Where exactly is the sacrifice in the death of Jesus?

[sojourner]

You claim that there is a sacrifice by god.
You have not supported said claim.
I claim there was no sacrifice by god because god gave up nothing.
He suffered nothing.

In fact, god knew before he even started that man could not keep with the 613 laws he set down, yet he set them down anyway.

God gave up God's humanity.

 

[sojourner]

Where in the Bible does it even hint that he was beaten to "within an inch of his life"?
Or are YOU just going by what you see in the movies?

Ok. Let's try a little experiment:

You arrange to have yourself whipped 40 times with a cat-o-nine-tails digging pieces of skin off your back, in the hot Mid-Eastern sun, by a large person who doesn't care about you, or your well-being, and we'll just see how close to death you come from that activity.

Besides which, you're distracting the argument by picking at relatively irrelevant details. "Within an inch of his life" is a figure of speech. It was a significant amount of physical torture -- enough that would lead any sane person to call it a "sacrifice."

 

[sojourner]

I'm basing my judgement on a historical look at the crucifixion, and what the Bible says. I've also seen modern day crucifixions; however, they can not truly be compared to the ancient form. That is all besides the point though and really irrelevant to what I posted.

Regardless of the theological reasons for the gospel writers to portray Jesus as "serene," ancient, Roman crucifixion was brutal and certainly constituted a sacrifice on Jesus' part. In fact, Jesus is recorded as having cried out that God had forsaken him. Doesn't sound too "serene" to me...

 

[fallingblood]

Funny, everyone here is trying to define the sacrifice of Jesus Christ by applying nothing more than what they understand about what others say they heard and saw as Christ went through what He did. In the final analysis we do not have the slightest idea of what Christ went through in order to accomplish what He did. Christians are told by God and His appointed prophets that it was very much a sacrifice on the part of God and, for me and many others, that is good enough. I do not need to understand the gory details of it even if I was capable of understanding it (no man is) so why even try? The only thing that that can accomplish is a convoluted and distorted concept of a rather simple statement - "Christ made it possible for all mankind to be resurrected and for those who keep His commandments, to be able to return to the presence of God." All the debate in the world is not going to change that and any conclusions of such debate are irrelevant.

Then why add anything yourself? Now, I have to say that I believe you are wrong. I don't think Christ really did anything special. He died as a failed Messiah. However, debate and discussion will allow people to understand the idea of Jesus much better. Some people may not change their opinions, but others will come in and see evidence that helps them lean either way.

 

[fallingblood]

Ok. Let's try a little experiment:

You arrange to have yourself whipped 40 times with a cat-o-nine-tails digging pieces of skin off your back, in the hot Mid-Eastern sun, by a large person who doesn't care about you, or your well-being, and we'll just see how close to death you come from that activity.

Besides which, you're distracting the argument by picking at relatively irrelevant details. "Within an inch of his life" is a figure of speech. It was a significant amount of physical torture -- enough that would lead any sane person to call it a "sacrifice."

You are not talking about this in a historical light though. The beating that Jesus got was not done in order to kill him. It was step one of the crucifixion. If Jesus was let go at that time, he would have survived. It was meant to not take the person close to death. In practice, it was even monitored in order to make sure that the person was relatively safe (as in not going to die). The scenario you are painting is not historically correct.

 

[fallingblood]

Regardless of the theological reasons for the gospel writers to portray Jesus as "serene," ancient, Roman crucifixion was brutal and certainly constituted a sacrifice on Jesus' part. In fact, Jesus is recorded as having cried out that God had forsaken him. Doesn't sound too "serene" to me...

Not according to the Gospel of Luke. In Luke, Jesus is serene the entire time. He shows no signs of being tortured, or being worried. He even comforts the other who are crucified with him. Furthermore, he even asks God to forgive the men crucifying him. In Luke, Jesus is never seen as being in any trouble what so ever. Now, if we are to take the Gospels to be literal, Luke must be considered to be correct.

As you said though, yes, the crucifixion was brutal, but if Jesus was really God incarnate, than that would be of no consequence to Jesus.

 

[Tristesse]

Not according to the Gospel of Luke. In Luke, Jesus is serene the entire time. He shows no signs of being tortured, or being worried. He even comforts the other who are crucified with him. Furthermore, he even asks God to forgive the men crucifying him. In Luke, Jesus is never seen as being in any trouble what so ever. Now, if we are to take the Gospels to be literal, Luke must be considered to be correct.

As you said though, yes, the crucifixion was brutal, but if Jesus was really God incarnate, than that would be of no consequence to Jesus.

Yes, each gospel depicts the events of the crucifixion much different from each other. Even down to what day he was supposedly crucified.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Ok. Let's try a little experiment:

You arrange to have yourself whipped 40 times with a cat-o-nine-tails digging pieces of skin off your back, in the hot Mid-Eastern sun, by a large person who doesn't care about you, or your well-being, and we'll just see how close to death you come from that activity.

Besides which, you're distracting the argument by picking at relatively irrelevant details. "Within an inch of his life" is a figure of speech. It was a significant amount of physical torture -- enough that would lead any sane person to call it a "sacrifice."

And again you conveniently forget that he gets to be god 3 days later. I don't see how that's a sacrifice at all. One day of pain to bring an eternity of power? That's like saying if you give up 5 dollars to become a millionaire you're making a sacrifice. Really a weak argument...

 

[Zadok]

Originally Posted by Zadok
The point that you obviously do not understand is discipline - not for personal aggrandizement but for the good of someone other than self.


Hey, feel free to rationalize it however you have to.
No skin off my nose.

My point exactly - note your concern with self and lack of concern for anything else.

Originally Posted by Zadok
There was nothing in it for him.


I disagree.
It was completely, 100% for him.

What then did he gain that he did not have or control prior? What was in it for him? Your appreciation?

Originally Posted by Zadok
The sad thing is not that you do not care but that you do not recognize or care for the power of discipline.

You do not know jack **** about me.
How about you stop trying to tell me what I do and do not understand and or care about?

I understand you need this strawman in order to continue, but it is rather rude and un-Christian like to dictate to others what they think, feel, and or understand.
Especially when you do not know jack **** about them.

I know you from your posts. Is there a better way to get to know you? Reading your posts results in not knowing jack **** about your? Do you recommend that I not "judge" you from your posts? Are you the example in this matter that I should follow?

Originally Posted by Zadok
And so you pretend that discipline is a charade –to accomplish what? Without discipline, you will gain nothing and lose everything - sadly without discipline you will lose even your most trusted friends; if you ever had any.

This is nothing more than you attempting to divert the topic from god to me.
Nice try.
But I am not the least bit interested in your strawman or your attacks on said strawman, your ad hominems, or even your worthless sermon.

Again you miss the point - order can only come from discipline. I offer Jesus as the best example of discipline. I am not criticizing Jesus or his discipline - you are. I only asked if there was any substance to your criticism - do you understand and have something to offer or you just a whiner and complainer (claiming the grapes are sourer because you have failed to obtain them.)

The point is simple – if one follows in the discipline of Jesus they will know if it is of G-d or not. If you understand and have tired “better” discipline – I am interested and desire to know more of your opinion. But if your opinion is empty with nothing to offer but to complain about Jesus – even if you are smart – what is the point. Any fool can complain – I am interested in finding “things” worth keeping – I believe Jesus offers many things worthwhile. You may oppose my thinking but without offering something of substance that even you believe to be more worthwhile – why should I care about your opinion?

Zadok

 

[Evandr]

Then why add anything yourself? Now, I have to say that I believe you are wrong. I don't think Christ really did anything special. He died as a failed Messiah. However, debate and discussion will allow people to understand the idea of Jesus much better. Some people may not change their opinions, but others will come in and see evidence that helps them lean either way.

My point exactly - “You Think” - You do knot know, how can you?, you do not have all the facts, no man does.

Debate and discussion can not change the truth. It is good to discuss what is, but not wise to formulate opinions based on conjecture, that is how information becomes corrupt. I am not saying that the story of Christ's sacrifice has not already suffered conjectural mutation through out the centuries but adding to it accomplishes nothing but to further mislead future generations. This reality and my belief in God dictates that I must believe that that God has not stopped communicating to man via the Holy Ghost, through living prophets and/or made reservations for those not privy to His commandments, in fact, I have experienced it but you cannot know that simply because I said so, you must experience it for yourself.

When I go looking for more enlightenment, I try to look to the source, not to a group of people that must start every thought with "I think", having no firm foundation upon which such thoughts are built.

 

[fallingblood]

My point exactly - “You Think” - You do knot know, how can you?, you do not have all the facts, no man does.

Debate and discussion can not change the truth. It is good to discuss what is, but not wise to formulate opinions based on conjecture, that is how information becomes corrupt. I am not saying that the story of Christ's sacrifice has not already suffered conjectural mutation through out the centuries but adding to it accomplishes nothing but to further mislead future generations. This reality and my belief in God dictates that I must believe that that God has not stopped communicating to man via the Holy Ghost, through living prophets and/or made reservations for those not privy to His commandments, in fact, I have experienced it but you cannot know that simply because I said so, you must experience it for yourself.

When I go looking for more enlightenment, I try to look to the source, not to a group of people that must start every thought with "I think", having no firm foundation upon which such thoughts are built.

So basically you're saying you're wrong than? If no one can know, then everything you've stated is basically useless as you only think it.

Dealing with historical figures, one can not know for certain. Even looking at the source material, one can not know for sure. That is part of history. What I've stated is based on what I believe most likely happened as shown from source material, history of the time, anthropological research, cultural research, etc. Now I may claim that I know what I'm saying to be the truth. However, there is a chance I am wrong. Yet, it is illogical to state that just because one says they think it means they do not have a firm foundation. I personally find that to be quite arrogant.

 

[McBell]

You are not talking about this in a historical light though. The beating that Jesus got was not done in order to kill him. It was step one of the crucifixion. If Jesus was let go at that time, he would have survived. It was meant to not take the person close to death. In practice, it was even monitored in order to make sure that the person was relatively safe (as in not going to die). The scenario you are painting is not historically correct.

Now now.
You should really not pester him with facts.

 

[McBell]

God gave up God's humanity.

hey, whatever it takes to keep yourself from crying.

 

[Storm]

You are not talking about this in a historical light though. The beating that Jesus got was not done in order to kill him. It was step one of the crucifixion. If Jesus was let go at that time, he would have survived. It was meant to not take the person close to death. In practice, it was even monitored in order to make sure that the person was relatively safe (as in not going to die). The scenario you are painting is not historically correct.

While it may not have been intended to kill Him, I think it's fair to say that someone on the wrong end of 40 lashes (or even 39) has been "beaten within an inch of their life."

 

[sojourner]

And again you conveniently forget that he gets to be god 3 days later. I don't see how that's a sacrifice at all. One day of pain to bring an eternity of power? That's like saying if you give up 5 dollars to become a millionaire you're making a sacrifice. Really a weak argument...

First of all, Jesus was fully God before he underwent crucifixion. Second, Jesus was also fully human. Death for any human is a sacrifice, no matter the outcome. Third, Jesus didn't want power. Not one time did he ever claim power for himself. He may have claimed it for others, but never for himself. What is "prizey" about gaining power, if you never wanted it in the first place? That would be like awarding me a lifetime supply of feminine protection. Don't want it -- don't need it.

 

[sojourner]

hey, whatever it takes to keep yourself from crying.

Provocative and inane. And worthless to the discussion.

 

[McBell]

Provocative and inane. And worthless to the discussion.

Yeah, because "God gave up God's humanity" is like the core of the whole freaking topic....

 

[logician]

I have a couple of problems with this post. First, Jesus was never beaten within an inch of his life. He had underwent 40-1 lashing in practice. Meaning, he was condemned to 40 lashings, but in practice this subtracted one just in case they miscounted. This is something that could be survived, and one was meant to survive it. It was a common ordeal prior to the crucifixion. It was not meant to kill, just hurt. The Romans did not want a person to die during the lashings, they wanted them to suffer on the cross for an elongated time.

Luke does not have Jesus complaining or anything. He is seen as quite tranquil. He is even talking about being in paradise later on. So in at least that account, I don't see too much taken away (now, I would say that account is a fraud, but that is besides the point). Either way, Jesus fully knew it was a temporary thing. He knew he would overcome death. So he had nothing to fear.

Logically, yes, it would be painful. But it was a relatively short time according to the Bible, Luke has him not really suffering at all, and according to the Bible, he knew would be alive once more, and be in paradise quite shortly. Personally, looking at the pay off, I would have done the same thing.

Since these and other stories in the gospels contradict each other so much, and there is not one iota of substantiating historical evidence, one is lead to believe it is highly likely Mark, Matthew and Luke were making it up as they went along, according to their own biases. But, then again, I don't accept at best hearsay at face value like some do.:sleep:

 

[blueman]

Many more people that you refer to are not God. Jesus's sacrifice was significant because it was a righteous God dying to redeem a lost world as a result of sin. There's no comparison!

 

[McBell]

Many more people that you refer to are not God. Jesus's sacrifice was significant because it was a righteous God dying to redeem a lost world as a result of sin. There's no comparison!

What makes setting up the 613 rules he knew before hand could not be met righteous?