Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?

[1robin]

i guess its a fools take on it. My belief personally, is that i know i have sinned, i have done very bad things. I have broken all ten commandments over and over. I know i was wrong, that i was a poor miserable black hearted sinner and deserved whatever punishment i had coming (hell is not the same for everyone). I am thankful that god did love me and freely saved an undeserving sinner such as i. God's wisdom truly is higher than our wisdom and if you want to question that and stick your nose up at what christ did for us, then that is your choice, but i think it is a very foolish choice. That's just my belief/opinion.

Ditto

 

[Heathen Hammer]

The events happened. Jesus was crucified. What really changed?

(Hint: I'm telling you that Mark agrees with you.)

So, what really changed?

 

[1robin]

So, what really changed?

At the very least the most influential religion in the history of man was begun. Plus the teachings of Christ which have done more to restrain and soften mankind that all the secular moralists and philosophers put together have been spread throughout the world. Plus the more important and significant spiritual changes like the concept that since Christ came, for the first time we can have direct access to God, complete forgiveness, and adoption as sons of God. I imagine you will dismiss the later but there is no denying the former.

 

[roberto]

"...Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?..."

Which of the three types of sin ?

 

[CMike]

so... let's recap:
God sacrificed himself, to himself, to appease himself, to change a rule that he made in the first place. So he won't have to roast us alive, his beloved creation, for ever and ever. He loves us so much, we cannot even comprehend, but if we don't love him back, he will hasta la vista our soul into the molten lava jaccuzzi for all eternity.
sound accurate?

:yes: LOL Makes perfect sense to me

/sarcasm off

 

[CMike]

I think what you meant to post might be....
'my prophet is greater than your prophet'.

There is only one God.
There is only one God to worship.
No one else is worthy of your knee.

All who have spoken well of God will stand well enough in His presence.
No one circumvents the prophets.

You do have to choose. Life is too short to follow after everyone.
In this life you have choices...yes you do.

But ultimately the one choice that counts for something doesn't belong to you.

It belongs to the angels...and they carry swords.

It belongs to G-D.

Angels are simply messengers of G-D.

 

[Jacksnyte]

At the very least the most influential religion in the history of man was begun. Plus the teachings of Christ which have done more to restrain and soften mankind that all the secular moralists and philosophers put together have been spread throughout the world. Plus the more important and significant spiritual changes like the concept that since Christ came, for the first time we can have direct access to God, complete forgiveness, and adoption as sons of God. I imagine you will dismiss the later but there is no denying the former.

Yes this religion was spread world-wide....by the sword! It has utterly destroyed, undermined and corrupted so many cultures in favor of the extremely dysfunctional european model.

 

[Thief]

It belongs to G-D.

Angels are simply messengers of G-D.

Matthew13:39
The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world, and the reapers are the angels.

Matthew 13:49
So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels come forth and sever the wicked from the just.

Angels have been displayed with sword in hand for centuries.
Not by my word....or work of my hand.
This is not a new idea.

Angels as messengers?...yeah....often they are.
But there has been occasion of angels with the message of death.

Are you assuming angels have no will of their own?
(there's plenty of discussion for this!...start a thread!...let me know.)

 

[1robin]

Yes this religion was spread world-wide....by the sword! It has utterly destroyed, undermined and corrupted so many cultures in favor of the extremely dysfunctional european model.

Oh good lord. For early Christianity it was the one being persecuted. It had a slight break with Constantine and then Nero and the boys started in again. There is no significant current Christian European model. Europe tried to encorporate the Church and so it self destructed. Europe is a virtual secular continent these days. Can you tell me which countries were forcefully converted by Christians? I admit Christianity has it's share of violence but your by the sword claim is very inaccurate. What group of a significant amount of people could claim anykind on non violent history. Even the Budists and Hindu's fought the Muslims. Regardless any violence done by Christians was completely opposed by the teachings of the bible and so says nothing about the religion. You judge a philosophy by it's faithful not it's rebels and by it's use not missuse. When compared with atheism and fascists driven by evolutionary dogma they caused infinately more damage than Christians (and probably Muslims and Jews combined) ever thought of. This is simple misdirection and skirting the issue by sensationalism.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Plus the more important and significant spiritual changes like the concept that since Christ came, for the first time we can have direct access to God, complete forgiveness, and adoption as sons of God. I imagine you will dismiss the later but there is no denying the former.

Since we are only talking about the spiritual, that the historical changes happened, are as-read.

We had direct access to God before; ask the Hebrews.
Having to go through Jesus is not direct access to God. Jesus is in between.
So, again, what changed?

 

[InChrist]

Since we are only talking about the spiritual, that the historical changes happened, are as-read.

We had direct access to God before; ask the Hebrews.
Having to go through Jesus is not direct access to God. Jesus is in between.
So, again, what changed?

Certain ones chosen by God had direct access or contact with God, but not all the people of Israel. There was a barrier or separation between God and humans as represented by the veil in the temple. This was removed by Christ and those who go through Christ, the Son of God now have direct access to God the Father.


[FONT=&quot]And you shall hang the veil from the clasps. Then you shall bring the ark of the Testimony in there, behind the veil. The veil shall be a divider for you between the holy place and the Most Holy. Ex. 26:33[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split Matthew 27:50-51[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ.
2 Cor. 3:14[/FONT]

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Certain ones chosen by God had direct access or contact with God, but not all the people of Israel. There was a barrier or separation between God and humans as represented by the veil in the temple. This was removed by Christ and those who go through Christ, the Son of God now have direct access to God the Father.

No, the veil was not an illustration of some barrier between God and Man. For most of the Hebrew's history that temple wasn't even there.
And there is no need for an intercessor; God listens to all men, directly. They need only repent to him. Numbers 5 is rather clear. What Paul says in Corinthians is irrelevant, as he is merely speaking a dishonest man's opinion.

Sin exists before and after; God is angry about sin before and after; people go to Hell before and after.

Nothing changed at all. Nothing of any significance.

 

[Thief]

No, the veil was not an illustration of some barrier between God and Man. For most of the Hebrew's history that temple wasn't even there.
And there is no need for an intercessor; God listens to all men, directly. They need only repent to him. Numbers 5 is rather clear. What Paul says in Corinthians is irrelevant, as he is merely speaking a dishonest man's opinion.

Sin exists before and after; God is angry about sin before and after; people go to Hell before and after.

Nothing changed at all. Nothing of any significance.

I agree.

Except now it really is....you and God.....with no one to blame but yourself
if the two of you fail to reach an accord.

But the next step would be a different topic....

 

[Heathen Hammer]

I agree.

Except now it really is....you and God.....with no one to blame but yourself
if the two of you fail to reach an accord..

*sigh* I must admit: it borders on amazing to watch you repeat the same mistake with this frequency, but remember I said I wasn't going to repeat myself correcting you any longer.

Not 'except now', it always was that way, in the system of Abraham. No intercessor is required. Please stay on topic.

and you can blame God

The maze is not the rat's fault.

If he gets the glory for the good, he is to blame for the evil. Can't have it both ways. The creator took upon himself many heavy responsibilities when he creates; you cannot shrug them off just because it suits him to be selfish.

Or you can join a system that isn't run by a tyrant. Most slaves never think of that.

But then again, the most common folk are content to be slaves.

 

[sojourner]

Sin exists before and after

Sin is a relationship. The relationship has changed.

God is angry about sin before and after

Is that so?

people go to Hell before and after

They do?

Nothing changed at all. Nothing of any significance.

The relationship between God and humanity changed. I'd call that significant.

 

[Thief]

*sigh* I must admit: it borders on amazing to watch you repeat the same mistake with this frequency, but remember I said I wasn't going to repeat myself correcting you any longer.

Not 'except now', it always was that way, in the system of Abraham. No intercessor is required. Please stay on topic.

and you can blame God

The maze is not the rat's fault.

If he gets the glory for the good, he is to blame for the evil. Can't have it both ways. The creator took upon himself many heavy responsibilities when he creates; you cannot shrug them off just because it suits him to be selfish.

Or you can join a system that isn't run by a tyrant. Most slaves never think of that.

But then again, the most common folk are content to be slaves.

So you have faults, and God did it?

At what point do you take charge of yourself?
Your faults are your own?....your sins are your own?
And it has been this way..... always?

So how do you blame God?

If your hand does anything at all..it's because you think you should....
or because you felt like it.
That's you...right?

So it's God's fault that you are a sinner?
And this condition can only be fixed by God?...need a go-between?
Or were you going to take the responsibility and make 'a change'?

 

[CMike]

Certain ones chosen by God had direct access or contact with God, but not all the people of Israel. There was a barrier or separation between God and humans as represented by the veil in the temple. This was removed by Christ and those who go through Christ, the Son of God now have direct access to God the Father.


[FONT=&quot]And you shall hang the veil from the clasps. Then you shall bring the ark of the Testimony in there, behind the veil. The veil shall be a divider for you between the holy place and the Most Holy. Ex. 26:33[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split Matthew 27:50-51[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ.
2 Cor. 3:14[/FONT]

I think he really had to get over himself.

That Jesus thought he had some divine power is an insult and challenge to the real G-d.

 

[CMike]

No, the veil was not an illustration of some barrier between God and Man. For most of the Hebrew's history that temple wasn't even there.
And there is no need for an intercessor; God listens to all men, directly. They need only repent to him. Numbers 5 is rather clear. What Paul says in Corinthians is irrelevant, as he is merely speaking a dishonest man's opinion.

Sin exists before and after; God is angry about sin before and after; people go to Hell before and after.

Nothing changed at all. Nothing of any significance.

+100:yes:

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Sin is a relationship. The relationship has changed.

So God broke his own covenant? Interesting.

Is that so?

Yes

They do?

Yes. Or are you attempting to rebut using a personalized fringe interpretation?

The relationship between God and humanity changed. I'd call that significant.

At what point during Jesus' time on Earth did it change, why, and why weren't we allowed to opt out, since it wasn't the original covenant we agreed to?

As I pointed out in other places, God basically doesn't adhere to any rational rules [including his very own], and changes things dangerously [for others] at random.

 

[Thief]

As I pointed out in other places, God basically doesn't adhere to any rational rules [including his very own], and changes things dangerously [for others] at random.

So you would be more rational than God?

And God is not allowed to change His mind?

And you are attempting to corner this discussion by infringing upon the will of God?

Dealing with God is dangerous?.....probably.