How did Christ die for our sins?

[marco]

A nearby church has the words "CHRIST DIED FOR OUR SINS" written in giant letters on its wall. What can this mean?

Does it mean that by sinning we somehow killed Jesus?

Or does it mean that we can happily go on sinning in whatever way we want as Jesus has obligingly taken the punishment?


In what way is Christ's crucifixion linked, for example, to Hitler's Holocaust?

[marco]

[Replying to post 2 by marco]

It somehow suggests we have a licence to kill, since Christ made it so for us.

Here, you seem to be suggesting that, we all as humans are evil, and really want to carry out evil, but somehow, many of us are restrained from this evil, and if the restraints were taken away, we would all naturally be looking to kill others?

Nothing I have said matches this reply. I said that if "Christ died for our sins" means we needn't worry about being punished, since Christ has taken the blame, then it seems that Christ has opened the door for people to do all sorts of mischief, if they wish. I wonder why he would do that.


You mention "restraints". What are these restraints?

[marco]

Let's apply some logic:

1. If we don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing.
2. If sin is a debt, it is one created by an extortionist, who has basically stated human nature generates a debt that you must pay...

3. Sin, if it weren't an imaginary concept design to summon a god into existence, is something that defines who we are, otherwise.

(1) Yes, Christ died, it seems, to make up for Hitler and Stalin and Jack the Ripper and others. It does not say that Christ discriminated in his sacrificial act.

(2) Yes, the flaw is that there is any debt at all. Primitive savages saw God as a terrifying brute who made a couple of humanoids and sadistically sent a snake, more powerful than they were, to get them into trouble. Then he lashed out angrily, sending locusts, mosquitoes, toothache, lameness, baldness.... and Christ came along and miraculously cancer and leprosy stopped, as did baldness and backache, and of course nobody has died since 33 AD. To be fair possession by evil spirits seems to have stopped around the time of Christ, after he drove a legion of horrors into the sea. Well done!

(3) Theologians have amplified our understanding of sin: it can be venial or mortal or indeed actual. Usually it involves some sexuality since God is particularly opposed to displays of nudity, never mind anything beyond that. It is possible that those clergymen who get themselves into trouble by committing offences are just misunderstanding the term: "Christ died for our sins."

[JehovahsWitness]

The theology here, if we accept there was an Adam in a Garden of Sin...

How does the bible describe the original garden that God created?


ANSWER If we go by the text in question, the garden is described as "The garden of EDEN". The word "eden" means "pleasure" so it seems that rather than being described as a "garden of sin" Genesis has the creator putting the first humans in a pardise (the word "paradise" means garden) of pleasure.


Why was Eden thus described?

GENESIS 2 :8-9

Jehovah God planted a garden in Eden, toward the east; and there he put the man whom he had formed. Thus Jehovah God made to grow out of the ground every tree that was pleasing to look at and good for food ]

It seems the original "paradise" was not in heaven but was located on the earth and that God not only made provision for the humans to have all they needed for food (no famine) but that it was a beautiful place ("pleasing to look at"). There is no indication that God created humans diseased, or hanicapped indeed the bible says all God's works are perfect, so it is not unreasonable to conclude that God created nothing harmful or sinful but rather gave created the first human couple with the capacity to enjoy a beautiful environment, interesting animal life that was not harmful to them (see Gen 1:28) and of course the physical pleasures of each other with the COMISSION to reproduce and expand their family.

Pa·radei·sos is the Greek term that translates the Hebrew word for garden.The Cyclopaedia by McClintock and Strong says about pa·raʹdei·sos: “A wide, open park, enclosed against injury, yet with its natural beauty unspoiled, with stately forest-trees, many of them bearing fruit, watered by clear streams, on whose banks roved large herds of antelopes or sheep this was the scenery which connected itself in the mind of the Greek traveller. Compare Genesis 2:15, 16.

Source: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2018681#h=11

If the bible account is to believed, it seems that God created humans to live in a paradise of pleasure forever!


JW




RELATED POSTS

Did God purpose human or animal suffefing for life on this our planet earth?
viewtopic.php?p=1040286#p1040286

Is the Edenic account allegorical?
viewtopic.php?p=832815#p832815

Did the garden cover the entire planet?
viewtopic.php?p=1092491#p1092491

Did God create deadly germs and diseased to threaten the lives of Adam and Eve?
viewtopic.php?p=951119#p951119

Did God plant poisonous plants in the garden of Eden?
viewtopic.php?p=1005027#p1005027

If God knew Adam needed a mate, why did he make Adam to wait for her?
viewtopic.php?p=857016#p857016

What did Gods command to "REPLENISH" the earth mean?
viewtopic.php?p=1093063#p1093063

Did Adam & Eve eat from the forbidden tree because they were hungry?
viewtopic.php?p=1089029#p1089029

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

ADAM &EVE, .THE GARDEN OF EDEN and ...THE TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND BAD

[dio9]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

In response to the opening question, Christ died after being beaten bloody til he could barely walk and then nailed to a cross to bleed and suffocates to death. that's how Jesus died. Christ however never died and rose to live in the hearts of those who loved him and believed in him. Spirit doesn't die. It is of God eternal which doesn't begin or end.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 13 by JehovahsWitness]

An earthly existence without death even accidental? No organisms of any kind other than herbivores?

Lions grazing grass with the lambs?

I'm seeing some ecological problems with the concept.

[JehovahsWitness]

It is utterly inconceivable that somebody from the 1st century happened along, got himself crucified and this stands as a free meal ticket for humanity.

I don't think the idea of a ransom paid in the first century is {quote} "utterly inconceivable" if by that you mean "not capable of being imagined or grasped mentally". Indeed it is evident that the idea was conceived because first century bible writers record the idea and we have enough manuscripts to verify this to be the case.

If you mean "inconceivable" as in unbelievable, I will have to say that since the concept forms the basis of practically all Christian denominations there are arguably millions, if not billions of people that claim to believe this "unbeliabele" notion. I cannot speak for all these billions of people but I am qualified to speak for myself, so I can say you are wrong that the notion of Christ dying for mankind in the first century is NOT unbelievable because I will go on record that *I* believe it.


JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to post 2 by marco]

It somehow suggests we have a licence to kill, since Christ made it so for us.

Here, you seem to be suggesting that, we all as humans are evil, and really want to carry out evil, but somehow, many of us are restrained from this evil, and if the restraints were taken away, we would all naturally be looking to kill others?

Nothing I have said matches this reply. I said that if "Christ died for our sins" means we needn't worry about being punished, since Christ has taken the blame, then it seems that Christ has opened the door for people to do all sorts of mischief, if they wish. I wonder why he would do that.


You mention "restraints". What are these restraints?

Nothing I have said matches this reply. I said that if "Christ died for our sins" means we needn't worry about being punished, since Christ has taken the blame, then it seems that Christ has opened the door for people to do all sorts of mischief, if they wish. I wonder why he would do that.

You seem to be avoiding the point. What you said was,

It somehow suggests we have a licence to kill

You can say it however you want. The question still remains. If you do not do evil, and do not want to do evil, then if the consequences for doing evil were taken away, would this cause you to do evil, or even want to do evil?

If not, then please explain how, "Christ dying for our sins", would cause Christians to do evil or, want to do evil? It just doesn't follow, and you seem to be attempting to suggest that it would. Otherwise, I do not see a point.

You mention "restraints". What are these restraints?

Well, one of those "restraints" would be the governmental laws. So then, if there was no law against murder, would this cause you to commit murder, or even want to?

If not, then how would "Christ dying for our sins" cause Christians to want to sin?

[JehovahsWitness]

In short Jesus died so we won't have to.

But we do!.

Yes, at the present time death is a deality.

However I wrote "won't" ie will not; the English verb "to be" in future voice, so I was indicating that I believe the full benefits of Christs sacrifice, namely the elimination of old age (sickness) and death for faithful humans living on earth caused by adamic sin, is yet for the future.

No graveyards, no grieving, no coffins, no cemeteries, no hospices (no hospitals), no funerals: adamic death eliminated from the planet earth!

JW





RELATED POSTS


What is the condition of the dead? [3 min Video included]
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 715#918715

WHY do people die?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 821#939821

Is there a hope for the dead?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 329#846329

[William]

A nearby church has the words "CHRIST DIED FOR OUR SINS" written in giant letters on its wall. What can this mean?

Does it mean that by sinning we somehow killed Jesus?

Or does it mean that we can happily go on sinning in whatever way we want as Jesus has obligingly taken the punishment?


In what way is Christ's crucifixion linked, for example, to Hitler's Holocaust?

It seems that the general Christian idea of this is for the purpose of provoking attitudes of guilt, much in the same way as the idea of the commandments of the OT were.
This equates to ways in which to foster in society adherence to ideals which keep those societies strong and viable.
It appears that the commandments proved to be of little value in that regard in relation to stronger nations which used their own rules to strong-arm weaker neighbors, even while using such methods as might have been prohibited by the laws of those weaker nations, to do the job.

Q: Does it mean that by sinning we somehow killed Jesus?

I don't know that this is the case but certainly Christianity generically uses this idea to convey that message.

This is apparent in how Christians eventually treated Jews, by claiming the Jewish rejection of their own Messiah and resulted in the Jews demanding the Romans execute Jesus, as that story goes.
In that, - as far as the story goes - Jews were able to apply the Law related to punishment of offenders, and that because Jesus claimed to be From GOD, having been with GOD since the beginning and speaking to humans words which GOD had given him to speak, etc...' - this equated to the blasphemy of declaring oneself equal to GOD and was a serious enough SIN in which the death penalty could be imposed.

Q: Or does it mean that we can happily go on sinning in whatever way we want as Jesus has obligingly taken the punishment?

Some do think this is the case, but they are relatively rare. Most believe that the idea of guilt through acknowledging ones sinful activity required someone sinless in which to forgive ones sins so that one could have a blank-slate and continue their life from that point, no longer sinning willfully, or ignorantly.

Q: In what way is Christ's crucifixion linked, for example, to Hitler's Holocaust?

In relation to that, compared to other cultures not versed in Christianity, who's leaders committed equal atrocities and murdered even more humans, Europe was well versed in Christianity, and as such, Jews were expendable.
But it is not the case that Hitler was a Christian, or was doing a service for Jesus. The fact that there was a general loathing of Jews by Christians in Europe, and that 'The Protocols of the wise-men of Zion' were well known, well read and well believed documents, and that the Mufti of Palestine - Amin al-Husseini - had Hitlers ear, and many folk of means were contributing to the rise of the Nazi movement and the industries behind it, these are more able to be directly connected to Hitler's Holocaust, than the crucifixion of Jesus is.

Generally as I understand it, human beings can indeed pull excuses for committing atrocities 'out of nowhere' by creating laws will allow for that to occur, and those things are generally understood as sins/acts of the sinful (atheists would use a word other than 'sin/sinful'?) and this would include justifying said Law as being somehow authored by "GOD" as generally this appears to be the way in which societies create Laws (moral or otherwise) - by invoking some idea of outside agency which gives one the 'authority' to create and maintain laws through the threat of extreme punishment.

If human says to human "thou shalt NOT" (Or "thou SHALT") then the tendency is to ignore, unless their is no choice except execution. Put the idea of a GOD who will punish the offender either in this life (through the instrument of those endowed with the authority to do so) or after one has died, and more often than not, this equates to 'compliance'.

[marco]

In short Jesus died so we won't have to.

But we do!.

Yes, at the present time death is a deality.

However I wrote "won't" ie will not; the English verb "to be" in future voice, so I was indicating that I believe the full benefits of Christs sacrifice, namely the elimination of old age (sickness) and death for faithful humans living on earth caused by adamic sin, is yet for the future.

It is probably best if we discuss theology rather than grammar. The English verb is in the future tense not voice. Voice refers to active or passive. The point I was making is that Christ DIED and we also die. Nothing has changed. There's maybe an expectation, a theory, that whatever molecules remain will be magically transformed into new bodies and we'll live on a magically transformed Earth no longer subject to what we casually call seasons. But we all die; Christ did not prevent this.

How odd of God to kill in order to offer presents. Yes, I know he didn't personaly drive in the nails but according to the theory, he willed it all. Odd.