1. 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!

Do you really believe that Jesus died for our sins?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Bennettresearch, Mar 8, 2010.

  1. Bennettresearch

    Bennettresearch Politically Incorrect

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    877
    Ratings:
    +61
    The mantra goes like this; God gave His only begotten Son to die for our sins so that we may have life.
    A human sacrifice as a scapegoat for our sins? Jesus has die so that we can have life? We can’t have life without Jesus around? This all sounds rather sinister when you look at it.
    There is scriptural evidence that sacrifice and burnt offerings weren’t really to God’s liking. Jesus is also quoted in the Gospels as saying this.

    “But if you had known what this means, ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT A SACRIFICE,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.
    Matthew (12:7)

    “But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do.
    John (8:37-40)

    Sacrifice and meal offering Thou hast not desired; My ears Thou hast opened; Burnt offering and sin offering Thou hast not required.
    Psalms (40:6)


    In spite of the repetition of this rationalization of the crucifixion dreamed up by Paul in the first seven verses of chapter 1 in Revelation, we later have this statement by John.

    And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
    Revelation (13:8)

    John is representing the crucifixion as an act of murder committed by man, not God. What are we to think of this contradiction? We were warned that there would be scribes writing their own propaganda into Revelation, Revelation (22:18-19). Do you believe Jesus or Paul?
    Craig
     
  2. Kilgore Trout

    Kilgore Trout Misanthropic Humanist

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    26,685
    Ratings:
    +9,146
    Absolutely. This is why I sin as often as possible, to ensure that Jesus' sacrifice was worth it.
     
  3. Mr.Lost

    Mr.Lost Mr.Lost

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    120
    Ratings:
    +6
    This is what i dont get. He died for our sins and yet we have to pary for our sins. Is not feeling bad for our sins just as good as praying. Why pray to a brick wall!
     
    #3 Mr.Lost, Mar 8, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2010
  4. fallingblood

    fallingblood Agnostic Theist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,992
    Ratings:
    +505
    I would agree with what a historical Jesus most likely would have said. He died simply because he set a spark in a tinderbox. He decided that he would destroy the temple (or make a mess of it) around Passover. The Romans could not tolerate that, as it could have very well likely started serious consequences, so they killed him.

    It was not a sacrifice, and not intended to be such. Others ended up portraying it as a sacrifice though, after the event had already occurred in order to try to rationalize the death of their leader.
     
  5. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    41,100
    Ratings:
    +3,311
    In the old testament there is a practice described in detail....
    How Moses would lay his hand upon a sinner and then upon a scapegoat.
    The animal was then lead into the wilderness to die.

    With all that was following Him, Jesus was probably aware His days were coming to an end.
    His parables and other teachings had not been well received.
    He was accumulating powerful enemies everyday.
    That stunt He pulled in the Temple was the last straw.

    He may of thought of Himself as a sacrifice.
    After all, He knew He would be killed if He persisted.
    When He spoke to His disciples, there was strong implication how His public life would end.
    But He seemed determined to continue His teaching, in spite of pending consequence.
    This would be a sacrifice.

    But His death on the cross is not the saving grace, as many believers would believe.
    His parables are the focus.
    Without His parables you are no different than a non-believer.

    You cannot lay your sins upon another man.
    But you can change what you are.
     
  6. Father Heathen

    Father Heathen Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    30,211
    Ratings:
    +14,634
    God sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself and to change a rule he himself made in order to save us from a hell he himself created. How can anyone not understand that?
     
    • Like Like x 3
  7. fallingblood

    fallingblood Agnostic Theist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,992
    Ratings:
    +505
    The Gospels will only say that if you read it that way. Also, much of what you say relates to tradition and later teachings.

    If one were to look at the Bible in a logical manner, and try to discern the actual Jesus, from the Biblical Jesus, then a rational opinion can be formed. We do not pretend that the birth story of Alexander the Great of Augustus is meant to be literal, but still assume that Jesus's birth story, which is no different, has to be taken literal. It does not work like that.
     
  8. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Riboflavin
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    54,786
    Ratings:
    +13,377
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    By definition, any Jesus that you derive from looking at the Bible will be a Biblical Jesus.
     
  9. fallingblood

    fallingblood Agnostic Theist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,992
    Ratings:
    +505
    True, and I should probably have qualified my statement further. Discerning the parts of the Gospels that were from the time of Jesus, compared to those that were formed later on, one can see what a historical Jesus would have been like. To further this, one would have to go outside the Bible as well to discern what the historical Jesus would have been like, which would be, in many aspects, in stark contrast with the Biblical Jesus.

    I know I didn't even imply that in my previous post. I should have stated what I meant.
     
  10. S-word

    S-word Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,763
    Ratings:
    +102
    Quote Bennettresearch; The mantra goes like this; God gave His only begotten Son to die for our sins so that we may have life.
    This is correct

    Quote Bennettresearch; A human sacrifice as a scapegoat for our sins?
    No my dear friend, all sins of has been ascribed to the spirit that develops within the body of mankind, who is born in the far distant future with the death of the sinful mother body in which he developed. Psalm 51: 5; “Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive, me (Eve who is the expanding body of Mankind in which is the developing spirit of the son of the Most High from the previous world.

    The “Son of Man,” who takes on the sins of the world, and who is the great and glorious simulacrum, who dwells in the eighth eternal heaven of Light, has gained all his great wisdom, knowledge and insight, which made him equal to the heavenly Father, from the pain and the sufferings of the body in which he developed, which pain and sufferings were caused by our sins and mistakes.

    Quote Bennettresearch; Jesus has die so that we can have life? We can’t have life without Jesus around? This all sounds rather sinister when you look at it.
    No my dear friend, Jesus was a human being born of human parents as all human beings are, anything that could be born of a human mother from the seed of some heavenly alien who had existed aeons before mankind, would not be a human being, but some hybrid freak. See Acts 3: 13, “The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has given divine glory to his obedient servant Jesus.” Who we know is now incontestably divine. John 3: 6’ “A human being is born physically of human parents, but he is born spiritually of the spirit.” This is why John and Mark ignore the physical birth of the man Jesus as totally irrelevant and begin their account of the story of our salvation, with the spiritual birth of the man Jesus when he was filled with the spirit of "The Son of Man" as he rose from the baptismal waters.

    Luke shows that Mary had never had sex with a man until she was found pregnant three months later, and Luke 3: 23; reveals the biological father of Jesus to be Joseph the son of Heli from the tribe of Levi, who should not be confused with the Joseph who married the pregnant and unmarried woman ‘Mary,’ and never had sex with her until she had given birth to Jesus the son of Joseph and grandson of Heli from the tribe of Levi. That other Joseph, whose genealogy is recorded in Matthew, and who has no genetic connection to Jesus, is the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah. And the only reference in Matthew to the physical birth of Jesus is that he was the fulfilment of the prophecy of the Lord through his servant Isaiah, which prophecy was that an “Almah” (an unmarried woman would be with child and would bear a son, who people would give many names to, which has all been fulfilled.The first time that “Virgin’ appears in any translation of the Bible, in reference to the mother of Jesus is when it was translated to Latin.

    The 5th century Latin Bible ‘The Vulgate,’ was due mainly to the effort of Jerome who was commissioned to make a revision of the books that had already been translated to Latin by in most cases, persons unknown, and with those books translated by Jerome himself, which revision was completed in 405 A.D. became the official bible of the universal church that had been unified by its non-christian and unorthodox champion, ‘King Constantine,’ who had his father Constantius deified and was accorded the same honour himself after his death.

    In transcribing the Hebrew words of the prophet Isaiah, that an “unmarried female would be with child and bear a son,” into Greek, which unlike the Hebrew language, does not have a specific term for ‘virgin,’ the authors of the Septuagint and Matthew were forced to use the Greek word ‘Parthenos,’ which carries a basic meaning of ‘girl,’ and denotes ‘virgin’ only by implication.

    ‘Parthenos,’ was often used in reference to non-virgins who had never been married. Homer uses it in reference to unmarried girls who were no longer virgins, and Homer was the standard textbook for learning Greek all throughout antiquity, so any writer of Greek, including Matthew, who transcribed Isaiah’s words, (An unmarried woman would be with child etc) while being well aware of this words versatile and indefinite meaning; was in no way implying that Mary was a virgin when using the Greek 'parthentos,' as the best translation of the Hebrew “Almah.”
    To be continued.
     
    #10 S-word, Mar 8, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2010
  11. enchanted_one1975

    enchanted_one1975 Resident Lycanthrope

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    9,703
    Ratings:
    +2,045
    I agree! It makes no sense! I think one dies for his or her own sins. :yes:
     
  12. Gentoo

    Gentoo The Feisty Penguin

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    10,061
    Ratings:
    +1,129
    No, even when I was Catholic, this never made sense to me.
     
  13. fallingblood

    fallingblood Agnostic Theist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,992
    Ratings:
    +505
    There were other points that I disagreed with, but this stood out most. The two Josephs you are talking about are one and the same. There was not a second Joseph. The reason this stood out to me is because I have never seen this claim before.

    Luke 3:23 does not state that Joseph is from the tribe of Levi. It stated that his grandfather was Levi. Yes, there is a major difference in the genealogies; but they refer to the same Joseph. The most likely reason for the difference is that they were simply made up and added as part of tradition, as well as to form a link to David. That was what was important.

    Also, the entire birth story was made after the fact. It is the same way that the birth story of Augustus was created. A person of importance was suppose to have an important birth. So they created them. No one believes that the birth story of Augustus is true, why make a difference for Jesus?

    Finally, the prophecy you mention really has nothing to do with Jesus. It was added by Matthew (and implied by Luke) in order to connect Jesus with prophecy. It was a common tradition in that time.

    Oh, and the reason that Mark and John ignore the birth of Jesus is because, among peasants, there were no birth records. No one recorded birth of Jesus, and the people who knew about it were long dead by the time the Gospels were written. It was simply not important. What was important was what he did when we was older. This is actually very common during that time.
     
  14. footprints

    footprints Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    Messages:
    2,589
    Ratings:
    +57
    According to the story, and path of enlightenment left there in, did Jesus die for our sins, most assuredly so. Not only for, but because of them.

    Jesus also said, unless you be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. He was talking to the people who followed him, who believed in him at the time. That not even their place in heaven was assured.
     
  15. S-word

    S-word Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,763
    Ratings:
    +102
    When the only exception of all mankind from the previous generation of the universe, who according to Genesis 5: 24; and Hebrew 11: 5; had been carried to heaven where he was anointed with the sweet smelling ointment of God that shone with the brilliance of the sun, where, clothed and girded with fire, he was chosen to serve God before the Body of Adam/mankind, into all eternity. The Greek word, “Christ,” means “Anointed.” Hebrew 10: 5; When “The Anointed One=Christ,” was about to come into the world he said to God; “You do not want sacrifices or offerings, but a body you have prepared for me.”
    The body that God had prepared for the Son of Man, who came down, was the body of Jesus, whom God prepared for his Son in this way: Hebrew 5: 7-10; “In his life on earth Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death. Because he was humble and devoted, God heard him, and even though he was an Israelite and therefore A Son of God, (not The Son of God, nor Gods Son, but A son of God) See Psalms 82: 6; ‘You are gods,’ I said; ‘ all of you are sons of the Most High’) he still had to learn through suffering to become obedient and to do and say only that which he was commanded, in order that our saviour might reveal himself to the world through his obedient servant Jesus, and reveal the great sacrifice that he, our saviour makes for us.

    It was then that God had prepared Jesus as the vessel through which his heavenly Son would accomplish that which had to be done. And after Jesus had learned to be obedient to his indwelling spirit, God declared him to be high priest in the line of succession to Melchizedek, not that Jesus took upon himself the honour of high priest, instead, after he had become perfect in his obedience, and as he rose from the baptismal waters, and was filled with the spirit of our saviour, which had descended upon him in the form of a dove, the voice from Heaven was heard to say “Thou art my beloved in whom I am well pleased, “Today I have become your Father.” See the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 22; and Hebrew 5: 5; showing that Jesus who was born of human parents in his life on earth, was chosen as the heir to he, who takes on the sins of the world.


    Jesus the obedient servant of our saviour, did and spoke only that which he was commanded by his indwelling spirit who was the same God who said to Moses in Deuteronomy 18: 18; “I will send them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will tell him what to say, and he will tell the people everything I command. He will speak in my name etc.” Peter in Acts 3: 22; confirms that the man Jesus was the one chosen from among the Israelites to speak in the name of the Lord, and the people of that day understood this, when they cried out; “Who is this who comes in the NAME of the Lord.”
    The miracles performed through Jesus were the miracles of our saviour, “God the Son” and the words spoken through the mouth of Jesus were the words of our saviour, “God the Son,” who had filled the Body of the one that “God his Father” had prepared for him. Jesus admits that he spoke not one word on his own authority, but only that which he was commanded to say. John 4: 25-26; When the Samaritan woman said, “I know that the Messiah is to come who is called the Christ/anointed one; when he comes he will tell us all things.” And it was the words of our saviour God who said to her through the mouth of his obedient servant who spoke not one word on his own authority, “I that speak unto thee am He.”
    1st Timothy 1: 1: Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and the Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope.
    Acts 3: 13; “The God of our ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has given divine glory to his servant Jesus.” Jesus, who we once we knew as a man, but who is now incontestably divine.”
    Acts 17: 31; “For He, (our Lord and saviour) has fixed a day in which he will rule the whole world with justice by means of a man he has chosen. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising that man from death.” It was the spirit that had developed within the sinful body of mankind, who came down into his dead past and gave his immortal body that we might live.

    After he who cannot die, had risen his obedient servant Jesus from death, his immortal body was torn asunder and poured out as fire on all those who had believed his words as spoken through his earthly image, who had to be lifted up in the same manner that Moses lifted up the image of the serpent in the desert, whose poison, coursing through the veins of God’s people was killing them, and to be cured, they only had to turn their eyes to the earthly image of the old serpent who had been lifted up to receive once more the Glory that he had with God before this world was made. John 17: 5; the words of the Lord to whom all the sins of mankind have been ascribed, as spoken through the mouth of his earthly image, Jesus of Nazareth, “Father! Give me glory in your presence now, the same glory I had with you before the world was made.”
     
  16. footprints

    footprints Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    Messages:
    2,589
    Ratings:
    +57
    Hi,

    I am sure you have your own relationships of association. As for me personally, I only go as far into any religious belief, as to where they align with other beliefs around the world, and then only to those things which I can actually prove.
     
  17. S-word

    S-word Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,763
    Ratings:
    +102
    Believe as you wish matey, that's the beauty of having a free will. But they are two different men. Joseph the step father of Jesus, whose genealogy is recorded in Matthew, is the son of Jacob a direct descendant of Solomon the son of Bathsheba, who became a member of the tribe of Judah by her union to King David his father.

    The other Joseph, who is the biological father of Jesus, is the son of Heli who is a direct descendant of Nathan the older half brother of Solomon. Nathan is a Levite and the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah who became a Levite by his marriage to Bathsheba, who is the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Obed-Edom, who is a descendant of Moses the Levite, through his second wife who is the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two father-in-laws of Moses, the other father-in-law is Jethro, the father of the first wife of Moses. But like I say, believe as you wish.

    quote=fallingblood; Oh, and the reason that Mark and John ignore the birth of Jesus is because, among peasants, there were no birth records. No one recorded birth of Jesus, and the people who knew about it were long dead by the time the Gospels were written. It was simply not important. What was important was what he did when we was older. This is actually very common during that time.

    No, the reason is because everyone who knew Jesus personality, knew that he was a normal human being, born of human parents as are all human beings.
     
    #17 S-word, Mar 9, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2010
  18. S-word

    S-word Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,763
    Ratings:
    +102
    Jesus was the vessel through which the words of God the Son of Man were revealed to us, when you go the Gods words as spoken through his earthly servant Jesus, you must first emply yourself of all preconceived ideas, and you must go as a little child, with an empty mind ready to be molded by the words of the Lord Almighty.
     
  19. ShakeZula

    ShakeZula The Master Shake

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    103
    Ratings:
    +14
    None of the gospels are from the time of Jesus.

    -S-
     
  20. Man of Faith

    Man of Faith Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    3,423
    Ratings:
    +89
    Yes, I believe. Jesus confronted Paul on the road to Damascus and told him to take the good news to the gentiles, (me).
     
Loading...