Crucifixion and Atonement - I Don't Understand

[sojourner]

Yes they tell a nice story, but they are not historically accurate - and I'm using our modern paradigm of this, btw.

How could they rationally be held to a modern standard, when they are ancient writings? They do what they were designed to do -- that's what we have, and it's enough.

What matters to you or to the authors isn't necessarily what matters to me.

Then you're asking the texts to be something they were never intended to be. It's like buying a car and then being all upset because the car doesn't get your clothes clean enough. Well, the car isn't supposed to clean clothes. It wasn't designed to do that, no one expects it to do that (except you), and it's not going to do that.

Jesus didn't have to die for the Bible to be written, the myth of him dying is all that is required - and I use myth here as legend, not as falsehood.

Look, we know that Luke, at least, was written as ancient history. Why in the world, if he's writing history, would Luke (who, BTW, was not Jewish) write about a mythic character, rather than a real person? Answer: He wouldn't. We have at least four different sources, written at four different times to four different communities, about a man who was literally crucified. Odds are pretty good that it's a literal event, even if the details vary.

 

[loverOfTruth]

Do you seriously think as a Muslim he would go against Islamic teaching?

Do you seriously think as a Christian minister he would go against Christian teaching? Oh wait, he did. He left christianity and then later accepted Islam out of his own free will. Nobody forced him in doing either. What was his agenda then? I suspect it was 'searching for the Truth'. Your point might have some weight for a born Muslim - which is not the case for him.

 

[nazz]

Do you seriously think as a Christian minister he would go against Christian teaching? Oh wait, he did. He left christianity and then later accepted Islam out of his own free will. Nobody forced him in doing either. What was his agenda then? I suspect it was 'searching for the Truth'. Your point might have some weight for a born Muslim - which is not the case for him.

I can respect searching for Truth. Truth is after all my religion! Searching for truth also led me to Islam-- and then back out of it.

I am sure when he was a Christian minister he was preaching Christ crucified. I doubt he was preaching out of the Qur'an on sunday morning.

I don't know his story as to what led him to embrace Islam. But I kind of doubt it was doubt about Jesus' crucifixion.

 

[loverOfTruth]

I can respect searching for Truth. Truth is after all my religion! Searching for truth also led me to Islam-- and then back out of it.

Please note that sincerity in 'Searching for the Truth' is a good thing and is a never ending journey.

I am sure when he was a Christian minister he was preaching Christ crucified. I doubt he was preaching out of the Qur'an on sunday morning.

I would agree with that 100% and that's why it is more of a reason to think as to WHY he changed his mind about that later. I am sure nobody held a gun to his head asking him to do that.

I don't know his story as to what led him to embrace Islam. But I kind of doubt it was doubt about Jesus' crucifixion.

That wasn't the only thing but was certainly part of it. If interested, you can watch his story here :

[youtube]CKXKKyyXG4g[/youtube]
The Deen Show: A Christian Minister's Conversion to Islam ( 1 of 2 ) - YouTube

[youtube]Op_GxIK_iO4[/youtube]
The Deen Show: A Christian Minister's Conversion to Islam ( 2 of 2 ) - YouTube

Peace.

 

[1robin]

I remember when I was in Catholic grade school and I was taught that Jesus died so our sins may be forgiven. It didn't make sense then and it still doesn't make sense now.

I understand why the Ancients would perform sacrifices but what was God's thought process?

God: "Man has sinned and I cannot and will not forgive them."

Thousands of years go by.

God: "Someone has to pay for the sins of man. I will send my Son in human form and have Him be Crucified. Then, I will forgive mankind's sins."

OK, God would have thought something more elaborate and smarter than that but I just wanted to convey my perplexed state of mind. Couldn't the Crucifixion have a different meaning/purpose?

The provision of Jesus was decided upon before man was ever created. The sin debt that man had before Christ came was pushed forward by the symbolic blood of sheep and oxen until it was actually dealt with by Christ.

God is perfect and will not dwell eternally with imperfection. For us to exist with him permanently we must become perfect. That is where substitutionary atonement comes in. When we are saved his perfection is legally credited to our account and our imperfection to his. It is much more complex and comprehensive than God simply overlooking, ignoring, or just forgiving sin. The Biblical plan for salvation is the most sophisticated and profound of any religion. It is no wonder if to us an infinite mind's plans are mysterious.

 

[Pegg]

I remember when I was in Catholic grade school and I was taught that Jesus died so our sins may be forgiven. It didn't make sense then and it still doesn't make sense now.

I understand why the Ancients would perform sacrifices but what was God's thought process?

God: "Man has sinned and I cannot and will not forgive them."

Adam was warned what would happen if he sinned against Gods stated law regarding the tree of knowledge:
"You must not eat from it that you do not die"
when Adam disobeyed that law, he had the death sentence pronounced on him. Death is the divine penalty for disobedience. As Adam did not have any children before he sinned, all his children came to be born in sin. Adam could not produce a perfect sinless offspring...we are genetically the same as Adam.

Those early humans understood that their impending death was the result of disobedience...they desperately sought a way to avoid death and attempted to offer a sacrifice to God as a way to appease him and hopefully have the divine penalty removed from themselves.
So its not that God will not forgive their sins, he will and has always done so.... but he could not simply overlook his own stated law that disobedience would result in death.

Thousands of years go by.

God: "Someone has to pay for the sins of man. I will send my Son in human form and have Him be Crucified. Then, I will forgive mankind's sins."

OK, God would have thought something more elaborate and smarter than that but I just wanted to convey my perplexed state of mind. Couldn't the Crucifixion have a different meaning/purpose?

The crucifixion does not 'forgive mans sins'.... it actually pays the price of divine justice for wrongdoing, namely death. When we put our faith in the value of Christs sacrifice, we are assured that God will not demand the death penalty which is the divine requirement for sin.

God has been forgiving sins for millennium without the need for Christs sacrifice. Thats why Christs sacrifice goes beyond the forgiveness and actually makes everlasting life a real possibility for mankind.

 

[nazz]

The crucifixion does not 'forgive mans sins'.... it actually pays the price of divine justice for wrongdoing, namely death. When we put our faith in the value of Christs sacrifice, we are assured that God will not demand the death penalty which is the divine requirement for sin.

Yet all Christians still die

 

[F0uad]

I would want to ask the Christians to be honest is it reasonable to belief that an innocent had to die for the sinners? And if so why shouldn't we implement this in the courtrooms?

 

[1robin]

Yet all Christians still die

You must not be too familiar with the Bible. It was not physical death that we were freed from. If you will review my post above you will see that we must be perfect, as God is, in order to dwell with him permanently. Jesus' perfect record is credited legally to our account when we are born again (saved). That means when everyone is resurrected and their destination is determined at the judgement those that have been declared perfect by what Christ did can dwell with God forever and those that rejected him as savior can not. Those people suffer what the Bible calls the second death (spiritual death). This is what Christ saved us from. You may not believe in the Bible but if it is correct you can easily that this is the far more profound issue, not physical death. If you wish to fully understand the issue look up second death and the judgement.

 

[nazz]

You must not be too familiar with the Bible.

I am quite familiar with it.

It was not physical death that we were freed from.

Then why did Jesus physically die?

 

[1robin]

I would want to ask the Christians to be honest is it reasonable to belief that an innocent had to die for the sinners? And if so why shouldn't we implement this in the courtrooms?

I can not speak for other Christians but these types of questions are meaningless to me personally. Why is God obligated to act in ways that we would consider reasonable? Why would you even expect that a divine and infinite mind is always going to line up with what pitiful grasp of reason we have in comparison? Further more we believe in countless things that are not intuitive to our minds everyday. Quantum physics to me and you would not only appear illogical and irrational, but virtually unrecognizable yet the experts assure it exists. What a parent teaches a child many times makes no sense at all to the child because of the differences of information level of the two people involved. The Bible says over and over again that his ways are not our ways. It also says the non spiritual (born again) people can not fully understand spiritual matters. It makes sense to me but may very well not to the non born again according to the Bible. As far as the concept itself it exists in form after form and in countless verses in the Bible. The Qur'an says the Bible is true. Even if parts are corrupt (which they aren't) it is virtually impossible that every example of the myriad examples of substitutionary atonement are all corrupted. I have been told several times (but have not verified it myself) that even Islam contains the concept of substitutionary atonement in many teachings. I think one concerns a Muslim that martyrs himself may redeem family members, etc..... If true or even close to true that is far more unreasonable that anything Jesus did. I think the Quran is full of unreasonable things to my mind. If you defend Muhammad's 68 battles and countless raids on caravans as all 100% defensive then that is about as unreasonable as it gets to me. I do not want to drag the Qur'an into this issue but I was just illustrating why I think this argument has zero explanatory power or ability to determine the reality of what the Gospels claim.

Let me ask you a question. Why do we build museums, give medals, special places of honor, write books about, and consider the greatest example of human benevolence altruistic self sacrifice on behalf of others. We write books about them and honor them as mankind at our best. However Jesus does the same thing to even a greater degree and some just can't get their mind around it for some reason. It almost appears to be a supernatural blindness. The standard that honors your martyrs should honor Christ's infinitely greater actions.

 

[F0uad]

Wow such a long answer for such a short question. Fail?
If they are meaningless to start with why reply?

The worst part is that you didn't even answer it.

 

[1robin]

Wow such a long answer for such a short question. Fail?
If they are meaningless to start with why reply?

The worst part is that you didn't even answer it.

Was this all you had left? If you think I did not answer the question (I think I did) it wouldn't matter anyway as I explained why I feel it was invalid and meaningless to start with. Why don't you try and explain why you feel justified in insisting that whatever God chooses to do must meet your expectations or criteria when God operates on an infinately higher plane and with an infinately larger amount of information at his disposal than me you and everyone who has ever lived put together. The issues that Muslims address are meaningfull, the insistence that God must say or do what you specifically demand, and if not then it is false, is not meaningfull nor valid. It is not even logical.

 

[Pegg]

Yet all Christians still die

yes, and all will continue to do so until Judgement day has arrived.

when that day begins, death will cease.

Revelation 21:4 And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.”
5 And the One seated on the throne said: “Look! I am making all things new.” Also, he says: “Write, because these words are faithful and true.”

 

[Pegg]

I would want to ask the Christians to be honest is it reasonable to belief that an innocent had to die for the sinners? And if so why shouldn't we implement this in the courtrooms?

Adams children do not die for that mans sins.... they die for their own sins that they individually commit.

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Psalm 51:5 Look! With error I was brought forth with birth pains, And in sin my mother conceived me

Ecclesiastes 7:20 For there is no man righteous in the earth that keeps doing good and does not sin.

The punishment for sin is death... we all sin, therefore we all die.

 

[loverOfTruth]

Adams children do not die for that mans sins.... they die for their own sins that they individually commit.

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Psalm 51:5 Look! With error I was brought forth with birth pains, And in sin my mother conceived me

Ecclesiastes 7:20 For there is no man righteous in the earth that keeps doing good and does not sin.

The punishment for sin is death... we all sin, therefore we all die.

But you are ignoring the concept of repentance stated in Ezekiel 18. "21 But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. 22 None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live." (Ezekiel 18:21-22)

So if a person can LIVE after repentance and not DIE(for sin) then they don't need anyone else's sacrifice to save them and your theory breaks right there.

 

[nazz]

But you are ignoring the concept of repentance stated in Ezekiel 18. "21 But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. 22 None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live." (Ezekiel 18:21-22)

So if a person can LIVE after repentance and not DIE(for sin) then they don't need anyone else's sacrifice to save them and your theory breaks right there.

I agree.

 

[loverOfTruth]

I agree.

I am glad that at least one flavor of Christianity agrees

 

[nazz]

I am glad that at least one flavor of Christianity agrees

I'm one of those weird flavors

 

[Pegg]

But you are ignoring the concept of repentance stated in Ezekiel 18. "21 But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. 22 None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live." (Ezekiel 18:21-22)

So if a person can LIVE after repentance and not DIE(for sin) then they don't need anyone else's sacrifice to save them and your theory breaks right there.

this verse in Ezekiel is explaining the sense in which God forgives and forgets. When Jehovah forgives a repentant sinner, he wipes the slate clean and forgets about the sin in the sense that he will not take action against that one for those sins at some future time.

So really, 'they will live' because God will not bring punishment on them by ending their life for their sins.

The everlasting life, as promised by God, can only come about during the jugement day...that is during the time when the Messiah leads mankind back to perfection by removing death. And without the Messiah, everlasting life is not possible because we will continue to sin and sin brings forth death. Only the messiah can remove death from us and that is why Jesus sacrifice is the only means for salvation.... because his death has been accepted in exchange for ours.