Why is Christ's sacrifice needed?

[QuestioningMind]

Someone posted a thread about Jesus' sacrifice being, in their view, the "biggest problem of Christianity".
I thought I'd reply with a thread containing a link that helps to explain it.

No one can grasp the reason behind Jesus' sacrifice, without first recognizing the position that Adam, as our forefather, put all of us in: growing old, getting sick, and then dying. (This was not God's purpose for mankind.) We inherited sin from Adam and Eve. And 'sin leads to death.' --Romans 5:12; Romans 6:23

Keeping this in mind, here's a link providing information to think about:

Jehovah Provides “a Ransom in Exchange for Many” — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Sorry, but the entire story is kind of silly. God creates A&E so naive and gullible that they they are easily duped by the talking snake that God decided to let into the Garden of Eden. And when His naive and gullible creations get tricked by God's talking snake, He decides to punish them. Then for some reason He decides that just punishing A&E isn't enough, but that all of their descendants should ALSO be punished for the sin of A&E having been created so naive and gullible.

Fast forward and God decides that the only way He can forgive His creations for having been created with flaws is to send Himself to Earth in human form and then have Himself 'sacrificed' (though how it's a true 'sacrifice' when he comes back to life good as new a few days later is beyond me). None of it makes any logical sense and certainly wouldn't be the actions of an all-powerful all-knowing creator God.

 

[Foxic]

Sorry, but the entire story is kind of silly. God creates A&E so naive and gullible that they they are easily duped by the talking snake that God decided to let into the Garden of Eden. And when His naive and gullible creations get tricked by God's talking snake, He decides to punish them. Then for some reason He decides that just punishing A&E isn't enough, but that all of their descendants should ALSO be punished for the sin of A&E having been created so naive and gullible.

Fast forward and God decides that the only way He can forgive His creations for having been created with flaws is to send Himself to Earth in human form and then have Himself 'sacrificed' (though how it's a true 'sacrifice' when he comes back to life good as new a few days later is beyond me). None of it makes any logical sense and certainly wouldn't be the actions of an all-powerful all-knowing creator God.

To be fair, it was concocted by primitive minds.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

If it's not god's purpose to be like this, than why put it to where such an event would happen?

That's like if I had a child and put him in a playpen with a knife, it's not my doing because I didn't give the knife to him. Then, he picks up the knife and cuts himself leaving a scar that last even up to age. He tells his family, and his family family, and the "scar" goes through history as the worse event of the child's life as the memories aren't ceased since the "first cut."

Then, years later (pretend I can live longer than a hundred) I decide that my family, family family, family has suffered from these cut-memories for a long time. So, in order to help with this, I need to have another child who can share in the cuts of all of my family's generations. Once they see this child cut herself by placing another knife in the playpin, the current family can see that it was "their" fault not their mine (their mother's). It takes their guilt of blaming the mother to blaming their first sibling.

Never did they think about the mother placing the knife in the playpen to begin with because all they know of life are the memories of pain from their first sibling. They don't know their mother as the first sibling did; so, the only way they can get rid of their emotional and guilty painful memories causing them to do same actions as their other siblings is to follow the example of this new sibling and the same thing this new sibling did that will block out the reason why the first sibling took the knife and cut himself.

The new generation of families are blinded by the truth because all they can mirror and understand is the role of their siblings. So, when

toi be contineud work

Carlita, you have always shown a willing attitude to reason on every post I've read from you, you are never condescending or abusive. Any issue I've ever had, has been on my part, trying to follow your meaning.

Maybe my reply will help with this scenario you present? It's a good one, if I understand you correctly.
Whatever we go through living in this System -- the sicknesses we may have, the injustices we face, whatever hardships -- we only put up with it for 80 years, not much longer than that. (If some people are real sickly and in pain, maybe only 20 years, maybe only two days.)

But the Resurrection, promised by God and Jesus (of course I'm talking about the Bible's explanation), will undue all that we have experienced in this life. 80 years is nothing, compared with everlasting life!

Now, if your question is why God has taken so long to deal with the issue....yes, it's been 6,000 years! That is a long time! (But, again, not for each of us individually.) Why so long? Because, in addition to Genesis 3 explaining how sin came about through Adam and Eve, there's a lot more it tells us! The serpent (used by the Devil, Revelation 12:9) raised several issues, the major one questioning whether Jehovah God has the right to set guidelines for humans. IOW, questioning God's Sovereignty, his right to rule humans as their Creator. Over 6,000 years later, and all forms of human government being tried, the issue is just about settled: humans are becoming more and more selfish, destroying society and harming themselves! There's more divisiveness between people than ever before.

Great technological strides have been made, but really, what good is it if we can send men 240,000 miles to the moon, but so many can't even walk 1/2 mile down their neighborhood road without getting mugged?

People's attitudes are worse than ever before. The issue is pretty much settled: We need God's loving guidance. The truthfulness of Jeremiah 10:23 is observed everyday. God will even get rid of sickness and death. Revelation 21:3-4

Did I help to answer any of your questions?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

It's our way of saying, "Have a nice day." It sounds so much nicer than, "You're hopeless."

Since when did a sincere "have a nice day" include passive-aggressive challenges?

Confused? Please re-examine the quote of yours that I started from:

Perhaps you can ask Him one day.

May not seem like much taken at face value, but put in the context of the conversation, where this was pointed back toward someone who does not believe as you do about God, it has very subtly implied meaning. It implies that you know better, and that the person you targeted with the words is wrong about God. It is meant to bring to mind the judgment of God (don't kid yourself by claiming otherwise), and the supposed "truth" that we all have to face it when we have passed from this world. It is meant to get someone thinking and doubting themselves - trying to poke holes in whatever their current thoughts on the matter are. It is clandestine condescension, painted over with a thin, cheap coat of piety.

Now, I know the trick here. You make a passive-aggressive statement like the above, and then when anyone calls you on it, you roll into a little ball of persecution, and claim that i have it all wrong. That you meant no more than what the words say. That it was stated out of the kindness of your heart toward your fellow man, truly hoping that they one day have the heart to turn to God for the answers to their questions. Which would be lies... all of it. Plain and simple.

And you see, that is where we differ. I am perfectly willing to say exactly what I am thinking, honest and straightforward with my words. And while my words may be used as stones at times, at least you can see me throwing them, see them coming at you in the air, and can act accordingly. You, on the other hand, like so many others I have encountered whose beliefs are similar to your own, you put a very slight veil on your intent. Enough so that you can deny that your words are knives hidden in your sleeves if someone happens to catch sight of them. Deny it all you want. I trust my perception all too well to care.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Since when did a sincere "have a nice day" include passive-aggressive challenges?

Confused? Please re-examine the quote of yours that I started from:



May not seem like much taken at face value, but put in the context of the conversation, where this was pointed back toward someone who does not believe as you do about God, it has very subtly implied meaning. It implies that you know better, and that the person you targeted with the words is wrong about God. It is meant to bring to mind the judgment of God (don't kid yourself by claiming otherwise), and the supposed "truth" that we all have to face it when we have passed from this world. It is meant to get someone thinking and doubting themselves - trying to poke holes in whatever their current thoughts on the matter are. It is clandestine condescension, painted over with a thin, cheap coat of piety.

Now, I know the trick here. You make a passive-aggressive statement like the above, and then when anyone calls you on it, you roll into a little ball of persecution, and claim that i have it all wrong. That you meant no more than what the words say. That it was stated out of the kindness of your heart toward your fellow man, truly hoping that they one day have the heart to turn to God for the answers to their questions. Which would be lies... all of it. Plain and simple.

And you see, that is where we differ. I am perfectly willing to say exactly what I am thinking, honest and straightforward with my words. And while my words may be used as stones at times, at least you can see me throwing them, see them coming at you in the air, and can act accordingly. You, on the other hand, like so many others I have encountered whose beliefs are similar to your own, you put a very slight veil on your intent. Enough so that you can deny that your words are knives hidden in your sleeves if someone happens to catch sight of them. Deny it all you want. I trust my perception all too well to care.

Can't put one past you.

Pious? Me? BWAHAHAHAHA.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Why is Christ's sacrifice needed?

Were I to actually believe in God, believe the words of The Bible, believe the commonly held notions about God etc. - my answer would still be that it wasn't needed.

God is supposedly all powerful. Creator of the universe. Can do as He pleases with anything, at any time. But He also supposedly cares very deeply about what human beings think of Him - for He is trying His best to "save" every one of us, is He not? And yet, He chooses a method of going about this "salvation" that would be considered completely psychotic were we humans to witness anyone or anything else formulating and executing the same plan.

Let's say I have a child. I claim the child is an extension of myself, that it is truly somehow "me" - anyway, suspend your thoughts on how strange that is in the first place, and just know that I send him out into the world. Later on, I reveal that in order to save humanity from the horrible things I will do to them myself, I must send myself (in the form of my child-self, of course) into danger and ultimately to die horribly. And I do all of this, knowing full-well that many people will be rightfully confused beyond hope at my actions, and also do it all with the knowledge that I could have just as easily chosen some simple, non-threatening, peaceful resolution to all the "problems" I felt humanity faced - because, remember, I have the power to do so, but, being hopelessly addicted to drama, I can't help myself. So... I just have to ask everyone to please believe me that all of this was for their own good, and, more importantly, it was done so that I won't have to torture everyone relentlessly for eternity.

Does any Christian today claim to not understand how insane ANY summation of the supposed facts of all this sound? I mean... as soon as you write it all in a straightforward manner, without all the fancy prose and thoughtful story-telling, it's over... it's nuts... it's horrifying... it's terrible... it is, in my opinion, psychotic.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Can't put one past you.

Pious? Me? BWAHAHAHAHA.

Note that I said it was a "thin, cheap coat of piety". Doesn't mean you're truly pious. And here I was thinking I was being straightforward. I'll try to spell it out a little more clearly next time.

 

[james bond]

The "inheritance," not Adam. In God's design, "sin" can be transmitted from parent to child like some sort of virus. Was this feature of God's design an intended feature or not? Can God correct it or not?

I know I'm interjecting, but still think you're thinking physical view and looking strictly from your worldview.

The closest I could find to soul in physicalism is biocentrism which I've just recently started reading. It may or may not be "science."

"Consider the famous two-slit experiment. When you watch a particle go through the holes, it behaves like a bullet, passing through one slit or the other. But if no one observes the particle, it exhibits the behavior of a wave and can pass through both slits at the same time. This and other experiments tell us that unobserved particles exist only as ‘waves of probability' as the great Nobel laureate Max Born demonstrated in 1926. They're statistical predictions – nothing but a likely outcome. Until observed, they have no real existence; only when the mind sets the scaffolding in place, can they be thought of as having duration or a position in space. Experiments make it increasingly clear that even mere knowledge in the experimenter's mind is sufficient to convert possibility to reality.

Many scientists dismiss the implications of these experiments, because until recently, this observer-dependent behavior was thought to be confined to the subatomic world. However, this is being challenged by researchers around the world. In fact, just this year a team of physicists (Gerlich et al, Nature Communications 2:263, 2011) showed that quantum weirdness also occurs in the human-scale world. They studied huge compounds composed of up to 430 atoms, and confirmed that this strange quantum behavior extends into the larger world we live in."

Does The Soul Exist? Evidence Says ‘Yes’

 

[Mikail]

But apparently, it is

According to the Bible/your interpretation of it, maybe.

The article from the link I posted, noted it's God's justice that needs to be met. That was why the Israelites had all those sacrifices, leading up to the annual Day of Atonement. Hebrews 9:22 offers an interesting perspective on it. And all those ancient Israelite sacrifices, in some way or another, foreshadowed Jesus' perfect sacrifice.

So animals and then a human sacrifice is what God's Justice demands?

And here is another way we know that our imperfect nature is inherited: All of our sin, being inherited, came from "one man"

That assumes that all of humankind are descended from one man (that man being Adam). But I believe that is not where the evidence points.

Thanks for your reasonable question, I appreciate your "lack of antagonism". I.e., your friendliness.

You're welcome.

If this reply sounds 'disjointed', I'm sorry. I didn't get any sleep.

Touche!

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Note that I said it was a "thin, cheap coat of piety". Doesn't mean you're truly pious. And here I was thinking I was being straightforward. I'll try to spell it out a little more clearly next time.

Please do. You're on a roll.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I know I'm interjecting, but still think you're thinking physical view and looking strictly from your worldview.

I'm not, actually. I'm doing my best to simply take what @Hockeycowboy is saying and consider its implications without adding any assumptions that @Hockeycowboy doesn't share.

 

[Faithofchristian]

According to Romans 5:12..."through one man sin entered....and death spread to all men".

Was that "one man", Adam ? Yes, because of Genesis 3:20. So Adam would be the father of everyone.

The "inheritance," not Adam. In God's design, "sin" can be transmitted from parent to child like some sort of virus. Was this feature of God's design an intended feature or not? Can God correct it or not?

 

[Phantasman]

According to Romans 5:12..."through one man sin entered....and death spread to all men".

Was that "one man", Adam ? Yes, because of Genesis 3:20. So Adam would be the father of everyone.

Why didn't Paul say one woman, since she ate first? The first sin was murder. Transgression is not a sin. Cain was a product of the false god.

"And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord."

Since Moses did not get his visions from heaven, Christ clarified what Moses wrote to John in the Apocryphon of John. Cain joined the others created by the false god (land of Nod). Seth was the first born of Adam and Eve. The "flood" killed those without spirit (gained by the Tree of Life in Adam and Eve, and given to Seth and his offspring.

It's all passed perspectives. Pick the one that gives the answers defining the spirit, over the flesh.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Carlita, you have always shown a willing attitude to reason on every post I've read from you, you are never condescending or abusive. Any issue I've ever had, has been on my part, trying to follow your meaning.

Maybe my reply will help with this scenario you present? It's a good one, if I understand you correctly.
Whatever we go through living in this System -- the sicknesses we may have, the injustices we face, whatever hardships -- we only put up with it for 80 years, not much longer than that. (If some people are real sickly and in pain, maybe only 20 years, maybe only two days.)

But the Resurrection, promised by God and Jesus (of course I'm talking about the Bible's explanation), will undue all that we have experienced in this life. 80 years is nothing, compared with everlasting life!

Now, if your question is why God has taken so long to deal with the issue....yes, it's been 6,000 years! That is a long time! (But, again, not for each of us individually.) Why so long? Because, in addition to Genesis 3 explaining how sin came about through Adam and Eve, there's a lot more it tells us! The serpent (used by the Devil, Revelation 12:9) raised several issues, the major one questioning whether Jehovah God has the right to set guidelines for humans. IOW, questioning God's Sovereignty, his right to rule humans as their Creator. Over 6,000 years later, and all forms of human government being tried, the issue is just about settled: humans are becoming more and more selfish, destroying society and harming themselves! There's more divisiveness between people than ever before.

Great technological strides have been made, but really, what good is it if we can send men 240,000 miles to the moon, but so many can't even walk 1/2 mile down their neighborhood road without getting mugged?

People's attitudes are worse than ever before. The issue is pretty much settled: We need God's loving guidance. The truthfulness of Jeremiah 10:23 is observed everyday. God will even get rid of sickness and death. Revelation 21:3-4

Did I help to answer any of your questions?

Thank you. I highly appreciate that. Actually, you didnt answer my question but I see what you mean about god's way of doing things compared to how we are now in society. To me, it sounds too, I guess, "out there" to be considered fact in regarda to eternal life and biblical understandings of society as a whole.

To me, putting rules and ways of thinking back then on the 21st century is like my still using a candle light to light up every room of the house instread of switching on the light. It works for the people who do it that way; but, it gets you but so far then you cover the rest of the 21st century not in the bible with faith and interpretation. (I know. I mixed up that analogy).

My question. God is the mother. The child is humanity. The first sibling eve. The last jesus. The knife temptation. The action and memories inherited sin. Playpen, the world as a whole

If the mother placed her child in a playpen with toys, that I understand. He cant get hurt. Then someone places a knife in the pen. The mother knows and does nothing. She tells the Child (not adult; children dont reason like adults) not to touch the knife. Because his daugher is a child in mind, she disobeys.

Very innocent gesture of disobeying. Instead of 1. Teaching what was wrong so eve would know what death is react to it 2. Kick the snake from the garden or 3. Find a way for society to follow god Not kill them everytime they disobey.

Bad parenting...

 

[Unveiled Artist]

So, my question is why exactly would a mother allow a child not an adult to play with a knife at the same time upset that he does then punish the child for cuting himself rather than the person who gave the knife in the first place?

If jesus was there from the get go, jesus would not need to be sacrificed. People didnt need to die by god's wrath.

Parent approach is totally off compared to some healthy parents on earth. Yes, we have our bad apples but I do and Im assuming you do and our neighbors. We are all man so when we talk about society, we talk about ourselves.

Basically, original sin is not necessary when the parenting could have been to 1. Teach what is life and death in order for adam and eve as children in mind to understand their fault. 2. Get rid of the problem there would be no reason to sin

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So are you saying that God can't fix it or God won't fix it?

 

[Faithofchristian]

So are you saying that God can't fix it or God won't fix it?

Look, God fortold Adam, not to partake of the tree, So Adam made his choice and disobeye God.

So the blame does not lay with God, But with Adam for disobeying God.

Look the sign does say, bridge is out, Now who's at fault, the person that disobeyed the sign and went across the bridge and fell through the bridge or the one who gave the warning the bridge is out ?

Therefore God gave Adam the warning about the tree, But Adam disobeyed and partake of the tree.

Is God at fault for giving Adam the warning
Or is Adam for disobeying ?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Much in the same way an angry, abusive human's anger needs to be, hmmm?

God continues to seem to have been made in man's image rather than the other way around, for the deity is always portrayed as having weak human emotions. I suppose primitive minds were incapable of creating a deity that was more god-like, which begs the question, apologetics aside, as to why people would believe in or admire such a flawed deific construct.

Greek and Romans apparently. They believes the gods were human (athena etc) so they have flaws etc but what makes them deified isnt their character but that they live forever. Not like older deities that were more religious divinity oriented.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Greek and Romans apparently. They believes the gods were human (athena etc) so they have flaws etc but what makes them deified isnt their character but that they live forever. Not like older deities that were more religious divinity oriented.

The Gods aren't humans (although humans can become Divine). What makes them Gods is their soveignty over various spheres of influence, not that they're effectively immortal.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Look, God fortold Adam, not to partake of the tree, So Adam made his choice and disobeye God.

So the blame does not lay with God, But with Adam for disobeying God.

Look the sign does say, bridge is out, Now who's at fault, the person that disobeyed the sign and went across the bridge and fell through the bridge or the one who gave the warning the bridge is out ?

Therefore God gave Adam the warning about the tree, But Adam disobeyed and partake of the tree.

Is God at fault for giving Adam the warning
Or is Adam for disobeying ?

The blame is on god. Whe a child hits other children because they see their parents fight at home, yes, the child has consequences but its not isolated from the parents who influenced those consequrences. Blame the parents if the child is not beeing raised well not the child.

God, the father, told eve not to eat the fruit. He did Not, however, explain what life and death mean. They were children. They did not know.

The snake tempted them and because they are child minded, they disobeyed out of ignorance.

If the father taught his children life and death, THEN if they disobeyed, its their fault. Since he did not-he wanted to keep it secret/know good and evil like us-the ignorance was of eve but the actual blame falls on the parent.

Thats like accusing the employee for messing up putting in his hours when the company is supposed to teach how to use the new program first before he starts putting in his ours. Its the company's negligence. We all have consequences for our actions but...

in life biblical and not the blame would go to the parent not to the child. If god had a lawyer, he'd have to prove god hsd a reason not to tell his children life ans death and even more so find why the children would be at fault given their innocent crime and their parents negligence to keep them from commiting one.