Does disbelief in the atoning cross

[Elijah John]

Is it fair to suggest that if one does not believe Jesus died to "pay for" our sins then one must have contempt for Jesus?

Or to suggest that "we too would have him crucified"?

Is believing that Jesus died to "pay for" our sins, the only way to find meaning in an otherwise horrific event like his crucifixion?

[Benoni]

A ransom "paid to" whom? To save mankind from what?

Jesus gave his life to save mankind from sin and death.

Jehovah's original purpose was never that humans live for a while, grow old, get sick and eventually die; no when He created Adam and Eve he wanted them to live forever and populate the planet with their perfect human offspring.

Sadly Adam and Eve rebelled and brought sin and death not only to themselves but to their offspring. Jehovah in his immense love for humans asked His son if he would be willing to offer his life for the children of Adam, Jesus willingly accepted to buy back the human race so we do not have the eventuality of facing eternal death. It is for this reason, especially during this holiday season, Jehovah's Witnesses are especially consciouse of what was and will aways be God's greatest gift.

We have the happy hope of life, peace and prosperity on this our planet earth restored to condition like the Garden of Eden all thanks to Jesus!


[youtube][/youtube]

Why did Jesus have to die?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 214#852214

Who was the ransom paid to and why?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 203#852203

You are so wrong on this. Of course God planned for mankind to fail. Long before there ever was a sinner their was a saviour for the lamb was slain from the foundation of the earth. Why would God have the lamb slain if he did not have need of the blood of Jesus.

Second point: Ps. 90:1-3. "Lord, You have been our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You have formed the earth or the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God. You (God) turn man to destruction; and say return you children of men.

Notice the time frame: Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You have formed the earth or the world, even from everlasting to everlasting

(NIRV) Romans 8: 20 The created world was bound to fail. But that was not the result of its own choice. It was planned that way by the One who made it. God planned to set the created world free. He didn't want it to rot away completely. Instead, he wanted it to have the same glorious freedom that his children have

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 39 by JehovahsWitness]

Again, "buy back" from whom? Ransom "paid to" whom?

Also, this ransom theology seems dependent on a literal belief in Adam and Eve and the Garden story, which science does not support.

And still, the JW pov amounts to human sacrifice, does it not? Willing or not, some pagans offered their "willing sacrifices" to the volcano gods. That too, was human sacrifice.

[polonius]

Is it fair to suggest that if one does not believe Jesus died to "pay for" our sins then one must have contempt for Jesus?

Response: No. It only shows that the reader has a knowledge of history, and realizes that Jesus was crucified by the Romans as an insurrectionist for claiming to be King of the Jews.

The" pay for our sins" story was started by Paul writing in about 55 AD or about 20myears or more after the event. (Read esp. 1 Cor chapter 15)

[Benoni]

[Replying to polonius.advice]

It all start with the Old testament with Adam's sin and the message is sprinkled all though both old and new testament.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 42 by polonius.advice]


[center]
Caught red handed trying to poison the well. [/center]

It only shows that the reader has a knowledge of history, and realizes that Jesus was crucified by the Romans as an insurrectionist for claiming to be King of the Jews.

You seem to imply that those who don't "realize" the way that you do don't know history. That's a rather weak attempt at poisoning the well.

Those who disagree with your realization might know history more than you do.

__________________

Poisoning the Well

(also known as: discrediting, smear tactics)

Description: To commit a preemptive ad hominem attack against an opponent. That is, to prime the audience with adverse information about the opponent from the start, in an attempt to make your claim more acceptable, or discount the credibility of your opponents claim.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/too ... g-the-Well

__________________


Didn't work.

[Elijah John]

Why would God have the lamb slain if he did not have need of the blood of Jesus.

A reasonable question, but one contradicted by Scripture:

If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fullness thereof. Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer unto God thanksgiving...

(Psalm 50.12-14b)

So perhaps Jesus was a martyr, and not a lamb at all. And God never had any need of animal blood, or human blood, in order to be able to forgive sins.

For YHVH forgives for His own sake, and for His name's sake. (Isaiah 43.25, Psalm 79.9)

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 44 by Blastcat]

Actually, when p.a says that Jesus was:

crucified by the Romans as an insurrectionist for claiming to be King of the Jews.

he is right, historically. To suggest that Jesus died in order to "pay for" our sins, is theological speculation, not history.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 39 by JehovahsWitness]Also, this ransom theology seems dependent on a literal belief in Adam and Eve and the Garden story, which science does not support.

Yes, Jehovah's Witnesses absolutely believe that God created humans and that all humans are in fact the children of our first parents, Adam and Eve (who were humans not animals). Jesus evidently shared this belief as he referred to them as real individuals when speaking of the "gold standard" for marriage.

If human scientist come to conclusions that conflict with scripture, one of them is wrong and it's not the bible. That said there is nothing in the Genesis account which contradicts proven science.

JW

Further reading: Adam and Eve"Were They Real People?
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2009645

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 46 by Elijah John]

[center]

Fake vs real news[/center]

Actually, when p.a says that Jesus was:

crucified by the Romans as an insurrectionist for claiming to be King of the Jews.

he is right, historically. To suggest that Jesus died in order to "pay for" our sins, is theological speculation, not history.

We only have the BIBLE as source for Jesus's life and death.
If that's history, they are just historical claims, nothing else.

We have NO historical way to verify the claims, of course.
For all we know.. Jesus didn't exist at all.

People talk about stories all the time.
Lots of "False News" gets reported, even today.

Is it a historical fact that there are Jesus stories?
Yes.. it's a fact that there are STORIES.

Are the stories TRUE?
Nobody knows.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 48 by Blastcat]

I'd like to know what exactly 'crucified by the Romans' means. If it means 'found guilty of violating Roman law and sentenced to death' then no, the Gospels disagree with that. They have Pilate wash his hands of the whole affair, find no guilt in Jesus, and give Jesus to the violent mob.
I can understand Roman soldiers being involved with the crucifixion itself, but only in an unofficial capacity.