Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?

[Thief]

Though,I am presently an atheist,I still feel that God exists and I am searching for The One True God that Jesus worshipped.

I see by your banner, and your post...you're sitting on the fence...
so to speak.

If you're waiting for evidence.... there won't be any.

Unless you are willing to find reason or cause.... there won't be any.

It's more to the way you think and feel....than anything else.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Though,I am presently an atheist,I still feel that God exists and I am searching for The One True God that Jesus worshipped.

How can you be an atheist and feel that God exists? Surely you're agnostic at least?

 

[sojourner]

What do you propose then? I am curious as to your own views on the matter.

And indeed God's love doesn't have to be bought. He made the ultimate sacrifice because He loves us. And assuming the fundamental laws laid out by God require substitutionary atonement, then He can not simply dismiss them for that would make Him unjust for not abiding by His own laws, even though He is more than capable of simply forgiving us without a price.

It's the Incarnation that reconciles us to God -- not a blood atonement.

 

[ER.Robin Zoe]

For those who believe that Jesus died for our sins,I really have some noteworthy questions to ask.Till date no christian has been been able to answer them satisfactorily and logically!




SALVATION:
Christians say that "GOD LOST His only son to save us". To whom did God lose Jesus if he
owns the whole universe?
1. If it was agreeable with God’s Majesty to have sons, He could have created a million sons
the like of Jesus. So what is the big clear deal about this only son?
2. Why does the Bible say that Jesus wanted to die on the cross, when the one on the cross
was shouting "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" according to Matthew 27:45
and Mark 15:33 ?
3. If God had wanted to save us, couldn’t He have done that without sacrificing Jesus?
4. God is Just, and justice requires that nobody should be punished for the sins of others, nor
should some people be saved by punishing other people. Doesn’t the claim that God sacrificed
Jesus to save us because He was Just, contradict the definition of justice?
5. People sacrifice things they have to get something they don’t have when they can’t have
both. Christians say that "God SACRIFICED His only son to save us". We know that God is
Almighty; to whom did He sacrifice Jesus?
6. A real sacrifice is when you can’t get back what you have offered , so what would be the
big deal about such a sacrifice if God could recover the same offering? (according to the
Christians’ terminology)?
7. If all the Christians are saved through Jesus and are going to Heaven no matter what they
do, then the teachings of Jesus are irrelevant and the definition of good and bad are also
rendered irrelevant. If this is not so, then do Christians who believe in Jesus yet do not follow
his teachings nor repent go to Hell?
8. How can Christians take deeds as irrelevant after becoming one when Jesus says in
Matthew 12:36; "But I say unto you that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give
account thereof in the Day of Judgment. For by the words thou shalt be justified, and by the
words thou shalt be condemned"?
9. Christians say that people go to Heaven ONLY THROUGH JESUS, yet Paul says in 1
CORINTHIANS 7:8-16 that the unbelieving husband is acceptable to God because he is
united with his wife and vice versa, and their pagan children are also acceptable to God. So
people can go to heaven without believing in Jesus according to this.
10. How come the Bible says that ALL Israel is saved although they don’t believe in Jesus?
Doesn’t that contradict the claim in the Bible that the only way to heaven is through Jesus?
11. According to Christians, those who have not been baptized will go to Hell. So even the
infants and babies go to Hell if not baptized, since they are born with an inherited original sin.
Doesn’t this contradict the definition of justice? Why would God punish people for sins they
never committed?

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

you are arguing against LOGIC. you are violating occams razor/the law of parsimony in specific....you define your god to be the most powerful most complex thing in the history of existence, yet you claim that your god was not a product of intelligent design, while simultaneously arguing how all of the LESS COMPLEX things in existence are just too complex not to be a product of intelligent design.......keep ignoring reality buddy it suits you.

1. First of all, im not violating occams razor. Any naturalistic explanation used to explain the origins of the universe is absurd, so I postulate a transcendent cause for the universe just like I do for any thing else that begins to exist.

2. We dont have to postulate whether or not God was a product of intelligent design, because that would lead to infinite regress, which is logically absurd. What we can do is postulate whether or not things that BEGAN TO EXIST are intelligent designed or not, which is what we have been doing.

To easy.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Assuming there IS an origin is equally absurd when there is nothing to suggest that time (or anything else for that matter) ever 'began' (when we refer to time beginning we are usually referring to the concept that any time prior to the big bang is meaningless to us now in the aftermath of the big bang since the big bang provides a theoretical 'known state' of all matter and energy that exists at that given point of time, not that time did not exist prior to this, but merely that it is inconsequential to us), also there are naturalistic explanations about the potential origin of matter/energy based on energy fluctuations in a supposed void... not sure how I feel about that theory but there are indeed workable scientific models.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

How can you be an atheist and feel that God exists? Surely you're agnostic at least?

False flag operation

 

[jamesmorrow]

1. First of all, im not violating occams razor. Any naturalistic explanation used to explain the origins of the universe is absurd, so I postulate a transcendent cause for the universe just like I do for any thing else that begins to exist..

1.you are violating occams razor big time when it comes to your selection of the supernatural cause of our natural universe..... think about it... you have defined your god to be the most powerful, most complex thing imaginable... so when it comes to choosing between your god, and the plethora of other possible supernatural causes, you might as well slide down occams razor butt naked. OUCH!

2. We dont have to postulate whether or not God was a product of intelligent design, because that would lead to infinite regress, which is logically absurd. What we can do is postulate whether or not things that BEGAN TO EXIST are intelligent designed or not, which is what we have been doing.

To easy.

sorry friend. but you have not established whether your god always existed, or at one point began to exist... how do we know?? for the bible tells us so??....

remember, the concept of a state of the art sky scraper randomly ALWAYS existing by chance and nothingness is just as likely as the concept of a state of the art sky scraper randomly APPEARING by chance from nothingness....or will you try to argue that one scenario is more reasonable than another? i think not...

we dont know whether your god appeared in his current complex form from nothing, or whether he always existed that way....the only thing we know for sure, is that either way, your god had no control over his own existence... his own characteristics, powers, nature, disposition, ANYTHING about him/it.... all of these highly specific choices that define his existence are/were out of his control.....question is, were they in someone/thing elses control? or were they just a result of random chance and nothingness as you seem to imply by claiming that god was not a product of intelligent design.

 

[ER.Robin Zoe]

For those who believe that Jesus died for our sins,I really have some noteworthy questions to ask.Till date no christian has been been able to answer them satisfactorily and logically!




SALVATION:
Christians say that "GOD LOST His only son to save us". To whom did God lose Jesus if he
owns the whole universe?
1. If it was agreeable with God’s Majesty to have sons, He could have created a million sons
the like of Jesus. So what is the big clear deal about this only son?
2. Why does the Bible say that Jesus wanted to die on the cross, when the one on the cross
was shouting "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" according to Matthew 27:45
and Mark 15:33 ?
3. If God had wanted to save us, couldn’t He have done that without sacrificing Jesus?
4. God is Just, and justice requires that nobody should be punished for the sins of others, nor
should some people be saved by punishing other people. Doesn’t the claim that God sacrificed
Jesus to save us because He was Just, contradict the definition of justice?
5. People sacrifice things they have to get something they don’t have when they can’t have
both. Christians say that "God SACRIFICED His only son to save us". We know that God is
Almighty; to whom did He sacrifice Jesus?
6. A real sacrifice is when you can’t get back what you have offered , so what would be the
big deal about such a sacrifice if God could recover the same offering? (according to the
Christians’ terminology)?
7. If all the Christians are saved through Jesus and are going to Heaven no matter what they
do, then the teachings of Jesus are irrelevant and the definition of good and bad are also
rendered irrelevant. If this is not so, then do Christians who believe in Jesus yet do not follow
his teachings nor repent go to Hell?
8. How can Christians take deeds as irrelevant after becoming one when Jesus says in
Matthew 12:36; "But I say unto you that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give
account thereof in the Day of Judgment. For by the words thou shalt be justified, and by the
words thou shalt be condemned"?
9. Christians say that people go to Heaven ONLY THROUGH JESUS, yet Paul says in 1
CORINTHIANS 7:8-16 that the unbelieving husband is acceptable to God because he is
united with his wife and vice versa, and their pagan children are also acceptable to God. So
people can go to heaven without believing in Jesus according to this.
10. How come the Bible says that ALL Israel is saved although they don’t believe in Jesus?
Doesn’t that contradict the claim in the Bible that the only way to heaven is through Jesus?
11. According to Christians, those who have not been baptized will go to Hell. So even the
infants and babies go to Hell if not baptized, since they are born with an inherited original sin.
Doesn’t this contradict the definition of justice? Why would God punish people for sins they
never committed?


Can anyone answer these questions logically?:no::sarcastic

 

[InformedIgnorance]

First up - if you want to differentiate a specific section of text, keep it to a minimum - otherwise you end up with all sorts of weird formatting that makes it hard to read; if you are attempting to convince someone of the validity of your position through the argument you present, they need to be able to read it, preferably to be able to read it easily.

1. Even if God COULD have had many sons, if you accept the Christian view that he only had one, then that would make it significant. My personal view as an Ignostic, if the chidren of 'God' had great capabilities, then each would be important, though their individual importance would be diminished due to their numbers, a single one however is valuable due to its scarcity and this would make his involvement of greater importance.

2. A very good question; the traditional Christian view is that while in his phyisical form he was beset by suffering of the flesh and this seeped into his spirit such that he wondered if his father had discarded him. My personal view was that Jesus was not 'god' nor a son of god, so therefore he was speaking to his 'father in heaven', another way of referencing his god.

3. I agree, from a traditional christian perspective this is a problem; I believe one of the ways it has been traditionally met is that the original sin imprinted itself on us all so deeply, that it needed to be addressed with drastic measures, that humans had to be confronted by an event of significant divine impact. My personal view? Jesus was a guy who got crucified because his followers were making the local governors and their foreign overlords nervous.

4. The standard reply i have been given on this is that Jesus chose to do it himself.

5. Actually the word is 'gave' not sacrificed, though I understand the point. In which case the pat answer would be gave unto humanity or sacrificed upon the laws of humanity.

6. The traditional view would be that the sacrifice was the suffering; that Jesus sacrificed himself by undertaking pain and ultimately the feeling of death before regaining his true divinity. Personally I think it is not much of a sacrifice, but it sure would not have been pleasant.

7 + 8 + 9. I would suggest you read up on the idea of salvation through faith vs salvation through works, it is a lot more complex than you seem to think.

10. Where in the bible? But in any case, the original chrisitians were jews, therefore if you consider it from that perspective it makes sense that they were rather accommodating of their relatives and country men.

11. You should examine the concept of baptism of the spirit and so forth, as opposed to merely baptism of water or whatever it is called. The early church did agree that they went to hell, however later in the church's history they realised how screwed up that concept was.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

It's the Incarnation that reconciles us to God -- not a blood atonement.

So you believe that it was indeed God Himself that suffered and died on the cross, but there was no real meaning or purpose for His death?

 

[ER.Robin Zoe]

First up - if you want to differentiate a specific section of text, keep it to a minimum - otherwise you end up with all sorts of weird formatting that makes it hard to read; if you are attempting to convince someone of the validity of your position through the argument you present, they need to be able to read it, preferably to be able to read it easily.

1. Even if God COULD have had many sons, if you accept the Christian view that he only had one, then that would make it significant. My personal view as an Ignostic, if the chidren of 'God' had great capabilities, then each would be important, though their individual importance would be diminished due to their numbers, a single one however is valuable due to its scarcity and this would make his involvement of greater importance.

2. A very good question; the traditional Christian view is that while in his phyisical form he was beset by suffering of the flesh and this seeped into his spirit such that he wondered if his father had discarded him. My personal view was that Jesus was not 'god' nor a son of god, so therefore he was speaking to his 'father in heaven', another way of referencing his god.

3. I agree, from a traditional christian perspective this is a problem; I believe one of the ways it has been traditionally met is that the original sin imprinted itself on us all so deeply, that it needed to be addressed with drastic measures, that humans had to be confronted by an event of significant divine impact. My personal view? Jesus was a guy who got crucified because his followers were making the local governors and their foreign overlords nervous.

4. The standard reply i have been given on this is that Jesus chose to do it himself.

5. Actually the word is 'gave' not sacrificed, though I understand the point. In which case the pat answer would be gave unto humanity or sacrificed upon the laws of humanity.

6. The traditional view would be that the sacrifice was the suffering; that Jesus sacrificed himself by undertaking pain and ultimately the feeling of death before regaining his true divinity. Personally I think it is not much of a sacrifice, but it sure would not have been pleasant.

7 + 8 + 9. I would suggest you read up on the idea of salvation through faith vs salvation through works, it is a lot more complex than you seem to think.

10. Where in the bible? But in any case, the original chrisitians were jews, therefore if you consider it from that perspective it makes sense that they were rather accommodating of their relatives and country men.

11. You should examine the concept of baptism of the spirit and so forth, as opposed to merely baptism of water or whatever it is called. The early church did agree that they went to hell, however later in the church's history they realised how screwed up that concept was.

Dear friend,believe me when I pose these questions to any christian,everytime I get different and unconvincing answers!Please do not misconcieve me,but I find your answers unconvincing as well.Besides,I being a person who does not believe in anything without having done research on it,I have already studied the christian concept of salvation and that dosen't appeal to my rationality.Infact it is my own research and questioning nature that has caused my disillusionment with christianity which I forsook yrs ago.Though I love Jesus very much .I respect him and follow his teachings!I know that he never claimed divinity nor preach concepts as Baptism.It is an innovation from the deviant followers of Jesus and every innovation leads
to a wrong path.Thus, I dont follow saints Paul,or John or whosoever!I have not abandoned Jesus and I am not ready to do so.I really look at him as an example.I have lately heard from my atheist friend who converted to Islam recently,that in the Quran,God mentions that Jesus was one of the mightiest messengers of God who were sent to guide mankind but their followers (out of their vested interests tampered with the Divine message,deviated from the path of God and made others to do us).After reading the Bible,I realized that this was absolutely true!The concept of Jesus being the messenger of God seems logical to me.That's why I am seriously studying Islam to look for the answers.My friend who was a staunch christian before,also studied various ideologies and finally embraced islam.I ve many others friends who did the same.I constantly debate with them about belief ,religion,isalm,concept of God,trinity,salvation,evolution and creationism and i find the message of quran very convincing though yet there are many things to learn and explore.Let's see where this quest of truth takes me.Wish me luck!

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

For those who believe that Jesus died for our sins,I really have some noteworthy questions to ask.Till date no christian has been been able to answer them satisfactorily and logically!

Really? I find that hard to believe.

1. You forget the Son IS God.

2. While being God, the Son is distinct from the Father, and at that point of mental and physical agony He felt His Father in Heaven turn away and do nothing as He was crucified. Though this does not show that Jesus did not want to die on the cross.

3. Look at my earlier post in response to the Sum of Awe.

4. No, because God in effect sacrificed HIMSELF. He chose to do it.

5. He made the sacrifice FOR humanity, in exchange for our eternal salvation.

6. God can not get back the suffering and torment that He went through on our behalf. And some say that after death (in the three days before He rose again) He suffered even more agony, though I'm not too sure on that one.

7. It is pretty hard to fully accept the sacrifice God made and disobey His laws without repentance. If you were to fully understand the magnitude of God's gift to humanity, then one would try to emulate His teachings and do good on His behalf. Teachings vary on this and to be honest I'm not too sure entirely what my own stance is. I believe to be forgiven you must be truly sorry for your sins.

8. I believe that this only applies to those who have not accepted Christ as their saviour.

9. Indeed. Despite the unbelief, they are still being saved THROUGH Jesus' sacrifice, however.

10. The Bible does not say this.

11. Very few Christians, if any, believe this.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Still not technically a sacrifice.

 

[ER.Robin Zoe]

Really? I find that hard to believe.

1. You forget the Son IS God.

2. While being God, the Son is distinct from the Father, and at that point of mental and physical agony He felt His Father in Heaven turn away and do nothing as He was crucified. Though this does not show that Jesus did not want to die on the cross.

3. Look at my earlier post in response to the Sum of Awe.

4. No, because God in effect sacrificed HIMSELF. He chose to do it.

5. He made the sacrifice FOR humanity, in exchange for our eternal salvation.

6. God can not get back the suffering and torment that He went through on our behalf. And some say that after death (in the three days before He rose again) He suffered even more agony, though I'm not too sure on that one.

7. It is pretty hard to fully accept the sacrifice God made and disobey His laws without repentance. If you were to fully understand the magnitude of God's gift to humanity, then one would try to emulate His teachings and do good on His behalf. Teachings vary on this and to be honest I'm not too sure entirely what my own stance is. I believe to be forgiven you must be truly sorry for your sins.

8. I believe that this only applies to those who have not accepted Christ as their saviour.

9. Indeed. Despite the unbelief, they are still being saved THROUGH Jesus' sacrifice, however.

10. The Bible does not say this.

11. Very few Christians, if any, believe this.

Friend,
Your answers are even more unconvincing!
1,If u really believe in trinity,go to that thread ie "TRINITY" where I have lately posted some challenging Questions,See if u can answer them and then tell me That Jesus was son of God .
You say
'' While being God, the Son is distinct from the Father, and at that point of mental and physical agony He felt His Father in Heaven turn away and do nothing as He was crucified. Though this does not show that Jesus did not want to die on the cross.''
OH really,That sounds irrational.I do not accept that at all.Infact that is hillarious even to think that one part of the three in one god is requesting the other not to subject him to punishment! ha ha ha
Besides you have not answered even a single question of mine,though u think of having done so. See iI do not intend to mock at what the christians believe,BUT when I ask For answers,I want factual,and logical ones,I do not want anyone to beat nail into the air to prove his beliefs without any proofs and throw them on my face!If you can provide logical evidences to me,well and good,otherwise keep mum,Please!
I am fed up of assumptions!

 

[cablescavenger]

God is all powerful, why make a man just to die to save everyone when he could just do it by thinking it happening?

Yes, I know I will get a lot of comments saying "Jesus is no man! He is God!" Well, technically isn't he a demigod? Half man half God? And even if you don't consider him to be, it just made people suffer from sadness, especially Mary the mother of Jesus.

We are told the bible is full of figurative stories, not to be taken on face value, I see no reason to assume Jesus is anything more than a story aid, set up as an example to all. :bible:

Rumour has it Jesus is based loosely on someone called Brian

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Friend,
Your answers are even more unconvincing!
1,If u really believe in trinity,go to that thread ie "TRINITY" where I have lately posted some challenging Questions,See if u can answer them and then tell me That Jesus was son of God .
You say
'' While being God, the Son is distinct from the Father, and at that point of mental and physical agony He felt His Father in Heaven turn away and do nothing as He was crucified. Though this does not show that Jesus did not want to die on the cross.''
OH really,That sounds irrational.I do not accept that at all.Infact that is hillarious even to think that one part of the three in one god is requesting the other not to subject him to punishment! ha ha ha
Besides you have not answered even a single question of mine,though u think of having done so. See iI do not intend to mock at what the christians believe,BUT when I ask For answers,I want factual,and logical ones,I do not want anyone to beat nail into the air to prove his beliefs without any proofs and throw them on my face!If you can provide logical evidences to me,well and good,otherwise keep mum,Please!
I am fed up of assumptions!

I wasn't aiming to prove anything to you, simply because I cannot. It's a matter of faith and what I believe. No religion can provide factual evidence to support their claim about a supreme being. What factual evidence have you managed to ascertain from the Quran?

The Trinity is indeed a difficult concept to grasp, and I do not expect you nor anyone to fully understand it. But the relationship, in my view, between Jesus and the Father is indeed a "Father-Son" relationship. I see no problem with God's incarnation feeling shunned and rejected by his parent being. It's a tricky and fumbly thing to put into words I must say.

And how have I not answered a single question of yours? Have you even read them? I can see that whatever I write will simply be dismissed by yourself. Look at question 10, that was a straight-up and factual answer at the very least.

And if I come off as rude or am wrong then I do apologise, but are you a Muslim trying to play as an Atheist and ridicule Christianity?

False flag operation

Joking or not, I seriously think you're right here...

Still not technically a sacrifice.

If it doesn't meet the requirements of the definition, then I apologise. Suggestions for a better word?

 

[sojourner]

So you believe that it was indeed God Himself that suffered and died on the cross, but there was no real meaning or purpose for His death?

No. God suffered and died as one of us. God's self-sacrifice illustrates God's great love for us, and shows us the truth that life comes through death. It is an example for us. Jesus said, "Follow me." And to the cross of self-sacrifice -- of dying to self, is where we follow him.

 

[sojourner]

I want not assumptions but factual answers!

The aim of the spiritual quest is not to find answers, but to ask questions.
The aim of the religion is not to provide answers, but to provide space to question.

Your methodology is right -- but your goal is wrong. You're doing the right things, but looking for the wrong results.

 

[ER.Robin Zoe]

I wasn't aiming to prove anything to you, simply because I cannot. It's a matter of faith and what I believe. No religion can provide factual evidence to support their claim about a supreme being. What factual evidence have you managed to ascertain from the Quran?

The Trinity is indeed a difficult concept to grasp, and I do not expect you nor anyone to fully understand it. But the relationship, in my view, between Jesus and the Father is indeed a "Father-Son" relationship. I see no problem with God's incarnation feeling shunned and rejected by his parent being. It's a tricky and fumbly thing to put into words I must say.

And how have I not answered a single question of yours? Have you even read them? I can see that whatever I write will simply be dismissed by yourself. Look at question 10, that was a straight-up and factual answer at the very least.

And if I come off as rude or am wrong then I do apologise, but are you a Muslim trying to play as an Atheist and ridicule Christianity?



Joking or not, I seriously think you're right here...


If it doesn't meet the requirements of the definition, then I apologise. Suggestions for a better word?

Friend,let me first clarify that I am not a muslim I said I was only studying islam.Let me tell you that I am also studying Judaism,hinduism and buddhism.Does that make me a jew or a hindu .
ofcourse not!What I said was that my friend who recently converted to islam from atheism told me that their quran regards the concept of trinity as blasphemy against God and it refutes Jesus to be the Son of God but considers him to be of the mightiest messengers of God.Now that concept sounds more logical to me than trinity.That is my preference and choice.You do not have any authority to oppose what I choose to believe.To you is your way and to me is mine!So Goodbye!

And lastly let me tell you and I am not a mulim yet(though I am seriously studying Islam-there still remains a lot more to explore and I am constantly debating my friends about it.If they are able to convince me of its truth and logic,I shall accept it.If not,I shall denounce it just as I denounced christianity 2 yrs ago!).And also note that I had been an atheist until just a shortwhile ago but now I have turned into monotheist after a long perid of dissatisfaction with atheism and I realized this dissatisfaction through these forums!