we went over this before in another thread. jesus had to shed blood for the sins of man because blood is required for the forgiveness of sins. this is what the old covenant required. without christ's sacrifice there is no atonement for sin other than the old way of dealing with the priests in sacrificing animals and pouring their blood on the alter in the temples.

thats what the sacrifice, the new covenant in christ's blood, is. the final atonement for sin. your view of who jesus is, is based on your personal world view and totally contradictory to the testimony of scripture and as i said, you can reject the testimony but you cant change it.

so you believe the events chronicled in the gospels are incorrect? do you have any historical or journalistic evidence showing the testimony of these documents to be in error? your objection to what's wirtten in the gospels seems to be more about them not agreeing with your personal world view rather than lack of historical or journalistic accuracy.

paul's writings dont contradict what jesus did so there's nothing wrong with what paul wrote.

matthew 23
matthew 10:24-28
matthew 8:21-22
luke 6:24-26
matthew 7:21-23
john 8:23-24
matthew 13:37-43

a mixture of malicious and cold things jesus has said that also show that he absolutely judges people and differentiates.

you ask why he has to do it this way? because thats his decree. if you dont like that, well...thats your problem. whether or not it jives with your world veiw is not relevant. the point is what the scriptures say.

also you did exactly what i pointed out my last post. you look for literla words and phrases and completely ignore contextual reference. clearly you understand what the old and new covenants were and i dont think you as this isnt about peoper exegesis of scripture for you, this is about what jives with your personal world view.