Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?

[Watchmen]

Insurrection.

I see you identify yourself as a Christian. Is it your position that Christ's death was unnecessary for salvation?

 

[sojourner]

I see you identify yourself as a Christian. Is it your position that Christ's death was unnecessary for salvation?

There was no spiritual magic involved, if that's what you mean. Humanity was reconciled when God became Incarnate. The crucifixion provided a catharsis through which that Incarnation was emphasized, and by which resurrection was made more visible.

For me, the importance of the crucifixion isn't some formulaic spiritual necessity, but a teaching moment. It teaches both the cruelty that has infected humanity and the great love of God for us, that God would willingly be subjected to utter helplessness and suffering, all for love of us.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

1.you are violating occams razor big time when it comes to your selection of the supernatural cause of our natural universe..... think about it... you have defined your god to be the most powerful, most complex thing imaginable... so when it comes to choosing between your god, and the plethora of other possible supernatural causes, you might as well slide down occams razor butt naked. OUCH!

First off, that is not what Occams Razor means. Occams Razor states that we should accept the simpler explanations before we accept the more "difficult" explanations. That is Occams Razor, so I dont know what you are talking about here.

sorry friend. but you have not established whether your god always existed, or at one point began to exist... how do we know?? for the bible tells us so??....

Yes I have. I based my arguments based on the origins of the universe from nothing, the fine tuning of the universe based on the astronimcal odds against any naturalistic occurence, based on the impossibility of infinite regress, and the concept of objective moral values. And I base my belief in Christianity based on the evidence for the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

remember, the concept of a state of the art sky scraper randomly ALWAYS existing by chance and nothingness is just as likely as the concept of a state of the art sky scraper randomly APPEARING by chance from nothingness....or will you try to argue that one scenario is more reasonable than another? i think not...

Ummm, huh?

we dont know whether your god appeared in his current complex form from nothing, or whether he always existed that way....the only thing we know for sure, is that either way, your god had no control over his own existence... his own characteristics, powers, nature, disposition, ANYTHING about him/it.... all of these highly specific choices that define his existence are/were out of his control.....question is, were they in someone/thing elses control? or were they just a result of random chance and nothingness as you seem to imply by claiming that god was not a product of intelligent design.

True, God cannot "not" exist. Very true. The theist doesn't have any problem with this, and in fact, we would prefer to worship a God that exists necessarily and is not a product of some other pre-existing cause. No problems for the Christian here.

 

[Tristesse]

First off, that is not what Occams Razor means. Occams Razor states that we should accept the simpler explanations before we accept the more "difficult" explanations. That is Occams Razor, so I dont know what you are talking about here.

Actually, thats not what occam's razor means. Occam's razor says that new principals should not be invoked if existing principals already provide an explanation. But if the simpler explanation does not cover all of the details, then additional principals are necessary.

Yes I have. I based my arguments based on the origins of the universe from nothing, the fine tuning of the universe based on the astronimcal odds against any naturalistic occurence, based on the impossibility of infinite regress, and the concept of objective moral values. And I base my belief in Christianity based on the evidence for the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Your astronomical odds are based on a false premise. There is no evdence to suggest that the universe is statistically significant, it is our frame of reference granting the odds post hoc. But lets say you were dealt a hand of poker, what are the odds that you're dealt a royal flush? I think it's something like 650,000 to 1. However, there are four suits, meaning four possible royal flushes. Which means the odds of you getting just any random hand in poker is more unlikely than getting a royal flush. But of course we don't judge the game by those standards. But basically, you're being dealt a random hand in poker and saying after the fact, "wow! The odds of me getting this specific hand are 2,600,000 to 1. It must have been devine intervention.

 

[idav]

There was no spiritual magic involved, if that's what you mean. Humanity was reconciled when God became Incarnate. The crucifixion provided a catharsis through which that Incarnation was emphasized, and by which resurrection was made more visible.

For me, the importance of the crucifixion isn't some formulaic spiritual necessity, but a teaching moment. It teaches both the cruelty that has infected humanity and the great love of God for us, that God would willingly be subjected to utter helplessness and suffering, all for love of us.

I agree with what you say here. I just hope it wasn't a moment that said humans fail but we are still here so we might be good. )(

 

[sojourner]

I agree with what you say here. I just hope it wasn't a moment that said humans fail but we are still here so we might be good. )(

We are good. Good is our true nature, that has been infected by sin.

 

[beerisit]

There was no spiritual magic involved, if that's what you mean. Humanity was reconciled when God became Incarnate. The crucifixion provided a catharsis through which that Incarnation was emphasized, and by which resurrection was made more visible.

For me, the importance of the crucifixion isn't some formulaic spiritual necessity, but a teaching moment. It teaches both the cruelty that has infected humanity and the great love of God for us, that God would willingly be subjected to utter helplessness and suffering, all for love of us.

But surely if god's love was so great then his imposition of death and suffering on mankind would be inconsistent?

 

[jamesmorrow]

First off, that is not what Occams Razor means. Occams Razor states that we should accept the simpler explanations before we accept the more "difficult" explanations. That is Occams Razor, so I dont know what you are talking about here.



Yes I have. I based my arguments based on the origins of the universe from nothing, the fine tuning of the universe based on the astronimcal odds against any naturalistic occurence, based on the impossibility of infinite regress, and the concept of objective moral values. And I base my belief in Christianity based on the evidence for the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.



Ummm, huh?



True, God cannot "not" exist. Very true. The theist doesn't have any problem with this, and in fact, we would prefer to worship a God that exists necessarily and is not a product of some other pre-existing cause. No problems for the Christian here.

you are violating occams razor by choosing the most difficult/complex supernatural explanation for our natural universe.....since you describe your god to be the most powerful, most complex thing imaginable, EVERY other possible supernatural cause must be simpler/less complex.......by placing your god at the top of the complexity scale, you have also made him the least likely option in accordance with the law of parsimony......do you understand now?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

There was no spiritual magic involved, if that's what you mean. Humanity was reconciled when God became Incarnate. The crucifixion provided a catharsis through which that Incarnation was emphasized, and by which resurrection was made more visible.

For me, the importance of the crucifixion isn't some formulaic spiritual necessity, but a teaching moment. It teaches both the cruelty that has infected humanity and the great love of God for us, that God would willingly be subjected to utter helplessness and suffering, all for love of us.

So God subjected Himself to immense pain and suffering to teach us a lesson?

The Bible says in quite a few places that He died on the cross so our sins could be forgiven. Or do you simply not accept those verses?

 

[HeatherAnn]

So God subjected Himself to immense pain and suffering to teach us a lesson?

The Bible says in quite a few places that He died on the cross so our sins could be forgiven. Or do you simply not accept those verses?

Jesus was not God & quickly pointed that out when someone refered to him as "Good Master" & he replied, "None is good, save one, that is God." -Luke 18:19
Of course also: "Thou shalt not have any other gods before me"... Why? Because all things & people will fail, except God, who is love. "Charity never faileth."

It is theorized that the origins of Christianity are Gnostic - which is of the belief that Christ is an ideal, not a person. Scott Peck explained how Jesus is a personification of spirituality. Buddha similarly taught that it doesn't matter how we connect to God, but that we do so, & how we tend to best connect spiritually, is through the religious upbringing we had. So, some call Jesus Buddha, some call Jesus Allah, or St. Thomas... it's all the spirit of God...
"What's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name, would smell as sweet." -Shakespeare

For many years, we've handed down the tradition of warped Christian teachings. Some scriptures are psychologicaly & spiritually healthy, some are plainly not. People like Constatine had scriptures worded to maintain political power & keep the common people psychologically supressed. Some, like William Tyndale were persecuted & killed for trying to translate the bible into English.

You wouldn't just accept every word I write, so also with scriptures, hold them up to reason & spirit before accepting.

Jesus was crucified, partly because Jews were disappointed that he didn't save them how they wanted to be saved.
What can Jesus save you from?
He can't do anything without your consent... only if you apply his teachings, will you be saved. And what are his teachings?
"The kingdom of God cometh not with observation... the kingdom of God is within you." -Luke 17:20-21
You can't find God outside you, not even in a scapegoat as Jesus has become. You can only find God within you, so we need to stop "lookin' for love in all the wrong places."
"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God... & love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law & the prophets." -Matt 22

 

[sojourner]

But surely if god's love was so great then his imposition of death and suffering on mankind would be inconsistent?

God didn't "impose" that upon us. It's simply part and parcel of the material world.

 

[sojourner]

So God subjected Himself to immense pain and suffering to teach us a lesson?

No. God was subjected to pain and suffering as part of God's having become Incarnate.
But there are lessons to be learned and meanings to be taken away from the event.

The Bible says in quite a few places that He died on the cross so our sins could be forgiven. Or do you simply not accept those verses?

Tell me: Assuming that God became Incarnate in order to reconcile us, in what way would his having avoided the cross have helped that cause? Jesus spoke truth. It was that truth that led directly to his crucifixion. Being fully human, he was as susceptible to the vagaries of humanity as any other person.

 

[sojourner]

Jesus was not God

That's your opinion. How, then, does Jesus' death "effect" salvation?

He can't do anything without your consent... only if you apply his teachings, will you be saved.

But we already have been saved -- or, in your view, the crucifixion meant nothing.

 

[jamesmorrow]

No. God was subjected to pain and suffering as part of God's having become Incarnate.
But there are lessons to be learned and meanings to be taken away from the event.

Tell me: Assuming that God became Incarnate in order to reconcile us, in what way would his having avoided the cross have helped that cause? Jesus spoke truth. It was that truth that led directly to his crucifixion. Being fully human, he was as susceptible to the vagaries of humanity as any other person.

tell me: how did gods incarnation subject him to suffering physical pain but not subject him to the laws of physics(i.e. when he walked on water)?

 

[jamesmorrow]

God didn't "impose" that upon us. It's simply part and parcel of the material world.

which he created

 

[sojourner]

tell me: how did gods incarnation subject him to suffering physical pain but not subject him to the laws of physics(i.e. when he walked on water)?

That's why it's a "miracle."

 

[sojourner]

which he created

Your point? Or are you simply being obtuse?

 

[jamesmorrow]

That's why it's a "miracle."

ah, i see now. so on the one hand we are supposed to believe that jesus was not subject to the laws of physics in order to believe that he walked on water(amongst other physics defying stunts) thus proving to be god.........while on the other hand we are supposed to believe that jesus was subject to the laws of physics in order to believe that he suffered pain on the cross, so that we can feel guilty about rejecting him......how clever.

 

[jamesmorrow]

Your point? Or are you simply being obtuse?

im actually being acute in pointing out your obtuse evasion...

 

[sojourner]

ah, i see now. so on the one hand we are supposed to believe that jesus was not subject to the laws of physics in order to believe that he walked on water(amongst other physics defying stunts) thus proving to be god.........while on the other hand we are supposed to believe that jesus was subject to the laws of physics in order to believe that he suffered pain on the cross, so that we can feel guilty about rejecting him......how clever.

FYI, you're barking up the wrong tree here if you're itching for a fight. I'm well aware that the Bible contains both parabolic and mythic events. Whether Jesus actually walked on the water or not is not for me to say. I've personally witnessed some miracles on the part of people that clearly defy "nature." I don't know what they were, but I'm not going to waste time analyzing them, either. Many of the miracle stories probably are mythic in nature. So what? None of this is germane to the topic.