If Jesus is God he sacrificed nothing for us.

[Unveiled Artist]

If you don't lose anything then you sacrificed nothing.

If God is an all-powerful being, and Jesus is God then he sacrificed nothing on the cross.

If Jesus was just a normal human then he sacrificed everything for us.

I agree with you 100 percent. Devil's advocate here, if I were to debate against it, I'd say god became a human in the flesh so he did feel pain and all of that. What was "perfect" about him was he had a perfect relationship with his father not that he was sinless. His perfection was he did not sin not in the nature of who he is as a human being. As such, when he sacrificed his flesh as a human being, it became a mirror and example as what a christian should do in sacrificing their flesh/sin as well.

In other words, jesus was perfect in that he had 100 percent relationship with the father and he committed no sin. He is a human with a perfect nature via his relationship with his father.

So he did feel pain and all of that. He was human. When he sacrificed his flesh and blood, his flesh and blood meant sin. So, even in his perfection as I just described, because he is human with this perfection, he still had the pain of death. Sacrifice means give up something of value. So, jesus gave up his life (in the eyes of a christian) to be with the father.

He did so physically and he asks christians to sacrifice themselves by action through the Passion and body of christ. He wanted christians to see life with the father as the "real" life and disattach themselves from the world by sacrificing themselves-their pride, ego, etc-for the grace of the father.

They give up something of value. Where they end up and their relationship with god does not ex-nay that a sacrifice has been made.

You'd have to prove that jesus didn't value his life for his sacrifice to be invalid.

Also, the ransom part @Deeje comment. My thoughts.

Jesus flesh (his human nature) is humanity's sin/flesh.

He is perfect in that his spiritual nature was one with his father (not as his father but with his father) and that he did not sin (commit a transgression against his father).

When christians follow the passion, they are saying:

They sined: They admit that jesus carries their sin because he was the victim of the sins of humanity (aka the crucifixion)

We need help: Jesus one with his father came to show through his life style the way of sacrificing oneself for god. So they see this in christ.

Jesus life: Jesus taught that to give is to receive from god. He always pointed away from himself and always to his father. He instructed that of his disciples and christians. Always to the father. So his life showed that.

Jesus death: The sacrifice wasn't a sacrifice of a perfect/deity human being. It was the sacrifice of a real human with real flesh and blood who (as said) was willing to die for salvation of all. In other words, his life and sacrifice of his life became the means to go to the father.

The ransom: He gave his life so christians can be saved

Jesus resurrection: So christians are saved (resurrected) by jesus ransom. However translated, they feel they have a relationship with the father as long as they are sacrificing themselves (repenting and changing their lives) through christ.

It is not useless or for nothing. I just think if you don't see the claims of christ's perfection as him being god/perfect, then you would see what I mean. I dont meet many people who mix up jesus and his father. Only one person on RF I know said jesus created the world. That threw me for a loop.

 

[Scott C.]

It does not matter if he submitted or not, if he is all-powerful pain and certainly humans can not hurt him. If Jesus could be hurt he was not a god.

When Jehovah was born on earth, he clearly took upon himself certain mortal attributes. I don't know what it's like to be Jehovah, made mortal. Nor do you. The fact that that the suffering of Jesus violates your sense of reason concerning an all-powerful God, does not mean that there is no all powerful God who indeed did voluntarily suffer for humanity.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I agree with you 100 percent. Devil's advocate here, if I were to debate against it, I'd say god became a human in the flesh so he did feel pain and all of that. What was "perfect" about him was he had a perfect relationship with his father not that he was sinless. His perfection was he did not sin not in the nature of who he is as a human being. As such, when he sacrificed his flesh as a human being, it became a mirror and example as what a christian should do in sacrificing their flesh/sin as well.

In other words, jesus was perfect in that he had 100 percent relationship with the father and he committed no sin. He is a human with a perfect nature via his relationship with his father.

So he did feel pain and all of that. He was human. When he sacrificed his flesh and blood, his flesh and blood meant sin. So, even in his perfection as I just described, because he is human with this perfection, he still had the pain of death. Sacrifice means give up something of value. So, jesus gave up his life (in the eyes of a christian) to be with the father.

He did so physically and he asks christians to sacrifice themselves by action through the Passion and body of christ.

They give up something of value. Where they end up and their relationship with god does not ex-nay that a sacrifice has been made.

You'd have to prove that jesus didn't value his life for his sacrifice to be invalid.

Humans are not prefect and they do not come back from the dead therefore he was not human. Gods can not be hurt by humans, therefore if he was hurt by humans he was no god.

Also if all he did was suffer a little, seeing how he can come back from the dead than many more people in history have sacrificed more than Jesus since they cannot come back from the dead. If a human can sacrifice more than Jesus then in that respects the human is more powerful than Jesus.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

When Jehovah was born on earth, he clearly took upon himself certain mortal attributes. I don't know what it's like to be Jehovah, made mortal. Nor do you. The fact that that the suffering of Jesus violates your sense of reason concerning an all-powerful God, does not mean that there is no all powerful God who indeed did voluntarily suffer for humanity.

"made mortal."

He is not mortal if he cannot die. Mortal means you can die.

 

[Scott C.]

Has no one ever explained the mechanics of the ransom to you?

If you're referring to the fact that Jesus' sacrifice is a ransom for sin, yes of course I know that. I was addressing the issue of how it is possible for an infinite God to suffer, since he's all powerful and therefore impervious to pain. Understanding the atonement, the ransom, or the need for a Redeemer explains why it was necessary for God to suffer, but it does not explain how it was possible for a God to suffer. I accept the atonement and the suffering. I was trying to explain such to another. Or did I entirely miss the point of your question?

 

[Scott C.]

"made mortal."

He is not mortal if he cannot die. Mortal means you can die.

I think you're missing my point. You seem to have logical problems with an infinite and all powerful God coming to earth, living a somewhat mortal existence, eating food, suffering injuries, performing miracles, voluntarily giving up his life after unfathomable suffering, being physically resurrected, and then ascending to heaven. I may not use the correct words to describe his mortal/immortal makeup while on earth. I may not exactly explain how it is that a God could suffer. But simply put, there is a God in heaven and he did what he said he did. And if it doesn't seem logical to you, that doesn't mean that it could not or did not happen.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I think you're missing my point. You seem to have logical problems with an infinite and all powerful God coming to earth, living a somewhat mortal existence, eating food, suffering injuries, performing miracles, voluntarily giving up his life after unfathomable suffering, being physically resurrected, and then ascending to heaven. I may not use the correct words to describe his mortal/immortal makeup while on earth. I may not exactly explain how it is that a God could suffer. But simply put, there is a God in heaven and he did what he said he did. And if it doesn't seem logical to you, that doesn't mean that it could not or did not happen.

"mortal/immortal makeup while on earth"

That is a contradiction, either he was mortal or immortal. And if his life was never in any real danger, than many humans have given up more than Jesus.

"And if it doesn't seem logical to you, that doesn't mean that it could not or did not happen."

If you are going down that road: Can God create a boulder so big even he could not lift it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Something I'm not reading right:

Humans are not prefect and they do not come back from the dead therefore he was not human.

Okay, if he was not human, was he god?

Gods can not be hurt by humans, therefore if he was hurt by humans he was no god.

Since he was hurt by humans, then he is not god.

Which is it?

Also if all he did was suffer a little, seeing how he can come back from the dead than many more people in history have have sacrificed more than Jesus since they cannot come back from the dead. If a human can sacrifice more than Jesus then in that respects the human is more powerful than Jesus.

Jesus' sacrifice was considered a ransom. That is different than a saint who gave his life for god. Jesus gave his life for humanity. Two very different things. A saint is a human and a everyday joe smoe who devotes himself to the father and in some cases were killed because of this.

That aside, though,

Because jesus human life/flesh was humanity's sin, he did have something to loose for humanity to gain. If he did not die in the flesh then christians cannot see their sins dying. In other words, Christians need an example of jesus dying in the flesh so they can do the same as he did through his life sacrificing their time etc for the body of christ and those outside the body.

What you are saying has nothing to do with a ransom.

If god became flesh named jesus, and he sacrificed himself, it isn't a sacrifice because he is god.

Christianity is about the ransom built from that sacrifice not the sacrifice itself. So, instead....

If god became a human being named jesus, through his life (his example of sacrifice), through his Crucifixion (humanity's sins dying on the cross), and his resurrection (him returning back to his "thrown" I guess) shows christians they will not die if they did the same thing god did for them.

It's about the full Passion and it is a ransom. The sacrifice wasn't meant for jesus to die but for humanity to live. So, regardless if he felt pain and where he would be, it wasn't about him, he always pointed outward to his father and the people. Never to himself as the source. Always a medium to the source.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Something I'm not reading right:

Okay, if he was not human, was he god?


Since he was hurt by humans, then he is not god.

Which is it?



Jesus' sacrifice was considered a ransom. That is different than a saint who gave his life for god. Jesus gave his life for humanity. Two very different things. A saint is a human and a everyday joe smoe who devotes himself to the father and in some cases were killed because of this.

That aside, though,

Because jesus human life/flesh was humanity's sin, he did have something to loose for humanity to gain. If he did not die in the flesh then christians cannot see their sins dying. In other words, Christians need an example of jesus dying in the flesh so they can do the same as he did through his life sacrificing their time etc for the body of christ and those outside the body.

What you are saying has nothing to do with a ransom.

If god became flesh named jesus, and he sacrificed himself, it isn't a sacrifice because he is god.

Christianity is about the ransom built from that sacrifice not the sacrifice itself. So, instead....

If god became a human being named jesus, through his life (his example of sacrifice), through his Crucifixion (humanity's sins dying on the cross), and his resurrection (him returning back to his "thrown" I guess) shows christians they will not die if they did the same thing god did for them.

It's about the full Passion and it is a ransom. The sacrifice wasn't meant for jesus to die but for humanity to live. So, regardless if he felt pain and where he would be, it wasn't about him, he always pointed outward to his father and the people. Never to himself as the source. Always a medium to the source.

"Which is it?"

The contradiction is kind of the point of the thread.

"What you are saying has nothing to do with a ransom."

I am not the one that brought up the ransom.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If you're referring to the fact that Jesus' sacrifice is a ransom for sin, yes of course I know that. I was addressing the issue of how it is possible for an infinite God to suffer, since he's all powerful and therefore impervious to pain. Understanding the atonement, the ransom, or the need for a Redeemer explains why it was necessary for God to suffer, but it does not explain how it was possible for a God to suffer. I accept the atonement and the suffering. I was trying to explain such to another. Or did I entirely miss the point of your question?

Going off the claim jesus is god, god suffered because he was human. Humans can suffer. He did suffer as a human not as god. In other words, his flesh was temporary and suffered but his nature was in full communion with his father. His flesh suffered not his spirit.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

"Which is it?"

The contradiction is kind of the point of the thread.

"What you are saying has nothing to do with a ransom."

I am not the one that brought up the ransom.

What you are saying has to do with sacrifice. Christianity and the claim jesus is god and sacrificed himself is about ransom not about sacrifice.

A saint can sacrifice himself for god. He's a human and took his life and gave up something of value.

Jesus (as god) became a human being. So he was human. As a human being, he suffered and felt pain. He sacrificed his life not for himself (as the saint) but his sacrifice-the giving up of his flesh-was humanity's sin.

When he "gave up his flesh" (something of value) that made a way for christians to do the same thereby reconnecting their way to the father.

That is what a ransom is.

The OP is looking at it from the wrong angle. @Deeje has a point. If you see sacrifice as a ransom to save humans, then it probably make more sense why his godliness doesnt matter since he was human and he suffered.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I don't even think an all-power being can sacrifice something. You can say he suffered but just because he felt pain that does not mean he give up anything. If an all powerful being was to give up something or sacrifice something then they would no longer be an all-powerful being.

 

[psychoslice]

I don't even think an all-power being can sacrifice something. You can say he suffered but just because he felt pain that does not mean he give up anything. If an all powerful being was to give up something or sacrifice something then they would not longer be an all-powerful being.

Yes true, I believe that was to make the believers of organized religion feel guilty.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I think people want to say Jesus was both not a god and a god at the same time. But if you embrace that logical absurdity then all logical absurdities concerning the all-powerful become equally valid; such as: Can God create a boulder so big even he could not lift it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If you don't lose anything then you sacrificed nothing.

He sacrificed his flesh. He lost his human life for others to be with the father. ((Basically, main stream christianity is saying God became human. Human died for humanity. Human lost his flesh for humanity (sacrifice via ransom) and then went back to be god again.))

If God is an all-powerful being, and Jesus is God then he sacrificed nothing on the cross.

He sacrificed his flesh. It was his pain and human lost that mirrored the same as humanity's sins. So his Crucifixion was humanity's sins dying on the cross.

Jesus is a scapegoat for humanity's sins.

If Jesus was just a normal human then he sacrificed everything for us.

Either way, they both were human and both lost their flesh. As humans, both their flesh meant humanity's sins and in either scenario, they would have saved humanity by their physical self dying.

 

[Scott C.]

"mortal/immortal makeup while on earth"

That is a contradiction, either he was mortal or immortal. And if his life was never in any real danger, than many humans have given up more than Jesus.

"And if it doesn't seem logical to you, that doesn't mean that it could not or did not happen."

If you are going down that road: Can God create a boulder so big even he could not lift it?

I'm not sure there are any Christians who fully understand the status of Jesus as the Son of God and the Son of a mortal woman, while he lived on earth. Sure, great Christian theologians have explained it to the best of their abilities, but in my opinion it remains a mystery. I'm sorry if this perceived logical problem is a stumbling block to belief. It's not for me.

The "big boulder" question is a fun one. It's not exactly the same as "is it possible for an omnipotent God to suffer?". I think there's a problem with the "boulder" question itself. It pits infinity against infinity. That's a problem not just regarding an infinite being. It seems to be a problem with our being able to understand infinity at all. But I'm sure the infinite God could answer the question.

But I have a strong opinion on the answer to the "If a tree falls in a forest..." question. HA.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

"made mortal."

He is not mortal if he cannot die. Mortal means you can die.

In mainstream Christianity, humans do not die. They either live with god in heaven or forever in hell. The spirit is eternal. The flesh is temporary.

Jesus saved christian's spirit not their flesh.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I think people want to say Jesus was both not a god and a god at the same time. But if you embrace that logical absurdity then all logical absurdities concerning the all-powerful become equally valid; such as: Can God create a boulder so big even he could not lift it?

No. Saying jesus god and not god at the same time is saying "god became a physical image of an invisible god." Jesus was one with his father but because they both shared the same nature, that is why they call jesus god. So he is both. He is a human-human spirit-who can die if he had sined and he is god-because he was one with his father sharing his father's nature.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I'm not sure there are any Christians who fully understand the status of Jesus as the Son of God and the Son of a mortal woman, while he lived on earth. Sure, great Christian theologians have explained it to the best of their abilities, but in my opinion it remains a mystery. I'm sorry if this perceived logical problem is a stumbling block to belief. It's not for me.

The "big boulder" question is a fun one. It's not exactly the same as "is it possible for an omnipotent God to suffer?". I think there's a problem with the "boulder" question itself. It pits infinity against infinity. That's a problem not just regarding an infinite being. It seems to be a problem with our being able to understand infinity at all. But I'm sure the infinite God could answer the question.

But I have a strong opinion on the answer to the "If a tree falls in a forest..." question.

"The "big boulder" question is a fun one. It's not exactly the same as "is it possible for an omnipotent God to suffer?""

The question is not can he suffer, but can he lose something. A sacrifice means you give up something, if an all-powerful being give ups something then he is not all powerful. As long as he is all powerful he can not make a true sacrifice. Jesus could have only made a sacrifice if he gave up his divinity. Otherwise it is all just a show.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

In mainstream Christianity, humans do not die. They either live with god in heaven or forever in hell. The spirit is eternal. The flesh is temporary.

Jesus saved christian's spirit not their flesh.

"humans do not die"

Put a gun to a Christian's head and ask him if he wants to live or die. Even if they believe in the afterlife, most still very much believe they can die. Jesus came back from the dead, no human can do that and if you can come back from the dead you are not mortal.