Reason for Jesus Death Explained

[1213]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.

Bible tells that the reason Jesus died is this:

For to this end Christ died, rose, and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.
Romans 14:9

And reason why he came on earth is this:


"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, Because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim release to the captives, Recovering of sight to the blind, To deliver those who are crushed, And to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."
Luke 4:18-19


He said to them, "Let's go elsewhere into the next towns, that I may preach there also, because for this reason I came forth."
Mark 1:38

 

[sooda]

I don't know all about the archeology. For purposes of Jesus death in the gospels, which is the star in the contention of his death, Elisha isn't popular in his own country; and this is used to compare him to Jesus who also is unpopular. See Luke 4:27. Elisha is unpopular + Jesus is unpopular, thus arguing Jesus is legitimate despite his unpopularity. This also adds to the main argument (of the gospels) that Jews should fellowship gentiles, receive the Kingdom of God there, to accept the kingdom was like seed that falling upon various kinds of soil rather than seed planted in carefully curated boxes.

Makes no sense to me. Jesus was not unpopular.. By all accounts he was well-received by everyone except a small group of Pharisees in Jerusalem.

 

[12jtartar]

Jesus Christ died for the same reasons everybody dies, except he was executed by curcifiction by the Romans for claiming to be the King of the Jews and rebellion against Roman authority. He lived to present the message of his Revelation.

shunyadragon,
According to the Bible, it seems, that Jesus died to take away the sins of all men who would follow after him, 1Peter 2:21, John 1:29, 3:16, 10:14-18, 1Timothy 2:5,6, Matthew 20:28.
Since Jesus never committed a sin, he would not have died at all, because, it seems, that death was the punishment for sin, Genesis 2:17, 3:17-19, Hebrews 4:15, 1Peter 2:21,22.
It seems to me that the entire chapter of Galatians 3, explains in depth, the reasons forJesus death.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Bible tells that the reason Jesus died is this:

A cherry picked verse with a mystical comment. Still at the heading of the chapter Paul says "One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables." (Romans 14:2 NIV) This, too, is about Jews and gentiles fellowshipping. It is an argument that is part of the entire argument following the mystical reason for Jesus death.

And reason why he came on earth is this:

You're avoiding the question. Suppose for example Jesus never died. He could go around healing every blind person with miracles and end slavery and rule as a king, forever. That's what people would want, after all; but it isn't literally why he came. Instead he left. We want someone to come here and end blindness and release the prisoners, but instead Jesus leaves. The question of the OP is why Jesus dies.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Makes no sense to me. Jesus was not unpopular.. By all accounts he was well-received by everyone except a small group of Pharisees in Jerusalem.

Whether it makes sense or not, that is the gospel comparing Jesus unpopularity with Elisha's.

 

[sooda]

Whether it makes sense or not, that is the gospel comparing Jesus unpopularity with Elisha's.

The 'gospel' is written 900 years after Elisha.

 

[paarsurrey]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.

"He willingly dies"

Does one mean that Jesus committed a suicide which is a sin of itself and thus makes him a sinful person from an innocent person, please?

Regards

 

[Brickjectivity]

shunyadragon,
According to the Bible, it seems, that Jesus died to take away the sins of all men who would follow after him, 1Peter 2:21, John 1:29, 3:16, 10:14-18, 1Timothy 2:5,6, Matthew 20:28.
Since Jesus never committed a sin, he would not have died at all, because, it seems, that death was the punishment for sin, Genesis 2:17, 3:17-19, Hebrews 4:15, 1Peter 2:21,22.
It seems to me that the entire chapter of Galatians 3, explains in depth, the reasons forJesus death.

I want to point out that a lot of people ( I don't know all of the reasons ) strongly believe that Galatians is written relatively late, possibly after the Christians and Jews had the big falling out but before 3rd century. Mostly its because the comments by this author can be perceived as contradicting Paul in certain other letters. Also Galatians seems to argue against Judaism anymore while Romans seems to uphold Judaism as legitimate. We can use either, but they don't seem in sync. It depends how they are interpreted, but the objection is easy to understand. Also Galations is very testy. Chapter 1 says "If anyone preaches a different gospel to you then let him be accursed," so its kind of like he's saying the author of Romans is accursed depending on various things. So we have a letter to the Romans and one to the Galations, and they don't always mesh when it comes to the Law and Jews.

 

[sooda]

I want to point out that a lot of people ( I don't know all of the reasons ) strongly believe that Galatians is written relatively late, possibly after the Christians and Jews had the big falling out but before 3rd century. Mostly its because the comments by this author can be perceived as contradicting Paul in certain other letters. Also Galatians seems to argue against Judaism anymore while Romans seems to uphold Judaism as legitimate. We can use either, but they don't seem in sync. It depends how they are interpreted, but the objection is easy to understand. Also Galations is very testy. Chapter 1 says "If anyone preaches a different gospel to you then let him be accursed," so its kind of like he's saying the author of Romans is accursed depending on various things. So we have a letter to the Romans and one to the Galations, and they don't always mesh when it comes to the Law and Jews.

You might find this interesting.

An Introduction To The Book Of Romans | Bible.org

 

[Brickjectivity]

"He willingly dies"

Does one mean that Jesus committed a suicide which is a sin of itself and thus makes him a sinful person from an innocent person, please?

According to NT writers he agrees with the sentence of death against his own flesh. Suicide is not spelled out as a sin in the Law, although generally it is thought to be one except in certain cases. Jesus is dying as a martyr, so its not the same as suicide.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Whether it makes sense or not, that is the gospel comparing Jesus unpopularity with Elisha's.

The 'gospel' is written 900 years after Elisha.

Agreed. The mention of Elisha is like you or I mentioning someone's hero. Elisha is a figure in the book of 2 Kings for the writer of Luke but more importantly to all Jewish readers of Luke's time. The story is an argument to Jews about how to live in the times, and it argues for merging and sharing with gentiles. This relates also to the reason Jesus dies and to the OP.

 

[sooda]

Agreed. The mention of Elisha is like you or I mentioning someone's hero. Elisha is a figure in the book of 2 Kings for the writer of Luke but more importantly to all Jewish readers of Luke's time. The story is an argument to Jews about how to live in the times, and it argues for merging and sharing with gentiles. This relates also to the reason Jesus dies and to the OP.

The Jews were VERY divided.. Those who colluded with the Romans were considered apostate as were the Hellenized Jews around Galilee and the Decapolis.

 

[Brickjectivity]

The Jews were VERY divided.. Those who colluded with the Romans were considered apostate as were the Hellenized Jews around Galilee and the Decapolis.

I'm trying to steer this on topic, and I don't understand where this is going. It is an interesting fact?

 

[sooda]

The Jews were VERY divided.. Those who colluded with the Romans were considered apostate as were the Hellenized Jews around Galilee and the Decapolis.

How do you tie Elisha to Jesus and inclusion of the Gentiles 800 years before Christ?

 

[Brickjectivity]

How do you tie Elisha to Jesus and inclusion of the Gentiles 800 years before Christ?

Its the gospel of Luke where Jesus is compared to the famous figure of Elisha. I'm not tying anything.

 

[sealchan]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.

I see it more as there was no sin within him as he was a stand-in for God's will. He was killed because he would not defend himself in the ways that people do which are, perhaps, sins in themselves. He stood in the midst of the greatest controversies of religion and government and wouldn't stop anyone from coming at him except through speech. Even miracles were not enough to change those minds that were set against him.

For me Jesus saves because the life of Jesus demonstrates that God understands just how hard it is to be good. God reveals this understanding through the story indirectly in that Jesus is approved of by God as Jesus approves of and declares the will of God. God himself doesn't have much of a voice in the New Testament gospels to my recollection.

As such anyone who contemplates the life of Jesus can receive this message, this "good news". But again, perhaps strangely, the news comes indirectly unlike what we get in the Jewish Testament.

 

[Nakosis]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.

I thought is was a sin payment. In the OT when a sin was committed the "perfect" animal was sacrificed to God as a payment for their sin. However to pay for the original sin of Adam and Eve required a greater sacrifice. Since it was a sin to sacrifice humans, God himself came in the flesh and allowed himself to be sacrificed for the original sin. I suppose that is fair, since God created Adam and Eve so was taking responsibility for their actions.

SInce the OT God is the same God Christians are dealing with, shouldn't there be some consistency between the concepts of the OT and NT?

 

[Brickjectivity]

I thought is was a sin payment. In the OT when a sin was committed the "perfect" animal was sacrificed to God as a payment for their sin. However to pay for the original sin of Adam and Eve required a greater sacrifice. Since it was a sin to sacrifice humans, God himself came in the flesh and allowed himself to be sacrificed for the original sin. I suppose that is fair, since God created Adam and Eve so was taking responsibility for their actions.

SInce the OT God is the same God Christians are dealing with, shouldn't there be some consistency between the concepts of the OT and NT?

A cursory reading of the OT including the types of sacrifices reveals none of them is a payment for any sin other than accidental sin. For example there is no sacrifice that covers theft, and the only way to repay theft is to repay the goods stolen + extra. The sacrifices are feasts people have together, and they are treaties. The semantics are difficult, but it is clear that there is no such thing as a sacrificial payment for sin such as the Germanic kings have. Sacrifices cover the sin of being less than perfect...but mostly they are for fellowship and peace. That has extensive implications for understanding formative Christianity and probably should for modern Christians, too.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I thought is was a sin payment. In the OT when a sin was committed the "perfect" animal was sacrificed to God as a payment for their sin. However to pay for the original sin of Adam and Eve required a greater sacrifice. Since it was a sin to sacrifice humans, God himself came in the flesh and allowed himself to be sacrificed for the original sin. I suppose that is fair, since God created Adam and Eve so was taking responsibility for their actions.
Since the OT God is the same God Christians are dealing with, shouldn't there be some consistency between the concepts of the OT and NT?

In Scripture I find God sent pre-human Jesus to Earth for us.
Also, Not dead Jesus, but his God resurrected dead Jesus back to heavenly life. Acts of the Apostles 3:15; 2:24;5:30
Since we can Not resurrect oneself or another is why God sent Jesus to balance the scales of justice for us.
Even the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus still thinks he has a God over him - Revelation 3:12

 

[Ellen Brown]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.

IMHO, the religions of THE ONE GOD are now so muddled that the best we can do is to do the basics, and I think it is likely that is all he wanted in the first place. Either the machinations of our very flawed brains, or the deceiver has made a complete muck up of it all.