How is Jesus the Savior?

[Elijah John]

How is Jesus the Savior? Who or what does Jesus save us from?

From sin and death? People still sin, and people still die.

From the world, the flesh and the devil? YHVH does all that. (Isaiah 43.11)

Or is it salvation from YHVH Himself? If Jesus is savior, does that make Jesus the "good cop" and YHVH the "bad cop"? Jesus the hero, and YHVH the villain?

The Hebrew Scriptures already provide us with an all-sufficient Savior:

I, even I, am YHVH; and beside me there is no savior.

Why do we need another? Isn't calling Jesus "Savior" redundant..at best? And at worst, contradictory to Scripture?

[Tcg]

The Hebrew Scriptures already provide us with an all-sufficient Savior:

I, even I, am YHVH; and beside me there is no savior.

When read in context, this is a promise made to Israel. In it, YHVH claims to be Israel's savior, not the savior of the universal us you are claiming.



Tcg

[William]

@

Elijah John: Why do we need another?

William: Have you ever thought that perhaps YHVH and Jesus are the same being?

[Divine Insight]

How is Jesus the Savior? Who or what does Jesus save us from?

Christian theology is based on absurdities, not to imply that the other Abrahamic religions aren't also based on absurdities. But here are the absurdities unique to Christianity.

Supposedly Adam and Eve sinned as well as every single human being since. In Christianity no human can be without sin as this would violate the supposed need for Jesus to be the savior.

The idea is that death is the wages of sin. All humans have sinned therefore all humans deserve to die. Permanently! Not temporarily!

Supposedly Jesus came to earth as a "human" and lived a completely sin-free life. He was then brutally crucified and "died" thus paying the wages of sin for which he did not need to pay. Therefore it is claimed that he paid the wages of sin for all of humanity (or at least those who accept Jesus as their penal substitute).

And this then "saves" some humans from the damnation or death that they have earned due to their sins.

That's the basic idea.

But there are several problems with this theology.

To begin with Jesus wasn't "human" he was supposed to be the divine Son of God therefore he is not a "sinless human". Christian theists know that this is a problem and this is why they claim that Jesus was both 100% God and %100 human which is an absurd claim. But they can't allow that Jesus was half God and half human because that would violate the idea that Jesus managed to not sin as a "human".

The theology seriously makes no sense.

On top of this, Jesus didn't die permanently. He only died temporarily, after a mere 3 days he was risen and ascended to heaven where he is supposedly alive and well to this very day. So that would violate the claim that his temporary death paid the wages of sin for anyone. The wages of sin was never to die for only 3 days and then be granted eternal life in paradise.

So this theology makes no sense on any level. And there is no way to repair it.

Judaism and Islam don't fair any better. They may not claim that Jesus paid the wages of of sin for those who accept him as their penal substitute, but their theologies are equally absurd.

In fact, Christian theology is doubly-absurd. It's already absurd because it's based on the original Old Testament religion. But then it continues to add even more absurdities in the New Testament.

The idea that Jesus paid for the wages of sin for anyone willing to accept Jesus as their savior is beyond absurd actually.

How anyone in our modern time can believe in any of these Abrahamic religions is simply beyond my ability to understand. All I can figure is that evolution is indeed true and apparently the majority of humans still have brains that aren't far evolved from their primate ancestors. They can't even seem to be able to comprehend why these religious folklore are clearly nothing more than man-made nonsense.

I figured out that it was nonsense by the time I was in my late teens. The idea that mature adults are still making excuses for these absurd religions is just beyond my comprehension. And ironically their main modern day apologies appear to be arguments that maybe God truly is an idiot. That's seems to be their best apologies for this religion anymore. They would rather believe that God is an idiot before accepting that it's just ancient man-made folklore that isn't so bright.

[Divine Insight]

@

Elijah John: Why do we need another?

William: Have you ever thought that perhaps YHVH and Jesus are the same being?

That doesn't work because if Yahweh was already the savior in the Old Testament then there would have been no need for him to come to earth posing as his own son and being crucified by humans to supposedly qualify him as savior. He would have already been qualified as savior from the get-go.

[shnarkle]

How is Jesus the Savior? Who or what does Jesus save us from?

He saves us from ourselves. He explicitly points out that we must "deny yourself". why? Because the self is nothing more than an abstract construction of the mind. IT necessarily must die along with the physical body, but if one denies the self now, then there is no need to live the lie that you are yourself.

From sin and death? People still sin, and people still die.

I would say that technically physical bodies die, but we are not the body we have. Therefore death only comes to the body.

I, even I, am YHVH; and beside me there is no savior.

Why do we need another? Isn't calling Jesus "Savior" redundant..at best? And at worst, contradictory to Scripture?

No, because Jesus took his own advice and denied the self. He isn't another savior, nor is he contradicting scripture. He is manifesting God's potential. In the old testament the tetragrammaton has the meaning of "I will be", or "I will be what I will be", and in the new testament what will be manifests as 'I AM". It's the distinction between becoming and being.

[shnarkle]

The Hebrew Scriptures already provide us with an all-sufficient Savior:

I, even I, am YHVH; and beside me there is no savior.

When read in context, this is a promise made to Israel. In it, YHVH claims to be Israel's savior, not the savior of the universal us you are claiming.



Tcg

I think this is a good point. However, if all are drawn to the God of Israel, and in that process enter into that same covenant, then there is no effective difference.

[Elijah John]

The Hebrew Scriptures already provide us with an all-sufficient Savior:

I, even I, am YHVH; and beside me there is no savior.

When read in context, this is a promise made to Israel. In it, YHVH claims to be Israel's savior, not the savior of the universal us you are claiming.



Tcg

A common misconception refuted by Isiah 45.22:

"Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other.

[William]

@

William: Have you ever thought that perhaps YHVH and Jesus are the same being?

Divine Insight: That doesn't work because if Yahweh was already the savior in the Old Testament then there would have been no need for him to come to earth posing as his own son and being crucified by humans to supposedly qualify him as savior. He would have already been qualified as savior from the get-go.

William: If that were the case, then you should be able to quantify for the reader as to exactly;
1: How is Yahweh the Savior?
2: Who or what does Yahweh save us from?

How can you divine that Yahweh, as Jesus, was not in fact fulfilling script?
How do you divine that Jesus is not Yahweh, and that it was not he who said "I, even I, am YHVH; and beside me there is no savior."?
What was the script referring to in relation to those words?
What makes you believe that Judaism in the time of Jesus, was the instrument of Yahweh, when we know from the story how often Yahweh was angered by being misrepresented by Israel?

[Tcg]

The Hebrew Scriptures already provide us with an all-sufficient Savior:

I, even I, am YHVH; and beside me there is no savior.

When read in context, this is a promise made to Israel. In it, YHVH claims to be Israel's savior, not the savior of the universal us you are claiming.



Tcg

I think this is a good point. However, if all are drawn to the God of Israel, and in that process enter into that same covenant, then there is no effective difference.

If this is true, then it guts many of the foundational claims of the New Testament, including these:

• Luke 2:11 "For today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."
  
  Acts 13:23 “From this man’s descendants God has brought to Israel the Savior Jesus, as he promised."
  
  Titus 2:13 "Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus."
  
  Ephesians 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body."
  
  Philippians 3:20 "For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ;"
  
  1 John 4:14 "We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world."

Of course, none of this is a problem for me, I see no reason to consider either Jesus or YHVH as saviors. All this reveals is one of the major problems that occur when one religion attempts to graft itself onto a contradictory one.


Can both YHVH and Jesus be the only savior needed? No.

Can neither be saviors and neither be needed? Yes.



Tcg