminated in the announcement and realization of this in Jesus on the Cross.

Because, if there were any problem at all, it is the problem that Christianity have come to an end in making this known and to embark to spread other vision in the necessity and consequence of exaltation of the sacrifice.

Then the interpretation of being responsible and with the inability to recognize that it is the cross that actually put to death the sacrifice is another. And if this was so, the question to ask is, is there a risk in the separation between Christianity and history?. The answer is no, because the cross is the liberation, and not a condemnation in term of the theological thought from St. Augustine to St. Thomas Aquinas and Kierkegaard. In this perspective, it would seems the sacrifice has lost its value.

But the reality is that, the question that remains is another, which is the ambiguities that exist between donation and sacrifice through which it also make sense in Nietzsche, the German philosopher in his pathological characteristic of the so called the –“Religious man. Although, one may not partake in such idea-or interpretation even if it has some valid element.

The sacrifice, in this context tends to find its place in the logic of cheat and in the very context of economy that has cut short, of the actual suffering that becomes the task of compensation for the future as a form of retributive mechanism. The donation on the other hand tends to be subtracted from this logic because it is the act that finds in itself the reason,-to-be, in the dimension of absolute dedication of a model that Nietzsche used as the connection between mother and child. It is exactly this connection that takes place on the Cross after it has being prefigured in the sacrifice of Isaac.

There is a reason as to why this episode of Ancient Testament, of which some philosopher of old became so passionate about, in the nature of the suspended sacrifice of Isaac. That Abraham did not cut the body of Isaac, simply means, the victim is not Isaac but the device of the sacrifice. In this context, the son becomes “insacrificeable, and the same is true that man in his “singularity” is forever subtracted from being sacrifice, as he comes to represent the most important acquisition of Christian Politics.

But why politics, one might ask ?, this is simply because the mystery of the sacrifice has being the basis of political ideology from the Ancient authoritarian till the present contemporary fundamentalism of our time. The moment we come to the awareness that the “sacrificial spirit” is also outside Christianity, it becomes very difficult, if not impossible to want to get rid of any man in the name of any presupposed “idea”.

Because deep down, there remain the awareness that in every man, is found the very face of God, or the image of God that permit a reciprocal relationship that fertilized the character of awareness of the –“insacrificeable” and singularity of this individual called man, last created among all creation.
Read more on ;--https://philoedu2017..com.