What is the logic behind Jesus' crucifixion?

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:04 am

I have been asking this question over and over on this forum and no theist has ever been able to address it. They try, but once I give my rebuttal to their attempts, they eventually stop replying. Hopefully I can get an answer this time.

Note: This topic is specifically for Christians who believe Jesus' death was necessary for us to have our sins forgiven.

This is arguably the core of the Christian faith that Jesus died for our sins and made it possible for us to live for eternity in heaven... but why did Jesus have to die in order for us to have our sins forgiven?

God makes the rules. There is no "God HAD to sacrifice Jesus" because God can do anything.

Christians often say that God cannot let sin go unpunished as it would be unjust; but is it any more just to sacrifice an innocent man on behalf of a guilty man? If a man rapes a little girl and the man's brother offers to go to prison on his behalf, would this be justice?

If god is satisfied by punishment without guilt (Jesus), why is he not satisfied with guilt without punishment?

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:15 am

JehovahsWitness wrote: I've already written on the point below. Maybe you missed it, so I will repost.

Justin108 wrote:Wait... what got them into this dilemma was Adam eating a fruit... so with your logic, all it would take for our sins to be forgiven is for us to eat a fruit
Was Adams sin a minor dietry infaction?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 992#848992

Ok I post walls of text and you cherry-pick one little sentence to respond to. Are you serious?

Whether Adam's sin was minor or not, your claim is that in order to "reverse" the effects of Adam's sin, the same "price" had to be paid. That price was the fruit. But to be fair, the fruit wasn't technically the issue. The issue was Adam's disobedience. Can we agree?

So if a single instance of disobedience is what caused it all, using your reverse-maze analogy, all it would take is a single instance of obedience to fix it, right?

Either that or your maze analogy is horribly flawed. I can't see how a horrible torturous crucifixion can be seen as a "180Â° turn" to the sin of disobeying God that one time.

And please if you would be so kind and actually respond to the rest of my arguments

JehovahsWitness wrote: FURTHER OBJECTIONS

Why was the ransom necessary?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 190#852190

How could an omniscient God not have known what the bad choices his creation would make?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 314#848314

Isn't God ultimately responsible since it was He who created intelligent beings?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 875#840875

Why was the forbidden try called "the tree of the knowledge of good and bad"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 045#849045

Why did God have a law in the first place?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 911#389911

Was the Edenic Law absurd or unreasonable?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 066#390066

Would God not EXPECT his law to be broken ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 066#390066

Did Adam and Eve understand the punishment (notion of death)?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 053#849053

Why are Adams children being punished for HIS Sin?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 280#381280

Yeah I'm not gonna debate links. I never even raised half of these issues. I take the time to read and respond to all of your arguments. I would expect the same in return

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:27 am

Justin108 wrote:... your claim is that in order to "reverse" the effects of Adam's sin, the same "price" had to be paid. That price was the fruit.

No the price was not the fruit. The price was DEATH.

A price is what you pay to obtain something, for example if you want a car, the price is not the car, the price is the $ 15,000 you have to give up to get the car. In a similar way Adam and Eve could indeed get the fruit, but God explained that in order to get the fruit they would pay with their lives. The price of that act of disobedience was a perfect life.

The link was where I explained why the price was so high and what their act meant

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:33 am

JehovahsWitness wrote: No the price was not the fruit. The price was DEATH.

Who's death exactly? And just to be clear, can you please define "death" for the purpose of this debate?

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:49 am

Justin108 wrote:So if a single instance of disobedience is what caused it all, using your reverse-maze analogy, all it would take is a single instance of obedience to fix it, right? [...] I can't see how a horrible torturous crucifixion can be seen as a "180Â° turn" to the sin of disobeying God that one time.

If you look carefully I did not refer to an instance of obedience I referred to an ACT.

JehovahsWitness wrote: If one act of disobedience caused the problems, then a corresponding act of obedience can reverse it.

QUESTION: How can we say that Jesus' torturous death was the equavalent of Adam's act of disobedience?

Two things can be very different but the value of those things are determined by the price; if cutting a person's hair is deemed of equal value as washing someone's car then the client will be charged the same price for the act.

The ransom had to be equivalent (but opposite) ; Adams single act cost him his life (the life of a perfect adult human male ) and so the equavalent act of obedience has to be exactly the same (the life of a perfect adult human male).

That Adam may have died peacefully in his bed, surrounded by friends and family and Jesus died after hours of torture in utter humiliation, is like a poor man buying a $15, 000 car having saved for 25 years working nights while supporting a family of ten, and a millionaire buying the same model car with his chump change. It might not be just or fair but the price is the same for both.

Jehovah set price, one life. Satan made sure that Jesus would suffer to the maximum degree before he could pay it. That Jesus did, despite the vile treatement he was submitted to is a testimony to the selfishness of Adam and the selflessness of Jesus.

Justin108 wrote: And just to be clear, can you please define "death" for the purpose of this debate?

Death is the opposite of life.

To learn more please go to other posts related to

SIN, THE RANSOM SACRIFICE and ... MEMORIAL OF CHRIST'S DEATH

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Sat Mar 04, 2017 12:06 pm

JehovahsWitness wrote:
So if a single instance of disobedience is what caused it all, using your reverse-maze analogy, all it would take is a single instance of obedience to fix it, right? [...] I can't see how a horrible torturous crucifixion can be seen as a "180Â° turn" to the sin of disobeying God that one time.
If you look carefully I did not refer to an instance of obedience I referred to an ACT.

So it wasn't the fact that they disobeyed God that was the problem...? It was their act? The act being eating the fruit... so we're back to eating the fruit. So a good fix to this would simply be eating another fruit... We have our 180. Problem solved

JehovahsWitness wrote:
QUESTION: How can we say that Jesus' torturous death was the equavalent of Adam's act of disobedience?

Two things can be very different but the value of those things are determined by the price; if cutting a person's hair is deemed of equal value as washing someone's car then the client will be charged the same price for the act.

Who determines the price and is there valid justification for said price? Suppose a king set the price of one of his vases to one life. If someone then breaks the vase, that person will be sentenced to death. Would this sentence be justified? Or is the fact that the king priced the vase to "one life" be questionable from the start?

Furthermore, wouldn't one expect that the life of the one breaking the vase is the only life that will be taken? The king is harsh enough as it is to sentence someone to death for breaking a vase... but then the king goes ahead and sentences all his children to death. AND THEN the king thinks to himself "hmm.. I don't want all of these people to die, so I'm going to kill my own son instead".

Do you consider this king to be reasonable? Or is he manically insane beyond diagnosis?

JehovahsWitness wrote:
And just to be clear, can you please define "death" for the purpose of this debate?
Death is the opposite of life.

Is death permanent?

rikuoamero · Post by **rikuoamero** » Sat Mar 04, 2017 12:23 pm

[Replying to post 134 by JehovahsWitness]

If one act of disobedience caused the problems, then a corresponding act of obedience can reverse it.

Notice that this says nothing about requiring a specific person to die. Indeed, can you exclude as a possible correct interpretation the interpretation that one can live humbly obeying God's commands and fulfill the price supposedly being demanded?

rikuoamero · Post by **rikuoamero** » Sat Mar 04, 2017 1:00 pm

[Replying to post 125 by JehovahsWitness]

Being born a perfect human male, had Jesus wanted to father children they would have in principle been perfect and lived forever.

...wait, I thought Jesus's DEATH was supposed to achieve that? Now you're arguing that not only was Jesus born perfect, but that this status was inheritable (genetically?) So...exploring this claim you have raised, so let's say Jesus DID have children, and like you say, they were perfect and would have been immortal.
Their father evidently would not have had to die in order to achieve that. Which runs counter to what you've been proposing in this thread.

So Jesus' death couldn't be accidental nor against his will. It needed to be an informed act of obedience, corresponding to Adam's act of willful DISobedience to be a valid equivalent

Does God's command HAVE to be for a death? Couldn't God have commanded Jesus to for example run on the spot for 20 mins, see if Jesus obeys him, and when he does, pronounce the sentence paid?

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:29 pm

JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 107 by OnceConvinced]

The point was to communicate to mankind the price that God and Jesus were willing to pay to save mankind. Evidently the story has indeed marked mankind's collective memory since we are still talking about it thousands of years later.

Of course we are discussing it thousands of years later. Christians always bring up the topic. They won't let us forget it.

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Sun Mar 05, 2017 5:40 pm

theophile wrote:
Thus, any time we act selfishly, or any time we take from others for our own welfare (whether from plant, animal, or humankind), we can imagine an outcry from the earth. A cry against our worthiness for this role from others in the world (those we are called to lead).

We can further imagine, as that outcry grows, that it may materialize into something truly adversarial and accusing of us, which is precisely what the satan is (see the Hebrew). It is a spirit, which is to say the combined voice of all doubters of humanity in this world, that rises up to God and speaks against us, that argues against our motives, etc... (which is precisely what we see in the book of Job.)

(Note: We can further imagine this spirit, if left unattended, becoming not just against us, but against God, who insists on us and continues to back us up despite our continued failure to properly lead.. i.e., we can imagine these satans becoming Satan, or one who is in outright rebellion against God, not just us...)

There's an awful lot of imagining going on here!

I still seems to me that Jesus never needed to die in any of this to work. Your system seems to describe a very limited and repressed god.

rikuoamero · Post by **rikuoamero** » Tue Mar 07, 2017 9:17 am

rikuoamero wrote: [Replying to post 125 by JehovahsWitness]

Being born a perfect human male, had Jesus wanted to father children they would have in principle been perfect and lived forever.
...wait, I thought Jesus's DEATH was supposed to achieve that? Now you're arguing that not only was Jesus born perfect, but that this status was inheritable (genetically?) So...exploring this claim you have raised, so let's say Jesus DID have children, and like you say, they were perfect and would have been immortal.
Their father evidently would not have had to die in order to achieve that. Which runs counter to what you've been proposing in this thread.

So Jesus' death couldn't be accidental nor against his will. It needed to be an informed act of obedience, corresponding to Adam's act of willful DISobedience to be a valid equivalent
Does God's command HAVE to be for a death? Couldn't God have commanded Jesus to for example run on the spot for 20 mins, see if Jesus obeys him, and when he does, pronounce the sentence paid?

Just to add to this discrepancy, I have the following comment from JW.

Well if you mean Lazarus (he was after all a believer and a follower of Christ) then he was raised to physical life, as were the other reports of rÃ©surrections in the bible. There are only 9 rÃ©surrections reported in the bible and only one (Jeseus) was raised as a spirit (read: immortality). Such a spiritual ressurection was only possible after the death and ressurection of Jesus, not before, for it was his ransom sacrifice, the value of which was offered to God 40 days after his resurrection, that other ones could follow.
from post 152 here
viewtopic.php?t=31687&postdays=0&postor ... &start=150