Jesus Failed Right?

[blü 2]

No.

And YHWH was with Judah; and he drave out [the inhabitants of] the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.
Judges 1:19

Heh heh! Thanks for reminding me. But back then, God was just another player in the Canaanite pantheon eg "no gods before me" and Judges 11:23-24, and various psalms. After the Babylonian captivity ─ say from Isaiah on ─ [he] graduated to being the only God, all-powerful &c &c.

He didn't. He repudiated blood sacrifice like Hosea and David did. The cleansing of the temple was about violence, but the Pharisees spun it as being about commerce.

I don't see how [he] can be said to have repudiated blood sacrifice when the whole NT is about Jesus' suicide mission at God's instigation.
Thus when all four gospel Jesuses say (in the Garden scene), Let's change the being-killed part, God replies, Stop blubbering and get going.

 

[InChrist]

Ah... so it's only the guilty who avoid punishment. This still sounds unjust.

No, all are guilty, it’s those who accept Christ’s payment on their behalf that avoid punishment. As a side note, the “punishment” is self-inflicted when one refuses heaven and instead is separated from God the only Source of love, beauty, and all that is good.

This seems inconsistent with what you said earlier.

In what way?

You think Jesus wasn't innocent? Surprising, but okay.

Jesus was innocent. I believe He was also God, who choose to pay the price of sin and save all who desire freedom and eternal life.

 

[blü 2]

One Godhead, three Persons; Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

But if each of Father, Son and Ghost has his own will, that's three wills, so that's three Gods.

You mean like a judge in a courtroom should just forgive crimes,

More like Trump in the Oval Office. But why did God send Jesus at all if it wasn't about forgiveness of sins? If not that, what was it really about?

“Hey, your murders, rapes, thefts, child abuse, kidnappings, etc. are all forgiven; you’re free, carry on”?
The scriptures are clear enough; Jesus took upon Himself the sins of everyone, paid the death penalty, offers forgiveness and eternal life to everyone.

Only because God sent him to perform that role. And God being omnipotent, I still have no idea why it was necessary for Jesus to die.

 

[InChrist]

But if each of Father, Son and Ghost has his own will, that's three wills, so that's three Gods.

I don’t see it that way. For one thing, it appears from the scriptures that the will of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are in one agreement and perfect harmony. Secondly, there is ONE human race comprised of many individual people; still ONE human race. The Johnson family down the street is ONE family, yet this ONE family is composed of mom, dad and a couple kids. I believe the scriptures reveal ONE God, the Godhead comprised of three eternal Persons/Beings who all share the Nature and attributes that only God has.

But why did God send Jesus at all if it wasn't about forgiveness of sins? If not that, what was it really about?

It is about forgiveness.

Only because God sent him to perform that role. And God being omnipotent, I still have no idea why it was necessary for Jesus to die.

Because God is putting sin to death. In the eternal realm sin will not be present. The penalty if sin is death…


For the wages of sin is death, but the gift ofGod is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

 

[Ebionite]

Heh heh! Thanks for reminding me. But back then, God was just another player in the Canaanite pantheon eg "no gods before me" and Judges 11:23-24, and various psalms. After the Babylonian captivity ─ say from Isaiah on ─ [he] graduated to being the only God, all-powerful &c &c.

"God" is a name for whatever you like, for actual theology try using the proper name.

 

[Ebionite]

I don't see how [he] can be said to have repudiated blood sacrifice

But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Matthew 9:13

But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Matthew 12:7

And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves robbers.
Matthew 21:13

 

[blü 2]

I don’t see it that way. For one thing, it appears from the scriptures that the will of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are in one agreement and perfect harmony.

In that case there's only one will, only one God. Nothing triune there except the three masks that can be put on.

Because God is putting sin to death. In the eternal realm sin will not be present. The penalty if sin is death…

I'm omnipotent. I don't like sin. I say "Let the universe be and remain without sin." I snap my omnipotent finger and instantly sin disappears from the universe never to return.

No torture, no blood, no agony, no death.

Instead an instant, perfect result.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift ofGod is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

But as you know, because you're familiar with the Garden story, sin is never mentioned, not even once, death is taken for granted, it's human immortality that God fears, and the snake speaks only the truth, it's God who misspeaks.

Besides, at the moment Eve ate the fruit she couldn't tell good from evil because God had expressly kept knowledge of that kind from her by God, so she was incapable of forming an intention to do wrong, so she was incapable of sin. Exactly the same is true of Adam.

 

[blü 2]

But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Matthew 9:13

But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Matthew 12:7

And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves robbers.
Matthew 21:13

No, that won't do. Jesus' death was a blood sacrifice to God, part of the plan and intended to happen from the very beginning of Jesus' mission.

 

[Ebionite]

No, that won't do. Jesus' death was a blood sacrifice to God

That's what the death cult taught, but the truth was hidden from them.

But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Matthew 12:7

For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.
Hosea 6:6

Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.
Psalms 40:6

Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, [even] the sure mercies of David.
Behold, I have given him [for] a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people.
Isaiah 55:3-4

 

[Ajax]

I would say that he accomplished phase one and then said “Start phase two"

But that's exactly the point of the discussion...He didn't accomplish phase one. The Jews didn't accept Jesus.
Didn't he know that Jews will reject Him? And if he did, why did he say (twice) that He came for them?

 

[blü 2]

That's what the death cult taught, but the truth was hidden from them.

But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Matthew 12:7

For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.
Hosea 6:6

Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.
Psalms 40:6

Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, [even] the sure mercies of David.
Behold, I have given him [for] a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people.
Isaiah 55:3-4

But Jesus announces at the start of his mission that he has to die ─ Mark 2:20, Mark 8:31.

And as all four gospels make clear, when he gets to Jerusalem, he makes sure that it happens (his prayers to be let off the hook being refused by God).

But why does anyone have to die for our sins, Jesus or anyone else? I ask again, what did that death achieve that God could not have achieved with one snap of those omnipotent fingers?

 

[Ajax]

I don’t see it that way. For one thing, it appears from the scriptures that the will of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are in one agreement and perfect harmony.

You must be a priest or a preacher...Only these people would write so many inaccuracies.

"yet not My will, but Yours be done." Luke
“My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.” Matthew
"Father! All things are possible for You; remove this cup from Me; yet not what I will, but what You will.” Mark

Secondly, there is ONE human race comprised of many individual people; still ONE human race. The Johnson family down the street is ONE family, yet this ONE family is composed of mom, dad and a couple kids.

We are talking about three persons, not three races, or families.

Because God is putting sin to death. In the eternal realm sin will not be present. The penalty if sin is death…

It's false statement. All the major figures in OT sinned, but none was put to death.

 

[Ebionite]

But Jesus announces at the start of his mission that he has to die ─ Mark 2:20, Mark 8:31.

No, exile and death are different things.

But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days.
Mark 2:20

Also, "son of man" is not an exclusive title.

And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and [of] the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
Mark 8:31

And as all four gospels make clear, when he gets to Jerusalem, he makes sure that it happens

No, they don't make that clear. There was wounding and exile, not death.

Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.
Matthew 26:31

Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man [that is] my fellow, saith YHWH of armies: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
Zechariah 13:7

And [one] shall say unto him, What [are] these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, [Those] with which I was wounded [in] the house of my friends.
Zechariah 13:6

But why does anyone have to die for our sins, Jesus or anyone else?

They don't. the point was to learn about the doctrine of mercy (Isaiah 55:3).

 

[Ajax]

They don't. the point was to learn about the doctrine of mercy (Isaiah 55:3).

Honestly...In every single denomination whilst its followers believe they have faith and therefore the guidance of the Holy Spirit, not only they create their own unrealistic interpretation about "prophecies", but there are also adamant about it.
The point is that the so called "prophecies" are very vague and everyone can adjust the meaning to suit his needs and ideas, like the horoscopes. Prime example being the Christian denominations which claim that almost all sayings about Israel (or kings of Israel, see Isaiah 7:14), refer to Jesus.

 

[blü 2]

No, exile and death are different things.

But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days.
Mark 2:20

He's not talking about exile, as my other reference made plain ─

Mark 8:31 And he began to teach them that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32 And he said this plainly. ...​

Also, "son of man" is not an exclusive title.

He's clearly referring to himself. (In the NT sometimes 'the son of man' clearly refers to Jesus, and sometimes it clearly doesn't, but the reference here makes no sense unless it refers to Jesus.)

No, they don't make that clear. There was wounding and exile, not death.

Gimme a break! He's predicted his mission will end with his death, in the Garden scenes in all four gospels he asks God to let him off the hook and God refuses, Jesus then declines the opportunities to flee Jerusalem, he goes out of his way to annoy Pilate, and he gets what he wants, crucifixion, which accords to Mark 8:31 prediction.

nd [one] shall say unto him, What [are] these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, [Those] with which I was wounded [in] the house of my friends.
Zechariah 13:6

That can't refer to Jesus, who was not wounded in his hands by his friends.

They don't. the point was to learn about the doctrine of mercy (Isaiah 55:3).

Then why did God send Jesus on his suicide mission, why did God insist on Jesus' particularly unpleasant death, AND WHY WAS ANY SUCH BLOODY AND CRUEL ENDING REQUIRED BY GOD ANYWAY?

I ask again, what did Jesus' crucifixion achieve that an omnipotent God could not have achieved with one snap of [his] fingers?

 

[Tomef]

Then why did God send Jesus on his suicide mission, why did God insist on Jesus' particularly unpleasant death, AND WHY WAS ANY SUCH BLOODY AND CRUEL ENDING REQUIRED BY GOD ANYWAY?

I ask again, what did Jesus' crucifixion achieve that an omnipotent God could not have achieved with one snap of [his] fingers?

Read sympathetically, I think there is a certain poetry to it. That someone had to pay the price for all of this xxxx. I mean, I can see where it comes from, the basic idea.

 

[Ajax]

I believe He was also God, who choose to pay the price of sin....

Because God is putting sin to death. In the eternal realm sin will not be present. The penalty if sin is death…

They don't (have to die for sin). the point was to learn about the doctrine of mercy

Do you think you are a little inconsistent here?

 

[Colt]

And you know that how? Mind you, I'm very far from being a literalist and/or a believer in biblical inerrancy, but it seems you've gone way overboard with your statement above.

I have the Urantia Book revelation so that's how I know, but setting that aside let me ask you a question, do you believe Jesus said this:

The Faith of the Canaanite Woman
(Mark 7:24–30)

21Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22And a Canaanite woman from that region came to Him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is miserably possessed by a demon.”

23But Jesus did not answer a word. So His disciples came and urged Him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”

24He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

25The woman came and knelt before Him. “Lord, help me!” she said.

26But Jesus replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

27“Yes, Lord,” she said, “even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”

28“O woman,” Jesus answered, “your faith is great! Let it be done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

 

[Kenny]

But that's exactly the point of the discussion...He didn't accomplish phase one. The Jews didn't accept Jesus.
Didn't he know that Jews will reject Him? And if he did, why did he say (twice) that He came for them?

That would be a perspective.

First, there were 12 with one betrayal
Then there were 120+

Acts 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples (altogether the number of names was about a hundred and twenty), and said,

then there were 3,000+

Acts 2:41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them

Then there were 5,000

Acts 4:4 However, many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand.

And it continued from there…

Acts 5:14 And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women,

Sounds like a successful effort to me.

 

[Ajax]

That would be a perspective.

First, there were 12 with one betrayal
Then there were 120+

Acts 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples (altogether the number of names was about a hundred and twenty), and said,

then there were 3,000+

Acts 2:41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them

Then there were 5,000

Acts 4:4 However, many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand.

And it continued from there…

Acts 5:14 And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women,

Sounds like a successful effort to me.

Sergio DellaPergola, one of the leading scholars of Jewish demography, estimates the Jewish population in the first century BCE at 4.5 million and in the first century CE at a number between 4 and 5 million. Other scholars talk for about 7 million.
So you don't call successful a conversion of 5,000 or even 10-20,000...

It is evident therefore that Jesus didn't know that the Jewish people will not accept him.. which is strange for a God. And at least his Father should have told him that he wouldn't have any luck with them and not to mention (twice) that he came for the people of Israel only.