Jesus's Death. Was That Unnecessary?

thomas t · Jan 2, 2021

paarsurrey said:
as it entails that Jesus did not fulfil the Sign of Jonah-

Actually, Jesus taught that the sign of Jonah will be given to the inquirers.
If you say that lying around (alive) in a tomb relaxing a bit, having a nice chat and chill out like that.... already counts as sign for them equal to what happened to Jonah... how much more will Jesus' 3-days visit of the world of death.

In the belly, Jonah couldn't chat with anyone, he couldn't just go out and enjoy the sun for a minute... and much more.

paarsurrey said:
Right friend, please?

no, I don't think so, see above.

paarsurrey said:
Kindly don't insult innocent Jesus, please. Right friend, please?

I didn't.

Moses_UK said:
Who told us that Jesus died in the first place?

Hi Moses welcome to the board. That was the Bible, see Romans 5:6 please.

thomas t · Jan 2, 2021

Joe W said:
I read this several hours ago, and have gone from being appalled to just plain sad.
What you are telling me is that if you had the power and ability to stop someone from being brutally tortured and killed that you would not act to prevent it unless you had an explicit request.

Jesus said that if he issued a request to the father, he would send him 12 angel armies at once.
See Matthew 26:53.
Given this knowledge, I would ask Jesus first. Yes. As sad as it may be for you...

PureX · Jan 2, 2021

Moses_UK said:
Listen, most atheists are formed due to the inability of Christians to exhibit common sense. I am surprised and always believe that being smart and being Christian is an oxymoron.

"Common sense" meaning that they comply with your unwarranted biases about the nature of existence.

capumetu · Jan 2, 2021

cOLTER said:
"The erroneous supposition that the righteousness of God was irreconcilable with the selfless love of the heavenly Father, presupposed absence of unity in the nature of Deity and led directly to the elaboration of the atonement doctrine, which is a philosophic assault upon both the unity and the free-willness of God."

The atonement theory by default says that God cannot forgive, that the Father is Not Love, is Not merciful, and cannot of his own forgive sin unless someone almost equal to himself to accept the consequence on everyone's behalf which is a crass injustice.

Likely you realize that perfect law does not have allowances for infractions sir. Matter of fact no law does. Jehovah out of His love was able to enact a provision in which something of equal value sacrificed, can atone for the law violation.

Since sin equates to death, an equal sacrifice can atone for it. Jehovah's perfect law states eye for eye, tooth for tooth, soul for soul.

Colt · Jan 2, 2021

capumetu said:
Likely you realize that perfect law does not have allowances for infractions sir. Matter of fact no law does. Jehovah out of His love was able to enact a provision in which something of equal value sacrificed, can atone for the law violation.

Since sin equates to death, an equal sacrifice can atone for it. Jehovah's perfect law states eye for eye, tooth for tooth, soul for soul.

The law of sin applies to those who completely, persistently and finally reject Gods mercy, love and forgiveness.

You are claiming that God has no free will, that he must devise a primitive scheme to satisfy your personal inability to love and forgive others.

Eye for Eye

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

ppp · Jan 2, 2021

thomas t said:
Jesus said that if he issued a request to the father, he would send him 12 angel armies at once.
See Matthew 26:53.
Given this knowledge, I would ask Jesus first. Yes. As sad as it may be for you...

What you are telling me is that if you had the power and ability to stop someone from being brutally tortured and killed that you would not act to prevent it unless you had an explicit request.

Moses_UK · Jan 2, 2021

thomas t said:
Actually, Jesus taught that the sign of Jonah will be given to the inquirers.
If you say that lying around (alive) in a tomb relaxing a bit, having a nice chat and chill out like that.... already counts as sign for them equal to what happened to Jonah... how much more will Jesus' 3-days visit of the world of death.

In the belly, Jonah couldn't chat with anyone, he couldn't just go out and enjoy the sun for a minute... and much more.

no, I don't think so, see above.

I didn't.
Hi Moses welcome to the board. That was the Bible, see Romans 5:6 please.

Hi Thomas,

I am confused. please read the below verses in the Bible Matthew 19:16-30 the rich man verse: This totally contradicts the Christians main faith of dying for sin. Jesus tells them to follow the commandments and nothing else. Why didn’t he tell them to worship him? Or anything about the cross?

6 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18 “Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”

20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

I ask my christian brethren why do they listen to Sauls statements (didn't even meet Jesus) rather then Jesus himself?

thomas t · Jan 2, 2021

Joe W said:
What you are telling me is that if you had the power and ability to stop someone from being brutally tortured and killed that you would not act to prevent it unless you had an explicit request.

actually, you can't generalize here when it comes to my behavior.
Jesus, the Son of God, had the capacity to order 12 angel armies, who would have been there in an instand, as says the passage I quoted above.
If this is the context, I would indeed have waited to see what the angel armies do.

ppp · Jan 2, 2021

thomas t said:
actually, you can't generalize here when it comes to my behavior.
Jesus, the Son of God, had the capacity to order 12 angel armies, who would have been there in an instand, as says the passage I quoted above.
If this is the context, I would indeed have waited to see what the angel armies do.

I heard you the first time. I am saying that the context is not exculpatory.

paarsurrey · Jan 2, 2021

thomas t said:
Actually, Jesus taught that the sign of Jonah will be given to the inquirers.
If you say that lying around (alive) in a tomb relaxing a bit, having a nice chat and chill out like that.... already counts as sign for them equal to what happened to Jonah... how much more will Jesus' 3-days visit of the world of death.

In the belly, Jonah couldn't chat with anyone, he couldn't just go out and enjoy the sun for a minute... and much more.

no, I don't think so, see above.

I didn't.
Hi Moses welcome to the board. That was the Bible, see Romans 5:6 please.

thomas t " sign of Jonah will be given to the inquirers"

They were not soft "inquirers", why not to use the language of the NT Bible?:

39 He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.
Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 12:39 - New International Version
Why does one resort to redact the scribe's narration, please?
Right friend, please?
Is it that one doesn't agree that the words of the Matthew were not the words of Jesus, please? Right friend, please?

Regards

thomas t · Jan 2, 2021

paarsurrey said:
Is it that one doesn't agree that the words of the Matthew were not the words of Jesus, please? Right friend, please?

they were the words of Jesus.

paarsurrey said:
Why does one resort to redact the scribe's narration, please?
Right friend, please?

I just chose a neutral word. This isn't intended to alter the text though.
I'm not making a moral judgement here. Just saying that Jesus was asked a question.

sojourner · Jan 2, 2021

thomas t said:
Actually, the NT was written in Greek.
Before, it was in Aramaic perhaps

Yes, I’m more than well aware of the languages of the Bible. One of the Greek words translated as “forgiveness” is aphiemi, which means, “to send away.”

thomas t said:
ok.
Yet there was a price that needed to be paid.
1 Corinthians 6:20.
So, some bill was still there that needed to be paid. Otherwise this Bible verse just does not make any sense whatsoever

Sure! The price of giving our energy back to us.

thomas t said:
Even if liberal Christians say you can skip Bible verses, I hold you can't

Not “skip,” but rather weighed for their contextual value. Some passages are more relevant than others.

thomas t said:
I'm not conservative either, but I say you should take Bible verses seriously

Of course, which is why we take the trouble to weigh the texts against each other.

sojourner · Jan 2, 2021

thomas t said:
they were the words of Jesus

Perhaps; perhaps not. Only about half of the sayings attributed to Jesus are authentic to Jesus. In this case, the Q text is shared neither by Mark or by Thomas. It probably is not authentic to Jesus. And the Mark parallel doesn’t mention Jonah.

Second, it’s always an exegetical mistake to read Jesus into any of the OT stories.

sojourner · Jan 2, 2021

Joe W said:
I read this several hours ago, and have gone from being appalled to just plain sad.
What you are telling me is that if you had the power and ability to stop someone from being brutally tortured and killed that you would not act to prevent it unless you had an explicit request.

It makes me sad to think that a believer in God would think that torture is part of God’s plan.

ppp · Jan 2, 2021

sojourner said:
It makes me sad to think that a believer in God would think that torture is part of God’s plan.

Or that they would excuse such behavior on such a basis.

paarsurrey · Jan 2, 2021

thomas t said:
they were the words of Jesus.
I just chose a neutral word. This isn't intended to alter the text though.
I'm not making a moral judgement here. Just saying that Jesus was asked a question.

How is one sure that the words were of innocent Jesus when neither did he write anything that has reached us nor did he dictate anything to innocent Mary or to any of the sinful twelve, please. Right friend, please?
It is one aspect among many that the sinful Paul was encouraged to fake a vision and self-declared himself a successor of innocent Jesus, please. Right friend, please?
This happened when innocent Jesus survived a cursed death on the Cross and exhibited Sign of Jonah as he had promised and prophesied to the "Adulterous Judaism people", and innocent Jesus migrated out of Judea, out the hands of Jews and Romans, please.
Right friend , please?

Regards

thomas t · Jan 3, 2021

sojourner said:
Sure! The price of giving our energy back to us.

nice hypothesis. Can't be found in scriptures.

sojourner said:
Not “skip,” but rather weighed for their contextual value. Some passages are more relevant than others.

I think this is saying that you pick and choose. Some Bible verses you take, others you rip out saying (see your quote below)...

sojourner said:
Perhaps; perhaps not. Only about half of the sayings attributed to Jesus are authentic to Jesus. In this case, the Q text is shared neither by Mark or by Thomas. It probably is not authentic to Jesus. And the Mark parallel doesn’t mention Jonah.

I hold that scripture is inerrant.

thomas t · Jan 3, 2021

I believe that God made it possible that every single word is right in scripture. Including Paul's letters.
Including Jesus's death on the cross.

Surviving the cross wouldn't be the sign of Jonah, I hope you understand.
The sign of Jonah is about being at a place where noone - except God's grace - can reach you for as long as three days.

paarsurrey said:
It is one aspect among many that the sinful Paul [...]self-declared himself a successor of innocent Jesus, please. Right friend, please?

No. Paul never claims to be a successor of Jesus.

capumetu · Jan 3, 2021

cOLTER said:
The law of sin applies to those who completely, persistently and finally reject Gods mercy, love and forgiveness.

You are claiming that God has no free will, that he must devise a primitive scheme to satisfy your personal inability to love and forgive others.

Eye for Eye

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Jesus did not nullify Gods law sir, although for us humans, and I stress in this time period, we are to forgive those who violate those laws, to an extent. When the covenant Jesus initiated is fulfilled, we will go back to that perfect law. If you take a life, you yourself will die.

Colt · Jan 3, 2021

capumetu said:
Jesus did not nullify Gods law sir, although for us humans, and I stress in this time period, we are to forgive those who violate those laws, to an extent. When the covenant Jesus initiated is fulfilled, we will go back to that perfect law. If you take a life, you yourself will die.

God as a Father transcends God as a judge. Jesus revealed God to be a Living, loving Father, not a Lawyer. Your claim that we will return to Judaism is silly. "Do not put the new wine into the old wine skins."

Jesus's Death. Was That Unnecessary?

As an atheist, do you agree with Dawkins' assessment of Jesus's death?

yes

no

yes, more or less, although his answer was a bit emotional

no, but he does have one or two valid points in his answer

non-denominational Christian

non-denominational Christian

Veteran Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

non-denominational Christian

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

non-denominational Christian

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

non-denominational Christian

non-denominational Christian

Active Member

Well-Known Member