Political Crossfire Forums

[DwightEisenhower]

As a Christian, I believe that Jesus lived, died, and was Ressurected. Some demoninations believe the reason for Jesus' existance was his death. Some people use the phrase "God sent Jesus to die for our sins." I don't think this makes sense.

If God sent Jesus to die for our sins, there are three unescapable conclusions:

God is a murderer

If God sent Jesus to die, it must mean that God endorsed and in a sense made possible the murder of Jesus. It means he created life only with the intention of its death. One can then conclude that God has no respect for human life and in fact violates its sanctity.

Pontius Pilate and the Jewish officals involved in Jesus' death should be saints

Easy enough to understand. If it was God's will that Jesus died, Pontius Pilate and the Jewish leaders executed God's will.

The meaning of Jesus' death outweighs the meaning of Jesus' life

This means that Jesus' entire time spent challenging people to incorporate love into their lives is not truly the premise of Christianity. The premise of Christianity would then be, in fact: It's okay to not let love rule because Jesus died for our sins anyway.
...
...
How then, could Jesus "predict his own death?"
A. Being a Rabbi, he knew the fates of Jewish prophets upon entering Jerusalem.
B. He knew he would be entering Jerusalem during a stressful and busy time, Passover.
C. He knew the priestly Jewish class, the Sadducees, did not support him.

Nothing mystical. Jesus lived without sin but was fully human, died, and ascended into God's presence. I believe he challenged us to let love rule throughout our lives, and the fact that he ascended into God's presence after the Resurrection is both a miracle and an example of paschal mystery. The notion that it was planned, however, before Jesus was even born, does not fit with the rest of Christianity.

[artistvrd]

I am not a priest or anything but I'll try to say what I can: Jesus died because of Blasphemic ways, everyone did in those days. Even if Judas was not to betray Jesus, he would be sentenced in the near future. Jesus was sent to save us, we didn't want to be saved, so we killed him. God didn't send Jesus to die because he wanted to, free will my good friend. Jesus was also Jewish. . .that may have a small reasoning for things, he dissed his religion, made the rabbis made, etc. But lastly Jesus was 100% man and 100% human, and the Lord works in mysterious ways.

That's probs not the best explanation, but I try.

I also get confused about this:
If there are three persons in one God, then God created Himself with Himself to create Himself.

But hey, GO JESUS! :wink:

[sLiPpY]

According to the Gospel of John, which is more so a theological work vs. anything. Christ's purpose was as you've stated. In absence of the Gospel of John, a high Christology is not possible.

For my own purposes, I see Jesus as an interesting character. A mystical teacher, an advocate of Gnosis. It's my own believe that the character of Jesus was dubiously raised to the level of Deity. The Gospel of John performs that task very well.

What the Gospels do not answer, is why the creator would have to use such a mechanism to accomplish a task that defies rationality? Further, I tend to empathize with the Jewish leadership of the 1st Century who took to expelling Jewish Christians from the Synagogues. In my own thinking, it is utterly offensive to imply in any way shape or form, that God became a man.

i.e. We breed all types of animals, we build computers and networks...I personally don't see the point in or have the desire to become one.

In the Torah, Numbers 23:19,
"God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind."

Seeing clearly that the Torah indicates that God is not man, nor a son of man. The Son of Man in the New Testiment, is obviously not God...but he does say that he is the "Son of Man."

God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.

[psholtz]

All things (born of the "material" world) die.

I'm not sure that this makes God a murderer... :?

[psholtz]

sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

[John]

DwightEisenhower wrote: As a Christian, I believe that Jesus lived, died, and was Ressurected. Some demoninations believe the reason for Jesus' existance was his death. Some people use the phrase "God sent Jesus to die for our sins." I don't think this makes sense.

If God sent Jesus to die for our sins, there are three unescapable conclusions:

God is a murderer

If God sent Jesus to die, it must mean that God endorsed and in a sense made possible the murder of Jesus. It means he created life only with the intention of its death. One can then conclude that God has no respect for human life and in fact violates its sanctity.

Pontius Pilate and the Jewish officals involved in Jesus' death should be saints

Easy enough to understand. If it was God's will that Jesus died, Pontius Pilate and the Jewish leaders executed God's will.

The meaning of Jesus' death outweighs the meaning of Jesus' life

This means that Jesus' entire time spent challenging people to incorporate love into their lives is not truly the premise of Christianity. The premise of Christianity would then be, in fact: It's okay to not let love rule because Jesus died for our sins anyway.
...
...
How then, could Jesus "predict his own death?"
A. Being a Rabbi, he knew the fates of Jewish prophets upon entering Jerusalem.
B. He knew he would be entering Jerusalem during a stressful and busy time, Passover.
C. He knew the priestly Jewish class, the Sadducees, did not support him.

Nothing mystical. Jesus lived without sin but was fully human, died, and ascended into God's presence. I believe he challenged us to let love rule throughout our lives, and the fact that he ascended into God's presence after the Resurrection is both a miracle and an example of paschal mystery. The notion that it was planned, however, before Jesus was even born, does not fit with the rest of Christianity.

Man, you've really missed it....

Jesus is the incarnation of God, who came (and was sent) to redeem the world so people could be saved. It kinda like if someone ran into a burning building to save some children, knowing that they would receive severe burns and be different from then on...but does it anyway to save the children.

If you don't understand that Jesus and the Father are One. That Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega (The Almighty)...then you're not going to understand the cross.

[John]

psholtz wrote: sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

What are you talking about? Jesus was fully human (a son of Adam) as the text reveals. God incarnated Himself as a man (not half man) in order to save His own from eternal separation from Himself.

It might blow your mind that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human...but it's true. A whole lot rests upon if you see that as truth or not.

[guantanamo on toast]

Well he sure as hell didn't die of starvation. Poor bugger was fed like a pig, sitting round that little cramped table, pig waitors bringing him wine and bread and double cheeseburgers and Stella Artois.

One might even wonder if his level of pain could have been somewhat thwarted had he put the sodding food down, gotten up off his arse, and moved a little. It is a sad fact, my friends, the cumulative walks and balades of the prior will not affect the atrociously expanding waistline, when, later in the day, the final hours are spent stuffing into the face the possible entire Sub-Saharan food supply.

Gone to Weight Watchers, the pain threshold would have been infinitely raised.

[psholtz]

John wrote: psholtz wrote: sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

What are you talking about? Jesus was fully human (a son of Adam) as the text reveals.
Jesus was fully human as common sense reveals.

The human race didn't possess android-making technology back in Palestine 2,000 years, so unless you have a better reason for suspecting so, I'm going to go w/ the "Jesus was 100% human" based complete and total common sense.

Quote: It might blow your mind that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human...but it's true.
And what's that you were trying to tell me before about the Law of Entropy pushing the Moon out of its orbit? :-D

First be correct in the small things, John... Then, perhaps (and it's a *big* perhaps), I might believe you in the bigger things.. Until then, you're assurances that "it's true" carry absolutely no weight whatsoever w/ me.

[psholtz]

John wrote: psholtz wrote: sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

What are you talking about? Jesus was fully human (a son of Adam) as the text reveals. God incarnated Himself as a man (not half man) in order to save His own from eternal separation from Himself.

It might blow your mind that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human...but it's true. A whole lot rests upon if you see that as truth or not.
Oh, and .. by the way, John .. you *still* slid by the fact that Ezekiel is mentioned as the "Son of Man" over 90 times in the Old Testament.. What's your explanation for that. You didn't address it at all above.

[sLiPpY]

psholtz wrote: John wrote: psholtz wrote: sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

What are you talking about? Jesus was fully human (a son of Adam) as the text reveals. God incarnated Himself as a man (not half man) in order to save His own from eternal separation from Himself.

It might blow your mind that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human...but it's true. A whole lot rests upon if you see that as truth or not.
Oh, and .. by the way, John .. you *still* slid by the fact that Ezekiel is mentioned as the "Son of Man" over 90 times in the Old Testament.. What's your explanation for that. You didn't address it at all above.

At the very least, John's consistent... :-D

[MJB]

DwightEisenhower wrote: As a Christian, I believe that Jesus lived, died, and was Ressurected. Some demoninations believe the reason for Jesus' existance was his death. Some people use the phrase "God sent Jesus to die for our sins." I don't think this makes sense.

If God sent Jesus to die for our sins, there are three unescapable conclusions:

God is a murderer

If God sent Jesus to die, it must mean that God endorsed and in a sense made possible the murder of Jesus. It means he created life only with the intention of its death. One can then conclude that God has no respect for human life and in fact violates its sanctity.

Pontius Pilate and the Jewish officals involved in Jesus' death should be saints

Easy enough to understand. If it was God's will that Jesus died, Pontius Pilate and the Jewish leaders executed God's will.

The meaning of Jesus' death outweighs the meaning of Jesus' life

This means that Jesus' entire time spent challenging people to incorporate love into their lives is not truly the premise of Christianity. The premise of Christianity would then be, in fact: It's okay to not let love rule because Jesus died for our sins anyway.
...
...
How then, could Jesus "predict his own death?"
A. Being a Rabbi, he knew the fates of Jewish prophets upon entering Jerusalem.
B. He knew he would be entering Jerusalem during a stressful and busy time, Passover.
C. He knew the priestly Jewish class, the Sadducees, did not support him.

Nothing mystical. Jesus lived without sin but was fully human, died, and ascended into God's presence. I believe he challenged us to let love rule throughout our lives, and the fact that he ascended into God's presence after the Resurrection is both a miracle and an example of paschal mystery. The notion that it was planned, however, before Jesus was even born, does not fit with the rest of Christianity.

Actually, it fits entirely with Christianity, because we know that, "...the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many," (Matthew 20:28).

John 15:13
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

First of all, death is a natural part of the mortal condition. God is not a murderer because Jesus died. If that was so, then he would be guilty of murder for the death of every soul ever born, because all who are born, will die.

Second, Jesus gave up his life by his own power, so even though he was sentenced to death and crucified, he was not actually murdered, because his life was not taken from him. He did not succumb to his injuries, but gave up his life by an act of will.

John 10: 17-18
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.

Having a mortal mother, and an immortal Father, Jesus had powers beyond that of any fully mortal man, which enabled him to lay his life down, and take it up again, something no fully mortal man was capable of.

The most significant thing about Jesus' death, was, that by it, he was able to conquer death by bringing about the resurrection, something he would have been unable to do if he had not, first, died. But because he did die, and was resurrected, we will, all, one day, be resurrected and live again.

1 Corinthians 15: 22
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15: 55
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

Jesus also had the ability to suffer infinite pain, by which he was able to take upon himself our sins, and not die under the heavy load.

Luke 22:43-44
43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

He not only took upon himself our sins, but also our infirmities and sicknesses, suffering through everything we suffer, that he might know, of himself, all we experience.

Matt. 8: 17
17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.

These reasons, including having sufficient strength necessary to be able to withstand all temptation, enabling him to live a life free of sin, are precisely why it was necessary that the Savior of mankind be the Son of God, and why he had the ability to suffer for our sins and atone for them, that we might be purified, something no fully mortal man could ever have done.

From my perspective, the emphasis on the life of Christ, is that he lived a sinless life, did all he did for me, and for the rest of mankind, taught us the path we were to follow, and, yes, did die, but more importantly, he atoned for my sins, and he rose from the grave, and he lives, and because he lives, I, too, will live again. That, to me, is an emphasis on life, not death.

[John]

psholtz wrote: John wrote: psholtz wrote: sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

What are you talking about? Jesus was fully human (a son of Adam) as the text reveals. God incarnated Himself as a man (not half man) in order to save His own from eternal separation from Himself.

It might blow your mind that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human...but it's true. A whole lot rests upon if you see that as truth or not.
Oh, and .. by the way, John .. you *still* slid by the fact that Ezekiel is mentioned as the "Son of Man" over 90 times in the Old Testament.. What's your explanation for that. You didn't address it at all above.

Ezekiel was human. He was a son of man...not THE Son of Man....which is a term used for the Messiah. That was my point; I guess I should have explained it further.

[psholtz]

John wrote: psholtz wrote: John wrote: psholtz wrote: sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

What are you talking about? Jesus was fully human (a son of Adam) as the text reveals. God incarnated Himself as a man (not half man) in order to save His own from eternal separation from Himself.

It might blow your mind that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human...but it's true. A whole lot rests upon if you see that as truth or not.
Oh, and .. by the way, John .. you *still* slid by the fact that Ezekiel is mentioned as the "Son of Man" over 90 times in the Old Testament.. What's your explanation for that. You didn't address it at all above.

Ezekiel was human. He was a son of man...not THE Son of Man....which is a term used for the Messiah. That was my point; I guess I should have explained it further.
Am I a Son of Man?

How about you?

I'm no expert on the Old Testament, but to me the use of the phrase in Ezekiel seems a bit more "exalted" than just a description for a human being. It seems to connotate some level of spiritual awareness and prophecy, although what that might be I'm not certain.

[John]

psholtz wrote: John wrote: psholtz wrote: John wrote: psholtz wrote: sLiPpY wrote: God called Eziekel "Son of Man" over ninety some times. What does it mean? It means that Eziekel is/was human, further that Christ was human and NOT GOD.
Yes, I love how Christians always "gloss over" facts like this one..

No matter, few Christians ever actually bother opening the pages of the Old Testament, so they can usually "slide by" facts like this pretty easily.

What are you talking about? Jesus was fully human (a son of Adam) as the text reveals. God incarnated Himself as a man (not half man) in order to save His own from eternal separation from Himself.

It might blow your mind that Jesus was both 100% God and 100% human...but it's true. A whole lot rests upon if you see that as truth or not.
Oh, and .. by the way, John .. you *still* slid by the fact that Ezekiel is mentioned as the "Son of Man" over 90 times in the Old Testament.. What's your explanation for that. You didn't address it at all above.

Ezekiel was human. He was a son of man...not THE Son of Man....which is a term used for the Messiah. That was my point; I guess I should have explained it further.
Am I a Son of Man?

How about you?

I'm no expert on the Old Testament, but to me the use of the phrase in Ezekiel seems a bit more "exalted" than just a description for a human being. It seems to connotate some level of spiritual awareness and prophecy, although what that might be I'm not certain.

Yeah...you're a son of man (without the capitalization)...there are also verses in Ezekiel where the term Son of Man is used as prophecy of the coming Messiah....who would be fully human....YET the savior of the world (See Isaiah 43)

[Richard Owl Mirror]

MEANING OF THE DEATH ON THE CROSS
~snip~
When once you grasp the idea of God as a true and loving Father, the only concept which Jesus ever taught, you must forthwith, in all consistency, utterly abandon all those primitive notions about God as an offended monarch, a stern and all-powerful ruler whose chief delight is to detect his subjects in wrongdoing and to see that they are adequately punished, unless some being almost equal to himself should volunteer to suffer for them, to die as a substitute and in their stead. The whole idea of ransom and atonement is incompatible with the concept of God as it was taught and exemplified by Jesus of Nazareth. The infinite love of God is not secondary to anything in the divine nature.

All this concept of atonement and sacrificial salvation is rooted and grounded in selfishness. Jesus taught that service to one's fellows is the highest concept of the brotherhood of spirit believers. Salvation should be taken for granted by those who believe in the fatherhood of God. The believer's chief concern should not be the selfish desire for personal salvation but rather the unselfish urge to love and, therefore, serve one's fellows even as Jesus loved and served mortal men.

Neither do genuine believers trouble themselves so much about the future punishment of sin. The real believer is only concerned about present separation from God. True, wise fathers may chasten their sons, but they do all this in love and for corrective purposes. They do not punish in anger, neither do they chastise in retribution.

Even if God were the stern and legal monarch of a universe in which justice ruled supreme, he certainly would not be satisfied with the childish scheme of substituting an innocent sufferer for a guilty offender.

The great thing about the death of Jesus, as it is related to the enrichment of human experience and the enlargement of the way of salvation, is not the fact of his death but rather the superb manner and the matchless spirit in which he met death.

This entire idea of the ransom of the atonement places salvation upon a plane of unreality; such a concept is purely philosophic. Human salvation is real; it is based on two realities which may be grasped by the creature's faith and thereby become incorporated into individual human experience: the fact of the fatherhood of God and its correlated truth, the brotherhood of man. It is true, after all, that you are to be "forgiven your debts, even as you forgive your debtors."

~snip~