• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why the Jesus sacrifice?

Brickjectivity

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
4consideration said:
I think the right to being in the experience of being in the presence of God is inherent for each person, and that is also why I think Jesus used the term "Father" and "child" in reference to God and to people. The way I see it if one is a child of God, there is no judgment a person can make on earth, or in this thread, :) that is capable of changing the essence of a Father/Child relationship, or to give any one of us the right to place ourselves in between another person and their creator, and declare that other person unworthy of being in God's presence.
Click to expand...
Interesting way of putting it, and it is important since in the past various people have tried to place themselves between us and God. This includes governments, institutions and individuals.
 
Ingledsva

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Knight of Albion said:
The 'sacrifice' of Christ contains some very important spiritual lessons.

Christ, the Lamb of God, gave himself as the sacrifice, which was to show that what God seeks of us is not a blood sacrifice, but a love sacrifice (i.e. Service)

The whole event opens the way for the Resurrection, the aim of which was to highlight the resurrection of the spirit in all of us i.e. there is no death

The life and death of Christ is a macrocosm of what is required in microcosm of all spiritual aspirants, of all who seek to attain the Christ Consciousness (the true message Jesus was teaching and exemplifying) i.e. the 'crucifixion' of the lower self and ascendancy of the higher self.
Click to expand...

And the point is?

This is a human sacrifice - no matter how you look at it.

And Christians say his sacrifice was necessary - animal sacrifices no longer doing the trick.

*
 
Ingledsva

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Shiranui117 said:
The Gospels made it quite clear that Jesus willingly and knowingly allowed Himself to be betrayed and executed. For instance, Jesus' insistence on bearing His own cross, even after being beaten and sourged terribly. He knew His death was coming, and said as much in His prayer at Gethsemane, and stated that He would be killed and lifted up numerous times throughout His ministry. He knew He would be betrayed as well.

So yes, it was a self-sacrifice. It just so happened that He sacrificed Himself via the murderers.
Click to expand...

Indeed! In the oldest Pagan sense of the Sacrificed Sacred King.

*
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Koldo said:
What is the difference on this case?

EDIT: I will elaborate the question.

What is the difference on practice?
If even being forgiven you still have to pay the ( same ) wages for your sin, then what difference does it make if you were forgiven?
Click to expand...
Forgiveness restores a relationship with God. Atonement removes the penalty of sin.
 
Ingledsva

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Theodore A. Jones said:
A sin debt does not exist. The sin of murdering Jesus Christ has only increased sin. "The law was added so that the trespass, his murder, might increase." Rom. 5:20
Click to expand...

4consideration said:
Is that all your bible says about this passage?

I'm using a New American Bible, printed 1970, and this is what mine says:

Romans 5:20 "The law came in order to increase offenses; but despite the increase of sins, grace has far surpassed it, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, grace may reign by way of justice leading to eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord."

I have a much different interpretation than what you seem to have. To me, it looks like the grace present (through the immediately forgiving heart of Jesus, and the asking for forgiveness of those responsible at the time) actually balanced the need for anything to be necessary on the subject of justice on his behalf, and regarding this event/sin.
Click to expand...

Boy-oh-boy! Folks! These posts show that a new and proper translation of the Bible needs to be done! It should be translated something more like ...

*

Rom 5:19 For just-as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Rom 5:20 (For) Law also came in alongside; with the purpose that, along with the increase of sin, that it could-thus then supersede sin, with abundant grace.

*
 
Last edited:
Falvlun

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
sandy whitelinger said:
Forgiveness restores a relationship with God. Atonement removes the penalty of sin.
Click to expand...
Forgiveness is "forgiveness of sins", correct?

If you still must pay a debt for sins, then that debt cannot be considered forgiven.

EDIT:
No verses are needed-- it's the definition of forgiveness that would indicate atonement is unnecessary (or vice versa: that if atonement was performed, then "forgiveness" has not occurred.)
 
Last edited:
dgirl1986

dgirl1986

Big Queer Chesticles!
Bad time to be the son of god that is for sure. Then again I thought we were all meant to be his children...
 
Walkntune

Walkntune

Well-Known Member
Brickjectivity said:
Why does Genesis differentiate between the sons of God and the sons of men? That is in Genesis 6:2 How can we conclude that we are all made in God's image? Really this starts getting into strange territory, too, because now we are talking about the very strange passage about 'Nephilim'.
Click to expand...
Man is carnal and a spiritual being. Fleshly we are sons of man but Spiritually we come from the breath of God.
 
Last edited:
Walkntune

Walkntune

Well-Known Member
Theodore A. Jones said:
Rom. 2:13 is not referencing the OT written code. It is referencing the law that was put into effect through angels by a Mediator after Jesus' crucifixion because it was the sin of murder. Acts 7:52 Gal. 3:19 Heb. 7:12 It is either pay hell by not obeying this law or escape it by the faith of obeying this law. There are no exceptions.
Click to expand...
Here is a little more Romans for you.
Romans 13
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
 
9-10ths_Penguin

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
sandy whitelinger said:
Verses please.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of verses; it's a matter of the meaning of the terms "forgiveness" and "atonement".

Atonement means to "pay back" what you owe. Forgiveness means to cancel what you owe. Once a debt is cancelled, it no longer needs to be paid back. If you have to pay it back, it wasn't really cancelled. If you need to atone for it, it wasn't forgiven.
 
nash8

nash8

Da man, when I walk thru!
Falvlun said:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever should believe in him should not perish, but have eternal life."

This is something that I just can't understand about the Christian mythos. I can understand the concept of a God that loves people. I can understand the concept of a rift between man and God. And I can understand the desire for God to reconcile.

But, for the life of me, I can't understand why God would need to sacrifice his Son in order to do so.

If it is about forgiveness of sins, could not have God simply have said "I forgive you"?

It can't be about the power of death or the rights of Satan, because God is God. He can change the rules, he can make the rules differently from the get-go, and he can simply flex some muscles and say "Scram!".

It seems to me-- and I understand how horrible that this would sound to a believer-- that Jesus' death was rather superfluous. It was unnecessary.

So, what was the point of the Jesus sacrifice?
Click to expand...

A ploy by the state of Rome in order to gain sympathy donations in order to empower the advancement of the state? Do we have any fragments of this particular piece of the NT prior to the Council of Nicea, and/or previous Roman appointed councils concerning the books that would be included in the Canon?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top