Reason for Jesus Death Explained

[Muffled]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.

I suppose if one considers the flesh sinful as Paul says, then crucifying it as Paul says makes a lot of sense. The truth is that Jesus overcame the flesh (the world) so there was no need to do that by crucifixion.

I believe His death takes on meaning in the resurrection. One may not be resurrected until one dies.

 

[shunyadragon]

Let us see the whole picture by revealing the whole scene of John 11:51-52
Let us read from 45 to 52, what is this scene?

John 11:45-52 New International Version (NIV)
Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him. But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

“What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.”

Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”

He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one.

No mention of Jesus Christ being King of the Jews anywhere in John 11
The scene was the meeting of villains where they discussed about Jesus being a threat to their very existence.

What is mentioned is Jesus would die for the Jewish nation - which doesn't make one a king of the Jews.
It also said Jesus would also die for the scattered children of God - the true Christians, which distinguishes from the Jewish nation.

When Jesus Christ was asked by Pontius Pilate what did he answer?

Mark 15:2 New International Version (NIV)
“Are you the king of the Jews?” asked Pilate.

“You have said so,” Jesus replied.

The Jewish Nation is an earthly kingdom
Jesus Christ said his kingdom is not an earthly kingdom
Therefore Jesus Christ is not the king of the Jews

I believe the use of king of Jews on Jesus Christ is a mockery of the Lord

John 19:2-3 New International Version (NIV)
The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe and went up to him again and again, saying, “Hail, king of the Jews!” And they slapped him in the face.

You need to look at this from the perspective of Rome, and what motivates Romans concerning the trial and conviction of Jesus Christ. From the perspective of Rome ALL Messianic movements were rebellion against the State of Rome. Your esoteric claims as to the nature of the Kingdom Jesus Christ preached had no meaning from the perspective of Pilate, and Roman Law.

 

[Brickjectivity]

How was Incarnate Jesus different from humans? He didn't have (for lack of a better term) the sin 'gene'. Prior to Jesus, all of mankind descended from Adam. According to scripture (Romans 3) all have sinned. Jesus did not inherit the ability to act on what Judaism calls the "evil inclination." He was tempted, but due to obedience to God and the Holy Spirit, he did not act on ungodly temptations.

Jesus took all thoughts captive to God. He nipped temptation in the bud before it could manifest itself into sinful behavior.

Jesus was different. He was born of God, and God cannot sin.

Its an idea.

 

[Muffled]

what is the question?



so why didn't he just kill himself vs forgiving those who killed him?

I believe it would have been a sin for Him to take His own life. With the crucifixion it was this sinful world that crucified Him.

 

[David T]

Cheer up, David. You could depress a Russian with that stuff.

Well I started a thread. Much of the text is written as a window to look into in regards to others as they look out through that window. In that regards it's identical to Buddhism curiously and not suprisingly.

 

[Muffled]

Jesus Christ died for the same reasons everybody dies, except he was executed by curcifiction by the Romans for claiming to be the King of the Jews and rebellion against Roman authority. He lived to present the message of his Revelation.

I believe Jesus made a good defense against that accusation and PIlot agreed but had to crucify Him for political expediency.

 

[Muffled]

That is not an argument and sounds to me like a spurious claim. All of the parables Jesus speaks can be interpreted to be about whether Jews should fellowship gentiles. All of the NT writers argue for integration. Jesus own twelve disciples are as motley and unequal as possible. His baptism makes him a type of Elisha, and Elisha is a prophet against Israel and for the gentiles. Jesus whole life is an argument as are his apostles lives and each of his miracles. They all say this "Its time to fellowship the gentiles, and whomever will choose the path of peace is for us not against us."

I believe gentiles are invited to partake in the new covenant but that does not mean fellowship with the old covenant.Of curse there would be fellowship with new covenant Jews. However the new covenant actually switches from blood to wine or grape juice if you are a Baptist. So it isn't so much about His death as it is about His shedding blood.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I believe gentiles are invited to partake in the new covenant but that does not mean fellowship with the old covenant.Of curse there would be fellowship with new covenant Jews. However the new covenant actually switches from blood to wine or grape juice if you are a Baptist. So it isn't so much about His death as it is about His shedding blood.

You and I are not privy to everything about Judaism like we are not privy to everything about String Theory. It takes years of practice, discipline and study to understand all of it. There is a difference between simply believing and entering into that discipline. The love of others, however, covers all differences. If we can do that then everything else lines up.

I am fond of some of the riddles in the various Bible books. I don't ask people to explain them, because I prefer to ponder them. I like this one a lot: "...He will tether his donkey to a vine, his colt to the choicest branch; he will wash his garments in wine, his robes in the blood of grapes. His eyes will be darker than wine, his teeth whiter than milk." Its so mysterious. I also consider the answer to Sampson's riddle to be another riddle. I like these, but I have never fully deciphered them. That's ok though.

 

[MJFlores]

You need to look at this from the perspective of Rome, and what motivates Romans concerning the trial and conviction of Jesus Christ. From the perspective of Rome ALL Messianic movements were rebellion against the State of Rome. Your esoteric claims as to the nature of the Kingdom Jesus Christ preached had no meaning from the perspective of Pilate, and Roman Law.

Yes, you have been looking at the perspective of Rome
The Romans and the Pharisees were the bad hombres
Why should I side with bad hombres?

The Romans were the villains in the Bible
So with the Pharisees and the Sadducees
These groups of people are not of God but of the Devil.
What is nice about pagan Rome which is the Pervert's Paradise?

I believe nothing good would come out from perverts and murderers.

It is clear on the Bible
that Jesus Christ wasn't the King of the Jews - never is and never was
The title was a misunderstanding and Jesus never declared or even crossed his mind
that he is such and this is gleaned on the Bible

John 18:32-34 New International Version (NIV)
This took place to fulfill what Jesus had said about the kind of death he was going to die.

Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”

“Is that your own idea,” Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?”

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes, you have been looking at the perspective of Rome
The Romans and the Pharisees were the bad hombres
Why should I side with bad hombres?

View attachment 29531

The Romans were the villains in the Bible
So with the Pharisees and the Sadducees
These groups of people are not of God but of the Devil.
What is nice about pagan Rome which is the Pervert's Paradise?

I believe nothing good would come out from perverts and murderers.

It is clear on the Bible
that Jesus Christ wasn't the King of the Jews - never is and never was
The title was a misunderstanding and Jesus never declared or even crossed his mind
that he is such and this is gleaned on the Bible

John 18:32-34 New International Version (NIV)
This took place to fulfill what Jesus had said about the kind of death he was going to die.

Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”

“Is that your own idea,” Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?”

Disagree with your selective citations. The fact is the reason why the Romans convicted and executed Jesus Christ for treason against Rome, and not your esoteric claims of e=what you believe the mission of Jesus Christ was or is.

The prophecies for the Messiah would be literally the 'King of Jews,' and as many claim the King of all Jews and Gentiles, in this world and the next.

 

[shunyadragon]

I believe Jesus made a good defense against that accusation and PIlot agreed but had to crucify Him for political expediency.

Actually, this is severely problematic, and no one who made Messianic claims had any defence in Rome. The execution by crucifiction is the Roman punishment for treason and rebellion against Rome,.

 

[viole]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.


***Late clarification: sin-nature within himself or that which could cause him to want to sin or any sort of human weakness within himself. I do not mean to imply he has personally transgressed or harmed anyone. I'm adding this, because I can see that many users think I am implying it in the OP. No, I do not mean Jesus has sinned or that he is dying to testify against any of his own actions.***

The questions is:
how would the world look like today if Jesus never existed?

1) Better
2) Worse
3) No matter

Ciao
- viole

 

[Brickjectivity]

The questions is:
how would the world look like today if Jesus never existed?

1) Better
2) Worse
3) No matter

Ciao
- viole

Its non sequitur to the thread, but we'd all be a lot less Jewish. The Roman Empire still would have fallen, but it never would have developed romance ideas about marriage and chivalry. The abolitionists in the UK would never have existed. No John Locke, etc. The governments would have continued the practice of suppressing all new technology. Most likely the world would be something like ancient Greece up until around 600 AD a bunch of warring city states, but then Islam would have appeared to bring order to the chaos. Happy now?

 

[viole]

Its non sequitur to the thread, but we'd all be a lot less Jewish. The Roman Empire still would have fallen, but it never would have developed romance ideas about marriage and chivalry. The abolitionists in the UK would never have existed. No John Locke, etc. The governments would have continued the practice of suppressing all new technology. Most likely the world would be something like ancient Greece up until around 600 AD a bunch of warring city states, but then Islam would have appeared to bring order to the chaos. Happy now?

Happy? No. But I am not sure whether assuming different scenarios would make sense at all, since I am an ethernalist. And that alternative scenarios are meaningless, anyway.

However, I believe Christianity is nothing short of a cancer that set humanity back several centuries. And when I see a cross, I see a symbol of superstitious bigotry, of celebration of primitive human sacrifices, or promotion of irrational nonsense, of oppression of women, scientific progress and the weak, something that is so repulsive to me as the symbol of the nazi swastika. Something that flies in the face of the word "sapiens" we attribute to our species.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Brickjectivity]

Happy? No. But I am not sure whether assuming different scenarios would make sense at all, since I am an ethernalist. And that alternative scenarios are meaningless, anyway.

However, I believe Christianity is nothing short of a cancer that set humanity back several centuries. And when I see a cross, I see a symbol of superstitious bigotry, of irrational superstition, or promotion of irrational nonsense, of oppression of women and the weak, something that is so repulsive to me as the symbol of the nazi swastika.

Ciao

- viole

The only people who have ever effected positive change are the pacifists. Are you one? Then and only then will I listen to finger pointing. You're beating a sick cow. There is a cancer, and its the idea that social evolution can come through legislation and telling people what they may or may not speak and think or redefining words. Yes, it infects Christians and Christian governments as well as non-Christian ones. Its always lurking around "If we tell people what to think then we'll accomplish peace and harmony" and never works. There's no pacifism in it, no personal sacrifice, no forgiveness. Hence Christianity is still a very viable entity carrying the ideals of forgiveness, personal sacrifice and pacifism. As for religious bigotry its no different from all other bigotry, but go ahead and blame Christianity and ignore whatever bigotry suits your ideals. Glad to hear you have zero bigotry and are able to nullify Christianity through your superior idealism. Let us see some evidence of your successes.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Lots of people have this question.

He willingly dies testifying against the sin within himself but in favor of the good within himself. This is explained by several NT writers. It is a mystical concept that argues that the gentile should be granted fellowship as if they were Jews. Whether you agree with that or not, that is what the death means.


***Late clarification: sin-nature within himself or that which could cause him to want to sin or any sort of human weakness within himself. I do not mean to imply he has personally transgressed or harmed anyone. I'm adding this, because I can see that many users think I am implying it in the OP. No, I do not mean Jesus has sinned or that he is dying to testify against any of his own actions.***

But Jesus didn't actually die according to Christians.

 

[Brickjectivity]

But Jesus didn't actually die according to Christians.

If we stick with the current canon, Hebrews 5:7 suggests that he doesn't want to die and prays to be spared. At the same time he endures the cross for the joy set before him. On the one hand he goes through the death for the 'Joy set before him' but on the other hand he doesn't want to die, either. Its true a lot of Christians think that death was for him just a sweet dream. That is, most believe in an afterlife somewhat like Muslims do. This probably undermines some of the deeper meaning of resurrection, maybe a lot of it. What can you do about it. You just go fix all your buddhism problems and hope things get patched up over here. Maybe between the two boats something will float.

 

[1213]

…Suppose for example Jesus never died. He could go around healing every blind person with miracles and end slavery and rule as a king, forever. That's what people would want, after all; but it isn't literally why he came. Instead he left. We want someone to come here and end blindness and release the prisoners, but instead Jesus leaves. The question of the OP is why Jesus dies.

I believe what the Bible tells and according to it, Jesus lives and in his name people can still be healed. But I think people would not commonly want to keep him as the king, instead they would want to kill him again and again.

Another Biblical reason for why Jesus died is this:


Most assuredly I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit.
John 12:24

By dying Jesus could be raised form death. Before that his disciples were fearful, but after they saw Jesus risen from the death, they got courage to continue fearlessly. So, in that way it was important that Jesus died. By so he showed that they should not fear death.

 

[paarsurrey]

There is a third Muslim version that Jesus was put on the Cross, but delivered from it in a near-dead position and was put in the Tomb of Joseph of Arimathea where he was treated for his injuries inflicted on him on the Cross, when he got recovered to some extent, he came out from the tomb and traveled elsewhere, secretly, to a place of refuge in an abode of peace and tranquility and with fountains. There he lived till he died naturally* at a very old age.

Regards
______________
* As per Quran

I give the verses of Quran in this connection:

[23:51]
And We made the son of Mary and his mother a Sign, and gave them refuge on an elevated land of green valleys and springs of running water.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 23: Al-Mu'minun

[3:56]
When Allah said, ‘O Jesus, I will cause thee to die a natural death and will exalt thee to Myself, and will clear thee from the charges of those who disbelieve, and will place those who follow thee above those who disbelieve, until the Day of Resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, and I will judge between you concerning that wherein you differ.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 3: Aal-e-`Imran

 

[Brickjectivity]

Another Biblical reason for why Jesus died is this:


Most assuredly I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit.
John 12:24

Nicely said. Similarly 1 Peter talks about this and about us following Jesus similarly, so that the fruit bears more fruit which bears more fruit etc. This is not always what happens, however. We often cling to our lives and our selves rather than die, and then we are unfruitful. I think each person has a tiny amount they are willing to do and that is their measure of faithfulness, and then its like moving a mountain by spoonfuls and persistence.

I think what is biblical is not necessarily what God reveals to each person. Many people would do better simply using their brains than micro-focusing on conundrums, and I speak from personal experience. Constant bible reading, for example, does not teach patience, doesn't replace food, can't change a diaper. A man goes off on a worldwide hiking trip. Another reads his Bible constantly all day until the hiker returns. When hiker returns he might understand the Bible better, because that is how it is sometimes. Someone may read the bible constantly and only get ink poisoning.

I believe what the Bible tells and according to it, Jesus lives and in his name people can still be healed. But I think people would not commonly want to keep him as the king, instead they would want to kill him again and again.

Maybe. Its a complex subject on its own.

By dying Jesus could be raised form death. Before that his disciples were fearful, but after they saw Jesus risen from the death, they got courage to continue fearlessly. So, in that way it was important that Jesus died. By so he showed that they should not fear death.

I don't think they believed in eternal torment, but if so then I'd agree with that idea. Bible systems. If your system involves eternal torment or doesn't then the entire system is slightly different, all verses affected. If a single meaning changes then the entire world does. Moses spends 40 years herding animals, but then one day suddenly he catches on fire and is not burned. He returns and the fire catches on to someone else, but they also are not burned. This continues, and there is a whole community of people on fire. This is the difference between 'Consuming fire' and 'Spreading fire'. Its a difference of one translated word, and it changes everything. Thus we are often deceived if we place emphasis upon anything we have read while ignoring our best sense.

 

[paarsurrey]

While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.”

Here is a clue that Jesus could not and did not die on the Cross.
G-d showed the dream to Pilate's wife so that she convinces Pilate to not let Jesus die on the Cross. He managed things in such a way that Jesus looked like having died but he was only near-dead.
It is a strong clue there in the Bible itself that Jesus survived a cursed death on the Cross.
Good news for Christians. Right, please?

Regards