Why did Jesus have to die? Why does man need a sacrifice?

[punkdbass]

@ Rocky S, you still havent explained how Jesus can pay the price for Adam, or any other human being's sin. The Bible is very clear when it says that every man must die for his OWN sin, and his sin ALONE. Now why can Jesus die for someone elses sin? How is this not a contradiction?

I have read Romans, and as you can see, the whole Jesus sacrifice thing still doesnt make sense to me. I am currently 1 or 2 letters away from reading Hebrews, so I will get to that soon.

I have read Isaiah 53, I have read the entire Tanakh.

No I am saying God does not cause us to sin.

In a general sense, I agree with this. We choose to sin from the free will God gave us. But God gave us that free will, knowing full well that we would thus have the capacity and inclination for sin... thus being a just God, He gave us means to atone for that sin -- repentance.

Its pretty simple to me. You may just have trouble accepting. From countless hours of study, I believe the Old and New testaments are in perfect harmony. As Jesus said "you search the scriptures for you think they contain eternal life, but you don't understand that they speak of me".

Pretty much all christians read the Bible as if building a tower from the top to the bottom. They read the NT first, and get a good understanding of Christianity first, then when they go back and read the Tanakh, they try to see the concept of Jesus in every word they read. Its like shooting an arrow and THEN drawing the bulls-eye sign around it after it lands. Jews, who explore the NT, read as if building a tower from the bottom to the top. And to be completely honest, both scriptures simply dont appear in harmony to me, for I havent been able to "build the top of the tower" (understand Jesus's sacrifice without contradicting the foundation of the Tanakh). Jews dont search the Tanakh for eternal life, we search it to know what God demands of us in this life.

Not so, this is Gods plan for salvation, the whole bible points to the cross and Gods redemptive plan for man.

I've read the entire Tanakh and none of it points to the cross in my mind. The authors of the NT certainly go to great efforts to make the stories of Jesus run parallel to that of the Tanakh, but when reading strictly the Tanakh I do not see Jesus at all.

According to scripture one needs faith in Christ and the cross. The contrite heart is being broken before a holy God and seeing the need for Gods plan of salvation, his Son, the sin and burnt offering for the world.

The Tanakh says that faith in God alone is enough to merit righteousness. Abraham had faith in God, and God alone(not Jesus), without any mediator. And his faith was enough to merit righteousness. And so can Jews have the same saving, righteous faith in today's age. And God will not condemn someone He deems as righteous.

[savagewind]

quote by punkedbass Abraham had faith in God, and God alone(not Jesus), without any mediator

It is my opinion that statement is not definitive. Abraham was the first one (I know of) through whom Christ would come. The reason for Abraham's faith? Was it not the mediator? So then, The Christ was present, though not realized, by ancient men and women of faith.

Religion, especially the Jehovah's Witness religion, downgrades faith imo.

[Rocky S]

sorry I did not respond sooner. You you have some very good questions. Now I am not sure if you are generally wanting to understand or if you don't. To start out, here is a passage from Issiah:
He was despised, and we esteemed Him not. He bears our sins, and is distressed for us; and we esteemed Him to be in toil and in affliction, and in evil treatment But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon Him. With His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Jesus is all in this prophecy from Isaiah. See how Isiah talks of him being a sin offering.

Originally Posted by punkdbass

@ Rocky S, you still havent explained how Jesus can pay the price for Adam, or any other human being's sin. The Bible is very clear when it says that every man must die for his OWN sin, and his sin ALONE. Now why can Jesus die for someone elses sin? How is this not a contradiction?

Because Jesus took the punishment for sin upon himself in a death that was real, but a vicarious death for us in a sense. Jesus Gods son was a sin and burnt offering as I said before. He atoned for sin as the spotless lamb of God. Read about the sin offerings in the Torah that explains this in typology. Its like this as you well know in the Torah the sin offering is a spotless animal typified to Jesus sinless body and soul. And as it was back then, the sins of the individual was placed on the animal. Just like on the cross the sins of a person was and is place on Jesus. And as in the burnt offering the animals unblemishness so to speak was given to the individual who offered it up. And even in the old testament this was all done by faith meaning faith in the sacrifices that God prescribed. Jesus is our eternal sacrifice for sin as john the baptist put it; "the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world". And it is only through faith in that is how one receives the atonement and justification and righteousness. This is Gods prescribed order for mans sin, Christ and him crucified. Now this is very hard to teach to non Jews, believe I know. you cannot understand this without studying the Torah and the Tanakh.

Originally Posted by punkdbass

I have read Romans, and as you can see, the whole Jesus sacrifice thing still doesnt make sense to me. I am currently 1 or 2 letters away from reading Hebrews, so I will get to that soon.

That's why I suggested Hebrews as well. Romans was written to non Jews who did not have the law. Romans is mainly about being made in right standing with God by is Grace through faith in Jesus' finished work on the cross, were sin was atoned for. That is why from Christians you here phrases like the blood washes away my sin or I am washed by the blood. In essence and even sometimes without understand it. What they mean is because of faith in Christ and the cross and the blood that was shed there, I am now as though I never sinned. Also Hebrews not only talks of him being our sin sacrifice but that he is now our high priest mediator as well like in the old testament. Please read Hebrews 7:11-9:25 it explains this in detail.

Originally Posted by punkdbass

In a general sense, I agree with this. We choose to sin from the free will God gave us. But God gave us that free will, knowing full well that we would thus have the capacity and inclination for sin... thus being a just God, He gave us means to atone for that sin -- repentance.

That is really only half true repentance maybe as a Christan or even initial conversion. As we know that repentance means to turn from. But with out a sacrifice ie the cross, there is not atonement. From a christian perspective one must have faith in Jesus' death burial and resurrection to receive atonement, repentance is only part of this.

Originally Posted by punkdbass

Pretty much all christians read the Bible as if building a tower from the top to the bottom.

Yeah that is right, That is because the new testament is the old testament revealed.

Originally Posted by punkdbass

They read the NT first, and get a good understanding of Christianity first, then when they go back and read the Tanakh, they try to see the concept of Jesus in every word they read. Its like shooting an arrow and THEN drawing the bulls-eye sign around it after it lands. Jews, who explore the NT, read as if building a tower from the bottom to the top. Yeah in some cases this is true but a lot of Christians are not Jews And to be completely honest, both scriptures simply dont appear in harmony to me, for I haven't been able to "build the top of the tower" (understand Jesus's sacrifice without contradicting the foundation of the Tanakh).

Can you give examples of this?

Originally Posted by punkdbass

Jews dont search the Tanakh for eternal life, we search it to know what God demands of us in this life.

Jews and christian believe in the same God, the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob and if you are Jewish the same God who led your ancestors out of Egypt. I search the Scriptures also to know what God demands. But without accepting Jesus as Messiah for Jew and gentile it is veiled. Allow me to quote Justin martyr in a letter were he is talking to a Jew "Nor have we trusted in any other God (for there is no other), but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. But we do not trust through Moses or through the law;"

Originally Posted by punkdbass

I've read the entire Tanakh and none of it points to the cross in my mind. The authors of the NT certainly go to great efforts to make the stories of Jesus run parallel to that of the Tanakh, but when reading strictly the Tanakh I do not see Jesus at all. Oh i promiss he is in there and prophicide about. like i showed you in issiah but there are many others.

I have as well read and studied the Torah and the Tanakh. What do you think Isaiah 53 is about? And countless other prophecies concerning a suffering messiah who would die for sin.

Originally Posted by punkdbass

The Tanakh says that faith in God alone is enough to merit righteousness. Abraham had faith in God, and God alone(not Jesus), without any mediator. And his faith was enough to merit righteousness. And so can Jews have the same saving, righteous faith in today's age. And God will not condemn someone He deems as righteous.

Righteousness only comes by faith in Jesus, as you read Romans it will explain that. Abraham was even showed righteousness by faith when he offered Issac up, this is all a shadow of Christ. Read Hebrews chapter 11. Oh and by the way, it is a honer to talk to you about this. As a christian God has given me a love for those of the Jewish religion and I believe God Has promises exclusively for the Jewish people and will fulfill them. But ,I believe that Jesus is the messiah for the Jewish people as well as non-Jews. I also believe just like non Jews, Jews have to believe in Christ as well.

[punkdbass]

@RockyS: Yes I do generally want to understand. I love learning about other religions, and if Jesus truly is a man sent from God, then I want to be able to understand his purpose.. but the fact of the matter is I have talked with many Christians, and have had this same conversation dozens of times, and I simply dont understand it. I cant logically and reasonably reconcile the many contradictions between Christian doctrine and basic teachings of the Tanakh.

I have read Isaiah, and am well aware of Isaiah 53. You can read my thoughts on Isaiah 53 and the suffering servant here. Jewish tradition teaches that the suffering servant speaks of Israel, or more specifically the righteous remnant of Israel, and as you will read from my post I also include righteous gentiles as well, and so did some Talmudic rabbis as well(Im pretty sure). However, there is a small line of thought in Jewish tradition of Messiah ben Joseph. Basically long story short, the general idea is that there will be 2 messiahs, one who suffers and is "slain," -- messiah son of Joseph, and the other who rules during the messianic age of peace and perfection -- messiah son of David. This isnt an official doctrine of Judaism obviously, but I still find it very interesting. And in this concept, messiah ben Joseph, the one who suffers and is slain, is associated with Isaiah 53. This whole concept of Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David runs analogous to the Christian concept of the messiah coming 2 times. And I do see a lot of similarities between Jesus and messiah ben Joseph..

You still havent answered my question.. Scripture says that man must die for his own sin, and his own sin alone(Ezekiel 18:20, Jeremiah 31:30). How can Jesus die for another man's sin, how can you reconcile this contradiction? I just dont get how you Christians can simply ignore and dismiss verses like Ezekiel 18:20, and Jeremiah 31:30 with such ease.

You say that Jesus was a burnt offering, but where in the Tanakh does it ever say or imply that human sacrifice is acceptable? In fact, It clearly states the exact opposite:

-Jeremiah 19:5 “They have built shrines to Baal, to put their children to the fire as burnt offerings to Baal – which I never decreed, and which never came to My mind.”
-Jeremiah 32:35 “and they built the shrines of Baal awhich are in the Valley of Ben-hinnom where they offered up their sons and daughters to Molech-when I had never commanded, or even thought [of commanding], that they should do such an abominable thing..”

The only school of thought regarding human sacrifice in Judaism, is that in some believe the death of a righteous person can bring atonement, because his death motivates others to repent and change their ways. And I dont have a problem viewing Jesus's death in this sense.

You say that there needs to be a sacrifice to achieve atonement, but I disagree. I dont believe blood is needed for atonement, for their are MANY instances in scripture where the Jews achieved atonement without blood -- especially when they were in exile and thus not able to offer blood sacrifices. I've had this debate so many times with Christians, and I firmly believe that God's mercy isnt limited to the need for bloodshed..

Can you give examples of this?

Just google those Jesus prophecy sites that list 500+ "prophecies" Jesus fulfilled. They will literally take ANY verse in the Tanakh, COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT, and paint Jesus's face over it. It's actually quite embarrassing if you ask me.

but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. But we do not trust through Moses or through the law;"

Yes, I am well aware that Christians have a very low regard for the law. I believe that God's Torah(Teaching) is perfect and can revive the soul as Psalm 19:8 says.

Righteousness only comes by faith in Jesus

Yea, makes no sense to me. So many people were called righteous before Jesus was born, heck, even the NT says that John's father the high priest was righteous, and Jesus's father Joseph was righteous. It also states that many of the righteous Jews from before Jesus's time resurrected in Mark. Clearly it was possible to be righteous without faith in the messiah. And anyways, why the heck isnt faith in God alone not enough to merit righteousness? Is God's arm to short to merit righteousness to those who have faith in Him? Does He not have that power?

[Super Universe]

There is a definite contrast in the idea's proposed by Jesus and those proposed by the Old Testament. It's as if God changed the way He chose to work with humans from "An eye for an eye" to the idea of "Forgiveness".

The truth is this, we've always been forgiven, even before Adam and Eve we were forgiven it's just that humans did not accept it because they still saw natural events happen, things they knew absolutely were the work of an "angry" god.

The human idea of God is evolving and always has been. As a species we won't have a full understanding of what God really is for another thousand years or so. The problem is that too many people get stuck on old theory as if it's more valuable than the new ideas, and some fall for the latest new thing but then can't go any farther than that when even it is surpassed.

Revelation is coming to us constantly. It doesn't come to the Pope, it doesn't come to the TV evangelists, it doesn't come to the head Imam or Rabbi, it comes to average people.

When has revelation come to a leader of any religion? Never.

[Rocky S]

Originally Posted by punkdbass

@RockyS: Yes I do generally want to understand. I love learning about other religions, and if Jesus truly is a man sent from God, then I want to be able to understand his purpose.. but the fact of the matter is I have talked with many Christians, and have had this same conversation dozens of times, and I simply dont understand it. I cant logically and reasonably reconcile the many contradictions between Christian doctrine and basic teachings of the Tanakh.

I have read Isaiah, and am well aware of Isaiah 53. You can read my thoughts on Isaiah 53 and the suffering servant here. Jewish tradition teaches that the suffering servant speaks of Israel, or more specifically the righteous remnant of Israel, and as you will read from my post I also include righteous gentiles as well, and so did some Talmudic rabbis as well(Im pretty sure). However, there is a small line of thought in Jewish tradition of Messiah ben Joseph. Basically long story short, the general idea is that there will be 2 messiahs, one who suffers and is "slain," -- messiah son of Joseph, and the other who rules during the messianic age of peace and perfection -- messiah son of David. This isnt an official doctrine of Judaism obviously, but I still find it very interesting. And in this concept, messiah ben Joseph, the one who suffers and is slain, is associated with Isaiah 53. This whole concept of Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David runs analogous to the Christian concept of the messiah coming 2 times. And I do see a lot of similarities between Jesus and messiah ben Joseph..

You still havent answered my question.. Scripture says that man must die for his own sin, and his own sin alone(Ezekiel 18:20, Jeremiah 31:30). How can Jesus die for another man's sin, how can you reconcile this contradiction? I just dont get how you Christians can simply ignore and dismiss verses like Ezekiel 18:20, and Jeremiah 31:30 with such ease.

You say that Jesus was a burnt offering, but where in the Tanakh does it ever say or imply that human sacrifice is acceptable? In fact, It clearly states the exact opposite:

-Jeremiah 19:5 “They have built shrines to Baal, to put their children to the fire as burnt offerings to Baal – which I never decreed, and which never came to My mind.”
-Jeremiah 32:35 “and they built the shrines of Baal awhich are in the Valley of Ben-hinnom where they offered up their sons and daughters to Molech-when I had never commanded, or even thought [of commanding], that they should do such an abominable thing..”

The only school of thought regarding human sacrifice in Judaism, is that in some believe the death of a righteous person can bring atonement, because his death motivates others to repent and change their ways. And I dont have a problem viewing Jesus's death in this sense.

You say that there needs to be a sacrifice to achieve atonement, but I disagree. I dont believe blood is needed for atonement, for their are MANY instances in scripture where the Jews achieved atonement without blood -- especially when they were in exile and thus not able to offer blood sacrifices. I've had this debate so many times with Christians, and I firmly believe that God's mercy isnt limited to the need for bloodshed..



Just google those Jesus prophecy sites that list 500+ "prophecies" Jesus fulfilled. They will literally take ANY verse in the Tanakh, COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT, and paint Jesus's face over it. It's actually quite embarrassing if you ask me.



Yes, I am well aware that Christians have a very low regard for the law. I believe that God's Torah(Teaching) is perfect and can revive the soul as Psalm 19:8 says.


Yea, makes no sense to me. So many people were called righteous before Jesus was born, heck, even the NT says that John's father the high priest was righteous, and Jesus's father Joseph was righteous. It also states that many of the righteous Jews from before Jesus's time resurrected in Mark. Clearly it was possible to be righteous without faith in the messiah. And anyways, why the heck isnt faith in God alone not enough to merit righteousness? Is God's arm to short to merit righteousness to those who have faith in Him? Does He not have that power?

I do not think your questions can be answered because of your rejection of it. You keep asking why and I have pointed that out to you, a few times. I am sorry if you cant' see it. Jesus has always been rejected, and will continue to be rejected by people. We as Christians can't change that fact. But, I believe Jesus is the son of God,crucified for sins and raised from the Dead by God the father to redeem his creation. And he fulfilled the law and the prophets.

[punkdbass]

Originally Posted by Rocky S

I do not think your questions can be answered because of your rejection of it. You keep asking why and I have pointed that out to you, a few times. I am sorry if you cant' see it. Jesus has always been rejected, and will continue to be rejected by people. We as Christians can't change that fact. But, I believe Jesus is the son of God,crucified for sins and raised from the Dead by God the father to redeem his creation. And he fulfilled the law and the prophets.

Would God want me to blindly accept or jump into something I fail to understand? Would He want me to leave my covenant for something I am uncertain about? You act like this is all supposed to be nice, easy and simple but it isnt for me.