• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why did Jesus need to die?

jmvizanko

Uber Tool
I did not intend to embarrass you only to point out your wisdom in understanding that you as we all are the shining examples of what we believe. Anyone willing to take such responsibility for themselves is someone I respect – I may not always agree with everything you say but I will respect you and what you say for admitting what and who you are.

Zadok

Sorry I misundertood you and assumed you were attacking my post. Although if I had meant it the way I thought you took it, I would hope somebody would call me a pompous @$$. And same back at you about the respect.
 

javajo

Well-Known Member
There was a man who comitted murder in a robbery, shot an old man in cold blood. Later in prison he felt remorse and wondered if he could be forgiven. Christ paid for that man's sins on the cross and forgave him.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
If god could just forgive, Jesus would never have needed to go for a ride on the cross at all...

I know of two cases where this is not so.

1.I once asked a Jewish person if he were celebrating the day of attonemnet. He said he wasn't because he wasn't sure God would forgive him.

2. I heard of someone who had a Muslim tenant who was using a lot of wter for ablutions. When asked why, the man rsponded that he wasn't sure God would forgive him.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
To love is to sacrifice. If you have no understanding of sacrifice then you don't understand love. God is Love.

I view it as a sacrifice from an ego standpoint. However the person who is expressing love does not see it as a sacrifice but as a natural expression of that love.

The person who buys his special person flowers is not thinking "Oh hell, I just spent a lot of money" but is thinking of how much the flowers will please the person, otherwise it isn't love at all but the begrudging fulfillment of expecttions.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
I think you have a very false and depressing view of humanity. I think many people understand what love is, and how to truly love. Sure they may fail at it sometimes, or even a lot of the time. But that doesn't mean they don't know what love is.

I am not trying to understand love too logically, as it can be easily understood logically. And the misguided attempts to love that you refer to are not love at all.

You make up your own rules and your own definition of love and fulfill them and pat yourself on the back for being a good person but of course that means ignoring God because He sees things differently.

However God has stated that everyone has fallen short of what love is. It is only by receiving His love that we attain to it.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
The laws of justice require that for each act a reward or punishment is given. However, mankind, according to doctrine; became a fallen creature through the fall of Adam.

Let's start right here: Is it just to punish a child for the actions of his father?

Zadok said:
The result of this fallen state is eventual death. Because man is a fallen creature they cannot atone or pay for their own sins because they already are subject to death and must die. If it was possible that man could pay for their sins then there would be no purpose or justice in death.
Please keep in mind that it was God who decided that "the wages of sin are death." He could have chosen a punishment that enabled us to learn from our mistakes, or even one that allowed us to personally atone for what we have done.

Regarding Purpose: What purpose does death accomplish? To punish sin. With that in mind, what purpose does Jesus' death accomplish? He committed no sin. Is a punishment's purpose accomplished if you punish the person who did not commit the crime? If you send Cindy to timeout when it was Sally that wouldn't share her toys, does the punishment retain its purpose?

Regarding Justice: Is it just to punish an innocent person for the crimes of another? If we sent an innocent man-- even if he volunteered-- to death row in the place of a serial killer, would justice have been served?

Is it just to punish all transgressions equally? Should calling into work sick, when you are not sick (ie, lying) be punished as harshly as rape?

Zadok said:
There is an additional condition to man’s fallen state – that is a condition of limited knowledge. Man is blinded from the eventual outcome of their choices and therefore their choices are made in ignorance but faith (meaning no proof of G-d or the outcome for repentance or not repenting). Because man is in a state of “darkness” not knowing the full consequences of their choices it would not be just not to provide a way to overcome such ignorance – therefore, should an individual begin to realize that their choices were flawed they can justly petition a Messiah, Christ or Redeemer to suffer for their former acts of ignorance. This atoning for others is known as the act of mercy or specifically the mercy of G-d.
Are you suggesting that it is more intuitive to ask a god-man to suffer our punishment for our crimes, than it is to understand that actions have consequences?

Zadok said:
In order for G-d to offer mercy without upsetting justice – that G-d must atone for the transgressions and sins of those to be forgiven – else there is no justice. The price or payment is to suffer death. And that is the reason it was required that Jesus die that our sins can be redeemed.
Zadok said:
As mentioned before, it is a strange justice that is satisfied by the punishment of an innocent person.

In addition, remember that it is God who decided that the "wages of sin are death." He could have created any consequence he wanted, including one that actually aided in teaching us to be better individuals.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Not through his sacrifice. It was his theosis that created the bridge back between man and God. His Transfiguration is what mankind was like before the Fall. He endured the crucifixion to defeat Death with death as a result of Theosis.
So, it's two-part: 1) A bridge between god and man had to be made. This was created by God's creation (?) of a god-man: Jesus. 2) Jesus had to die to defeat death.

I'm not quite sure how #2 doesn't count as a sacrifice. Was there any other way death could have defeated? (Well, yes, if God didn't make up the rules that way in the beginning.)

GabrielwithoutWings said:
Also, the Orthodox have a very interesting phrase when it comes to whether those outside the Church are saved or not:

"We know where The Church is. We do not know where The Church is not."

That's what's pretty cool about Eastern Theology. They use theologoumena a lot and their soteriology is never really dogmatized, so there are varying opinions.
Cool.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
There was a man who comitted murder in a robbery, shot an old man in cold blood. Later in prison he felt remorse and wondered if he could be forgiven. Christ paid for that man's sins on the cross and forgave him.
Ok. What about the devout Muslim? He was born in Iraq, raised in a culture steeped in Islam. He never killed any one, he gave to charity, he never committed adultery. He was an all around good guy who believed that Jesus was a prophet, but not the Messiah.

So, would God accept this man into heaven? Would he forgive a good guy, who through an accident of birth was born in a culture more prone to Islam than Christianity?
 

jmvizanko

Uber Tool
You make up your own rules and your own definition of love and fulfill them and pat yourself on the back for being a good person but of course that means ignoring God because He sees things differently.

However God has stated that everyone has fallen short of what love is. It is only by receiving His love that we attain to it.

So let me get this straight. Your definition of love is "believing for the sake of believing that some carpenter died to give people a get out of jail free card?"
 

jmvizanko

Uber Tool
[FONT=&quot]Satan’s time is limited, Rom 16:20, Ps 37:10, which is what I was referring to, but to have destroyed him straight out would have left the issue that he raised unresolved. [/FONT]

What does this have to do with people? Why didn't god just destroy Satan and not let him cause us all to be damned? The only reason I can think of is that he wants us, at least some of us, to be damned. After all, he could just forgive people outright no matter what they believe. But your god apparently gets off on torturing people forever.
 

gzusfrk

Christian
Not sure if this is already a thread, but whatever.



Why was Jesus' blood the only thing that could make God forgive people? It just doesn't make sense to me. You would think that an all loving god would be able to forgive his creations without spilled blood, but it seems as if that wasn't the case, that the only thing that could appease him was blood from his own son(and therefore himself).


*People always seem to assume that I am a christian because I posted from a (semi)christian perspective. I am being figurative or whatever, I am not a christian, and I do not believe in the bible scriptures and such. I just want a good discussion/debate. Thanks
He cut a path so to speak the path had to be complete, for us to get there.(heaven)
 

logician

Well-Known Member
No, I'm fine with the idea of going to heaven. In fact, I'm okay with the idea of anyone going to heaven.

Where's heaven? In the Xian bible they always have the person "ascending" into the clouds like heaven is up in the stratosphere. Of course, we now know better, that "space" is not heaven. So where is heaven?
 

Tre-L

Two Tears In a Bucket
Not sure if this is already a thread, but whatever.



Why was Jesus' blood the only thing that could make God forgive people? It just doesn't make sense to me. You would think that an all loving god would be able to forgive his creations without spilled blood, but it seems as if that wasn't the case, that the only thing that could appease him was blood from his own son(and therefore himself).


*People always seem to assume that I am a christian because I posted from a (semi)christian perspective. I am being figurative or whatever, I am not a christian, and I do not believe in the bible scriptures and such. I just want a good discussion/debate. Thanks

Jesus had to die because he was human. He was made like us in every respect, so he (Like us) had to die. He was forced to live and die like we all do only he did so teaching us the good news of the kingdom, and what is necessary for mankind to attain life, and realize the kingdom within.

His literal blood is not relevant at all. The only thing relevant is that he lived his life in service to God, and his fellow man. Blood simply represents the Spirit. Jesus lived his life through Gods Spirit. His life was testimony of his dedication to God.

Jesus spoke of his blood and his flesh representing Spirit and life in John chapter 6. His blood represents the spirit (True drink) and his flesh (True food) represents a life lived through the Spirit.
"" My flesh is true food and my blood is true drink."" John 6:55

""Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood live in me, and I live in them."" John 6:56

""Jesus saith unto them, My meat (Food) is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work."" John 4:34

""the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."" John 6:63

Blood = Spirit

Flesh = A life lived through the Spirit

Love,

Tre-L
 
Top