How does Jesus's "sacrifice" make any kind of sens

[rikuoamero]

This is for the theists, of course.

Just how does it make sense? What is the debt? Why is there a debt, and how is it to be repaid?

According to standard Christian theology, there was a tree with some fruit that was forbidden to the first humans. The fruit was eaten anyway, and some punishments were handed out.
Surely that should have been the end of it right? But no, according to Christians, someone just HAD to die. Which is strange, considering that nothing of what Adam and Eve did had anything to do with death; the loss of their supposed immortality was not done by them directly, but as a part of the punishment handed out by their god.
Even so...even if we ignore that...how does Jesus dying 'solve' that, or mitigate that?

Would it have worked if Jesus had lain down in a bathtub and slit his wrists? Or hung himself, entirely of his own volition?
I'm guessing no...I'm guessing that what just HAD to be done was for some corrupt priests (were they corrupt? Apparently they were only obeying their god's laws!) called for his execution and had him nailed to a piece of wood, with Jesus not resisting in any way.
So what does that accomplish? What does that show? From what I can see, it only shows that (some) people can kill, are ready and willing to do so, in the name of their god even if (apparently) this "isn't" what God wants (but it is!)

Now, I'm going to guess I'm going to get answers that ignore most, if not all, of what I said. I will be told that the only acceptable sacrifice was Jesus, since he's a sinless, perfect human. Notice that I didn't comment on that part.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 57 by Bust Nak]

Suggesting nothing! you have pointed out, quite logically, that sin must be a possibility in heaven...
and ripped another gaping hole in the belief.

Well done.

Perhaps there is an after-after life?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZplzRg6ZP4

[JehovahsWitness]

Are you suggesting that someone can sin in heaven?

• ANSWER: Yes, of course any intelligent being with free will and self determination, can sin. Satan was originally an angel in heaven, and he sinned

.

QUESTION: So is there a possibility that someone in heaven at any given moment can decide to sin?

• ANSWER Yes, that is a possibility

[So] the wicked are already getting into heaven ...

ANSWER No the wicked are not "getting into heaven"; only spirit anointed followers of Christ are "getting into" heaven. Nobody judged by God as wicked will ever get into heaven.

• The angel that eventually rebelled and became Satan the devil, was originally a perfect angel created in heaven, so he didn't "get into" heaven (meaning he didn't gain access to heaven from elsewhere, heaven was his original home). In any case Satan was expulsed from heaven along with all who joined him in rebellion, soon to be destroyed forever.
  
  As for the paradise earth, no incorrigibly wicked people will be given the opportunity for ever lasting life, they will remain dead (or be killed off) to be forgotten forever.
  
  Those not judged as incorrigibly wicked but who may have lead unrighteous lives will be given the opportunity to learn God's standards, abandon their sinful practices, take advantage of the ransom sacrifice and conform to God's standards (compare Is 55:7). Anyone unwilling will be killed off.

Christ's ransom does not cover for the deliberate unrepentant sinner; there will be no such people in paradise.


JW



RELATED POSTS

Does the ransom mean that wicked people will not be held accountable for their acts?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 903#909903

Who are "the wicked" that will be resurrected?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 451#851451

Was Jesus resurrected as a human?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 944#909944]

[Bust Nak]

ANSWER: Yes, of course any intelligent being with free will and self determination, can sin. Satan was originally an angel in heaven, and he sinned.

So what's stopping you from realizing this possibility in heaven, and why wouldn't this mechanism work on me? Lastly why didn't this mechanism work on Satan?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 63 by Bust Nak]

What "mechanism" are you referring to? I cannot answer your question because I do not understand your question.

JW

[Willum]

[Replying to post 62 by JehovahsWitness]

You know, it is incredibly frustrating, watching your conversations, and watching you only answer those questions you can with scripture, and ignoring everything else.

You know, it would nice to see you answering the things that are illogical and don't make sense:
Cherry-picking to avoid difficult issues is denial.
Scripture is not an authority on this forum.

Maybe you should consider a new religion, since you don't seem to b able to defend this one without ignoring the problems with it.

Zoroastrianism is nice, if you haven't considered it, and Buddhism doesn't practice warfare in the name of God. Two good reasons to jump ship.

[Bust Nak]

ANSWER No the wicked are not "getting into heaven"; only spirit anointed followers of Christ are "getting into" heaven. Nobody judged by God as wicked will ever get into heaven.

Well, put "wicked" in quote marks then, the nasty but genuine believer I referred to before, is a spirit anointed followers of Christ, yet he is *air-quote* "wicked" due to all the sin he committed and continues to commit, more sins and worse sins than say some Buddhist monk who has heard and dismissed the gospel.

As for the paradise earth, no incorrigibly wicked people will be given the opportunity for ever lasting life, they will remain dead (or be killed off) to be forgotten forever.

Those not judged as incorrigibly wicked but who may have lead unrighteous lives will be given the opportunity to learn God's standards, abandon their sinful practices, take advantage of the ransom sacrifice and conform to God's standards (compare Is 55:7). Anyone unwilling will be killed off.

Seeing you are using the word judged here, presumably by "given the opportunity to learn" you are talking about an opportunity after ones death? Is there room in your theology, for my Buddhist monk to be judged as temporarily wicked and given the same opportunity to learn God's standards?

Christ's ransom does not cover for the deliberate unrepentant sinner; there will be no such people in paradise.

Look around, find some non-Christian you can talk to in a non-confrontational settings, I think you'll find that many of us have a better sense of self-awareness than the worse (yet truly believing) examples of Christians. Those of us who are more aware of our own character flaws than the hypothetical "nasty but genuine Christian" I kept referring to. Maybe you've already have some people in mind that fit the two roles I've outlined. Surely you see that this "deliberate unrepentant sinner" isn't a very realistic character? We are unrepentant because we are as genuine in our disbelief as you are genuine in your belief.

What "mechanism" are you referring to? I cannot answer your question because I do not understand your question.

I am referring to what ever will stop you from sinning in heaven - this Christ's ransom. If it can work on this nasty but genuine Christian, why wouldn't it work on me for example, who has arguably fewer flaws to correct than this Christian? Or perhaps it could work, even if I was to drop dead in my atheism tonight?

[rikuoamero]

[Jesus is] the second Adam, the second perfect human, the only one who can pay for the random...

Excellent, that is exactly right.

but ... this sin thing he's supposed to deal with remains.

For now, yes.

When will obedient humans enjoy the full benefits of the ransom?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 010#854010

Why has God waited THOUSANDS of years to settle the issues raised in Eden?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 022#910022

I notice you ignored completely my question, about your God being a failure. While of course you can do that, I'd like to ask why.

♦ RESPONSE
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 395#853395

If you disagree with my assessment, please explain the numerous times God states a goal and then does not accomplish it.

♦ Could you provide and example of one of these "numerous times"?



RELATED POSTS

Why has it taken thousand of years to settle the issues raised in Eden?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 803#886803

The response you give, being solely a link...does not answer my question. I asked you how many times does it have to fail before you agree to call it a failure and all you can say is, it hasn't failed (essentially).

As for an example of your God failing...you yourself said it. Post 5...Jesus's death was supposed to pay for the sin we inherited from Adam and Eve. And yet, we still have sin.
Or how about this straight from the Bible? From Genesis Chapter 6, we have
“I have decided to put an end to all flesh, because the earth is full of violence on account of them, so I am bringing them to ruin together with the earth

Or in other words, there is violence on the Earth, God doesn't like it, so he's going to...wipe everything out with an act of extreme violence?
Can you tell me that once the flood was over, there was peace upon the Earth?

[JehovahsWitness]

Those not judged as incorrigibly wicked but who may have lead unrighteous lives will be given the opportunity to learn God's standards, abandon their sinful practices, take advantage of the ransom sacrifice and conform to God's standards (compare Is 55:7). Anyone unwilling will be killed off.

Seeing you are using the word judged here, presumably by "given the opportunity to learn" you are talking about an opportunity after ones death?

WHO ARE THE "WICKED" THAT THE BIBLE SAYS WILL BE RESSURRECTED?

There may well be many that will be allowed to pass through Harmageddon (the day when God destroys the incorrigibly wicked) and given an opportunity to learn thereafter, never having to die first. But yes, the majority of "wicked" (unrighteous) who are not incorrigibly so, will gain their "opportunity" after their death and RESURRECTION back to healthy life right her on this literal planet earth (they can't learn anything if they are dead).





God has promised to resurrect many (possibly millions) of people that may have died without having the opportunity to learn about Jesus and the RANSOM. They may have made bad choices out of ignorance. The wrongdoer that was executed next to Jesus would fall into this catagory. Evidently he may have lived a "evil" life, stealing and probably murdering, and found himself executed for his crimes. Jesus promised this man a RESURRECTION. Of course the man can no longer steal and murder but once resurrected he will be given an education that will enable him to make better life choices in the future.

Is there room in your theology, for my Buddhist monk to be judged as temporarily wicked and given the same opportunity to learn God's standards?

• I'm not sure what you mean by judged as "temporarily wicked" if you mean it was judged that they may have acted wickedly but God reads their hearts and judges they will be willing to change when taught how, then yes absolutely. Of course, the Buddhist in your example will have to immediately abandon his Buddhism, accept Christ, cease any actions that are not acceptable under the new regime and live by Christian standards while progressing in genuine faith, but absolutely, yes, that is what the bible indicates will be on offer.

The provision of the RESURRECTION is for people who, out of ignorance may have lived lives that are contrary to God's will. The paradise will not be marred, but those willing to conform and learn, but in his mercy God will offer humble people with regrettable pasts, the opportunity to do better when they know better.


JW



RELATED POSTS


Does the ransom mean that wicked people will not be held accountable for their acts?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 903#909903

What happens to all the people that died and knew nothing about Jesus?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 451#851451

Is there sin in heaven?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 140#910140

[OnceConvinced]

I believe that any sacrifice where human or animal blood is spilt is immoral. Are you ok with blood sacrifices? Do you see them as moral?

People sacrifice every day lot of animals for them to live longer (for food). Perhaps it would be better to not eat animals, but I think it is not wrong.

That's not a sacrifice. That is eating to survive. It's not the same as burning an animal on an altar to gain favours from a god. Especially a god that may not even exist.

And what about human blood? Are you ok with a human being slaughtered to be a sacrifice for you? (or to eat if you want to go there?)

Jesus used his life for us, that can be seen as sacrifice.

Which was completely unnecessary really.

I meant with Jesus used his life for us that he lived and preached the message that can make person righteous. I think it was important and good thing.

Jesus could have lived and preached without being slaughtered. Surely he could have achieved all the same without the need for being hung on the cross?

There is nothing that could have been achieved that needed a human sacrifice. Not when an all powerful god is involved. Blood sacrifices don't have any magical powers.

Just imagine it, if Adolf Hitler was on trial for his atrocities and then some Christian guy (say his name is Jack) comes along and says "Hey, everybody, I love Adolf so much that I'll take his place on the electric chair instead." Do you think we'd all be happy with that? That Adolf is going to get off scot free because Jack is willing to go to the chair for him?

I wouldn’t be happy to kill anyone, even if it was Hitler.

Yet you are happy that Jesus was put to death for your atrocities? Why are you ok with Jesus being killed for your atrocities?

In the case of Jesus, I think it is totally different matter. It is true that Jesus got murdered and because of that he got chance to resurrect, which then gave courage to his disciples to continue. It all worked well for the cause, but death itself was not necessary for forgiveness of sins. But it is interesting thing that Jesus says:

Most assuredly I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit.
John 12:24

So are you saying that God could not have achieved all this without Jesus being sacrificed?

You don't think God could have motivated the disciples without the need for a death and resurrection?

These guys were rubbing shoulders with the son of God for years! They were witnessing all the miracles he did. Why was that not enough? Was Jesus's works really that unconvincing that it required a resurrection before the disciples could be confident?

Imagine if you were living with Jesus for those years and were witnessing his miracles and his wisdom. Would you need his death and resurrection to gain courage to go out and preach the gospel?

The death was accepted, because then Jesus could rise from death and it would bear much fruit.

And he couldn't bear fruit without having to be executed? Why not?

Surely he could have died of old age, then resurrected himself then and achieved the same thing. Why the need for the sacrifice? (which by the way was never a sacrifice anyway because he was resurrected).

Before that the disciples were afraid, after that they were fearless. And the powerful teaching was, don’t fear death, it has been won.

Jesus must have been very unconvincing while he was alive. That's surely the only conclusion one can come to here. Perhaps the stories about him were exaggerated? That would surely explain why the disciples were so afraid and timid. They must have seen a fallible man, not a son of god at least until the resurrection.

It doesn't say much at all for Jesus while he was alive, that the disciples were still timid weaklings and needed his resurrection before they could be bold. Was Jesus's life not a good enough example for them? Were his words of wisdom and encouragement not enough? Why not?

It still doesn't explain why a sacrifice was needed. Jesus could have committed suicide and been resurrected. He could have died a natural death and been resurrected. It would have achieved the same thing, wouldn't it?

I for one believe people should step up and take responsibility for their own atrocities.

I agree.

Then how can you possibly see it as moral for Jesus to be a human sacrifice for you?
How can you possibly accept Jesus's sacrifice to enable you to get off scot free?
Where is your integrity?

But when you are in front of God in last judgment, will you do that?

Hey, I'm as human as anybody else. I would be happy to get off scot free, but that doesn't make it right. It certainly doesn't make it moral, does it? One might say it would make me a coward and someone without integrity. However if you're faced with an eternity burning in Hell, I'm sure anyone would sacrifice their integrity to get out of it. However that in no way makes it moral.

By accepting Jesus as your saviour, doesn't that make one a coward who lacks integrity?

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 47 by JehovahsWitness]

Doesn't it strike you as odd, that a creature with the characteristics you describe (God), uses such ineffective and illogical approaches to accomplish such odd things, when literally acting differently, or simply changing perspective would accomplish the same goals?

I mean it's supposed to be all-knowing right? Capable of knowing our intentions and very souls?

Exactly. It seems that God is limited and can only do things in primitive or barbaric ways. Of course when we consider that the people who came up with these ideas lived in primitive and barbaric societies, it's not surprising.

Further evidence that there is no real god involved. It's all made up by humans.