Could God have removed original sin without Jesus?

[Justin108]

Considering the variety of denominations and interpretations on this site, there is obviously a diversity of opinion regarding Jesus' role and purpose. With that in mind, I will try to phrase my questions to be as inclusive as possible and to welcome the perspective of various different denominations, whether you believe in original sin or not.

1. What was Jesus' purpose on earth?

2. Could God have achieved Jesus' purpose without Jesus?
- if you believe in original sin, was Jesus absolutely necessary in defeating/removing original sin? Could God have defeated/removed original sin without Jesus' life/death?

3. If your answer to 2 is "God could not have defeated sin without Jesus", would this not suggest a lack of omnipotence?

4. Expecting some to answer 3 with "God chose to sacrifice Jesus as a means to uphold justice", can you perhaps demonstrate how sacrificing an innocent man in order to pay for the sins of a guilty man can ever be considered "justice"?

5. Expecting some to answer 4 with "Jesus paid the ransom/debt wit his life", can you perhaps explain why a good God would demand death as a ransom? Is this any different from a corrupt ruler demanding the head of his enemy? Is it not worse considering the fact that God seems content with the death of an innocent man to pay this ransom? Worst of all, the death of his own son? If a man broke a law and his king responded by stating that "I will forgive you your crime if my son hangs himself", would you not think this king is mad?

[Justin108]

I'm not asking what motivated it, I'm asking why the solution was necessary?

Possibly

Well? Are you going to answer the question? Why was the solution (Jesus' death) necessary? "Possibly" is not an answer to this question.

My point was that the premise of the question was bibically faulty because it is the rectificaton that brings about justice. The sacrifice was not for the guilty it was to save the innocent and that sacrifice would be a demonstration of LOVE.

My question is why was it necessary? Can you please answer my question?

Did Jesus have to die to end original sin? Yes or no?
If so, why?

Why can't Christians answer this question? This is the core of their belief and even they can't explain the rationality behind it. I have asked this countless times on this site and no one has ever been able to answer me.

[rikuoamero]

I'm not asking what motivated it, I'm asking why the solution was necessary?

Possibly

Well? Are you going to answer the question? Why was the solution (Jesus' death) necessary? "Possibly" is not an answer to this question.

My point was that the premise of the question was bibically faulty because it is the rectificaton that brings about justice. The sacrifice was not for the guilty it was to save the innocent and that sacrifice would be a demonstration of LOVE.

My question is why was it necessary? Can you please answer my question?

Did Jesus have to die to end original sin? Yes or no?
If so, why?

Why can't Christians answer this question? This is the core of their belief and even they can't explain the rationality behind it. I have asked this countless times on this site and no one has ever been able to answer me.

There can be no rational explanation for answering yes (if the presumption of God being the three omni's is made). I can choose to save my friend's life by jumping in front of him and taking the bullet. However, if there is an alternative method to saving his life (such as teleporting him away, teleporting the gun away, the attacker away, freezing the bullet in mid-air, any one of a myriad of magical acts) that don't involve me bleeding to death on the floor, I would do it.

[ttruscott]

2. Could God have achieved Jesus' purpose without Jesus?

The Christian answer is that GOD runs HIS methodology at the highest game level of loving righteousness available...therefore even if HE might have achieved HIS purpose some other unproven way, by giving this way HIS stamp of approval, He was declaring it is the best way possible.

So it's the 'best' way not because it actually is the best, but merely because it's declared as the best by the guy with the big stick.
Gotcha.

So...??? implies you are paraphrasing what i wrote but it is rather a twisting that would make what I wrote into the opposite of my obvious meaning. This lack of respect has you on ignore again.

[JehovahsWitness]

I'm not asking what motivated it, I'm asking why the solution was necessary?

Possibly

Well? Are you going to answer the question? Why was the solution (Jesus' death) necessary? "Possibly" is not an answer to this question.

When I said "possibly" I meant that "Possibly that was in fact a question that you asked." I should have said "Indeed" as in: "Indeed [that is one of your questions]."

That said, you asked a series (several) questions; I usually quote the question I'm answering but notice I initially failed to do this. I then clarified which question I was addressing HERE. Still, I apologize for my lack of clarity and re-state for the second time that the question I was addressing was the following:

... how [can] sacrificing an innocent man in order to pay for the sins of a guilty man ... ever be considered "justice"?

My answer to the above is:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 082#880082


JW

[Justin108]

When I said "possibly" I meant that "Possibly that was in fact a question that you asked." I should have said "Indeed" as in: "Indeed [that is one of your questions]."

So basically what you said was "indeed that was one of your questions, which I won't be answering". Did I get that right?

That said, you asked a series (several) questions

Am I to understand you will not be addressing any of the other questions?

[JehovahsWitness]

So basically what you said was "indeed that was one of your questions, which I won't be answering". Did I get that right?

That is correct.

That said, you asked a series (several) questions

Am I to understand you will not be addressing any of the other questions?

Not at the present time, no I will not.


JW

[Willum]

[Replying to post 11 by Justin108]

Did Jesus have to die to end original sin? Yes or no?

No.
Because there is not a single person in the world who desires to do badly.
All God would need to do, simplistically, is to say what was right and wrong with out the ambiguity that plagues even all the different sects that plague Christianity, and give us the "choice" of following his will or going to Hell.

Everyone, I guarantee you would be more than happy to obey God, and wouldn't even need the promise of paradise.

There is a zero effort path to ending original sin, many really, therefore the whole Jesus' sacrifice is a contrivance.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 16 by JehovahsWitness]

Not at the present time, no I will not.

This speaks volumes in and of itself.

[Iseerce]

The issue here, as far I can see it, is within this Christian worldview, one must start with a base of assumptions that are not demonstrated in, or corresponding to, reality. Instead of stopping here, and questioning these beliefs, the Christian moves forward and continues to construct a narrative. If human sacrifice is consistent with this narrative, then all is well.

The OP has already answered the obvious. If God is indeed all-powerful, then he is not restricted by anything, period. In fact, I would add, the idea that a supposedly All-powerful being, who could choose to accomplish his goals any way he wishes, yet did choose to be consistent with said narrative, is further evidence that the bible is simply a book by committee, and not any kind of honest, actual account of history.

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 1 by Justin108]

I think it far more important to have studied theology before asking such questions.

The Pauline solution to the problem of sin is the mystical union of man with Christ's own death and resurrection.

So, is it possible for man to be united mystically with Christ's own death and resurrection without Christ actually having died and risen?