What if Jesus did not come to die for our sins?

[Beanieboy]

This is going to be controversial, so just keep an open mind before a new jerk response.

What if (I did say if) God did not demand Christ’s death, one who was sinless, as payment for the sins of the world.

Often, to the outsider, and sometimes the believer, this idea of sacrificing animals, etc. is confusing. Add to that that Jesus and the Father are one, and the logic goes:
God made Adam and Eve. They disobeyed God and sinned, as we all do, because they were imperfect, as we all admit we are.
Because of this, they were expelled from Eden and sentenced to toil and eventually die.
In order to save the world from this punishment he created, he impregnated a virgin with himself, and was then crucified by Pilot, and rose again, to appease himself for the world’s sin.

When we forgive another for sinning against us, we do not demand that they kill their dog, or give some other sacrifice. We simply forgive the sin, explaining how it harmed you, and asking them not to do it again.

When the woman was caught in adultery, after her accusers had left, Jesus said “Neither do I condemn you. Your sins have been forgiven. Go and sin no more.”

He didn’t say, “Your sins have been forgiven*
*pending my upcoming crucifixion and resurrection

If the only thing necessary for salvation was Christ’s death, they could have allowed Harod to kill Jesus with the rest of the children he was executing.

Is it possible that Jesus came here to teach us how to love one another?
Jesus, when asked if one should forgive their neighbor 7 times, Jesus says, “70 x 7.” Despite some literalists who have told me that meant one only has to forgive 490 times, and apparently keep a ledger and keep track, I understand it to me to forgive without limit, as many times as you would wish to be forgiven of the Father.
He told Parables of the sheep and goats, of how one is to love actively, versus simply refraining from doing misdeeds toward one another.
He told a Parable of the man forgiven a great debt who refused to forgive the small debt of his servant, angered the master, who then reinstated the debt. Christ is saying that we are forgiven a great debt, way before he was crucified.

So, why the crucifixion? To show how far Christ/God would go for us because of his great love, to the point of being willing to allow us to kill him, and still offer love and forgiveness.

Not completely biblical, but then again, when Jesus flipped over the tables in the temple, it was because people had made sacrifices into a way to make a buck, offering people entering the temple a sacrifice they had bought, but wasn’t really a sacrifice. When I went to my church, I never had to bring a dove or goat to sacrifice to God to show my loyalty or sincerity.
not do I demand it from another, or to find their most prized possession and destroy it as a sacrifice for atonement. I simply forgive.

******
As a side note, a Christian once told a story of how there was a Christian Man, his wife, and their 5 year old child, and an atheist on a boat.
They were caught in a storm, and the boat began to sink.
There was one emergency lifeboat, but it would hold only 3.
The Christian husband panicked, jumped over his wife and child and got in the boat. Then, realizing how bad that looked, said that way he could help others get on the boat.
The atheist then helped the child, and then the wife, before the boat sank and the atheist drowned.

Question: Does the atheist go to heaven?
I said, “Yes, of course.”
He said, “Wrong. Because he did not believe in Christ, he is now burning in hell.”
I argued,” but he sacrificed his own life so that he could save the Christian family.”
He said, “no good works get you into heaven.:
I said, “I’m not saying that he earned his way into heaven by dying. I am saying that he loved his neighbor so much, that he was will to sacrifice himself that they may live.”
He said, “Doesn’t matter. You can’t be saved without Jesus.”
I said, “Then I don’t understand. You have a husband that thought of himself before the atheist, his wife he loves, and even his own child. I get that people panick, but he showed that he was not following Jesus by loving his neighbor as himself, but rather, loving himself before others. By contrast, the atheist, not believing in a heaven or hell, that by sacrificing himself, his life will simply end, but chose to give up his life out of love for the family, he was acting Christlike.”
He said: “Doesn’t matter.”
I said: But he sacrificed his life, just as Christ sacrificed his life for us, that we might live. And the bible states that giving your life for another is the greatest kind of love their is.”
He said, “still doesn’t count.”
I said: Then your religion makes no sense.
You believe that Christ died for the world demonstrating his love for us, but when a human does it for another, regardless of their religion, it’s not as good as Jesus’ death, despite that the Bible says otherwise.
The atheist demonstrated his love for his neighbor without believing there is a heaven nor eternal life awaiting, but simply, nothingness, and still gave up his life.
The Christian husband thought only of himself, and yet, on some technicality of believing in Christ, yet not following Christ in at least thinking of his daughter and wife first, is given a free ticket to heaven.

That makes no logical sense.

 

[HTacianas]

This is going to be controversial, so just keep an open mind before a new jerk response.

What if (I did say if) God did not demand Christ’s death, one who was sinless, as payment for the sins of the world.

Often, to the outsider, and sometimes the believer, this idea of sacrificing animals, etc. is confusing. Add to that that Jesus and the Father are one, and the logic goes:
God made Adam and Eve. They disobeyed God and sinned, as we all do, because they were imperfect, as we all admit we are.
Because of this, they were expelled from Eden and sentenced to toil and eventually die.
In order to save the world from this punishment he created, he impregnated a virgin with himself, and was then crucified by Pilot, and rose again, to appease himself for the world’s sin.

When we forgive another for sinning against us, we do not demand that they kill their dog, or give some other sacrifice. We simply forgive the sin, explaining how it harmed you, and asking them not to do it again.

When the woman was caught in adultery, after her accusers had left, Jesus said “Neither do I condemn you. Your sins have been forgiven. Go and sin no more.”

He didn’t say, “Your sins have been forgiven*
*pending my upcoming crucifixion and resurrection

If the only thing necessary for salvation was Christ’s death, they could have allowed Harod to kill Jesus with the rest of the children he was executing.

Is it possible that Jesus came here to teach us how to love one another?
Jesus, when asked if one should forgive their neighbor 7 times, Jesus says, “70 x 7.” Despite some literalists who have told me that meant one only has to forgive 490 times, and apparently keep a ledger and keep track, I understand it to me to forgive without limit, as many times as you would wish to be forgiven of the Father.
He told Parables of the sheep and goats, of how one is to love actively, versus simply refraining from doing misdeeds toward one another.
He told a Parable of the man forgiven a great debt who refused to forgive the small debt of his servant, angered the master, who then reinstated the debt. Christ is saying that we are forgiven a great debt, way before he was crucified.

So, why the crucifixion? To show how far Christ/God would go for us because of his great love, to the point of being willing to allow us to kill him, and still offer love and forgiveness.

Not completely biblical, but then again, when Jesus flipped over the tables in the temple, it was because people had made sacrifices into a way to make a buck, offering people entering the temple a sacrifice they had bought, but wasn’t really a sacrifice. When I went to my church, I never had to bring a dove or goat to sacrifice to God to show my loyalty or sincerity.
not do I demand it from another, or to find their most prized possession and destroy it as a sacrifice for atonement. I simply forgive.

******
As a side note, a Christian once told a story of how there was a Christian Man, his wife, and their 5 year old child, and an atheist on a boat.
They were caught in a storm, and the boat began to sink.
There was one emergency lifeboat, but it would hold only 3.
The Christian husband panicked, jumped over his wife and child and got in the boat. Then, realizing how bad that looked, said that way he could help others get on the boat.
The atheist then helped the child, and then the wife, before the boat sank and the atheist drowned.

Question: Does the atheist go to heaven?
I said, “Yes, of course.”
He said, “Wrong. Because he did not believe in Christ, he is now burning in hell.”
I argued,” but he sacrificed his own life so that he could save the Christian family.”
He said, “no good works get you into heaven.:
I said, “I’m not saying that he earned his way into heaven by dying. I am saying that he loved his neighbor so much, that he was will to sacrifice himself that they may live.”
He said, “Doesn’t matter. You can’t be saved without Jesus.”
I said, “Then I don’t understand. You have a husband that thought of himself before the atheist, his wife he loves, and even his own child. I get that people panick, but he showed that he was not following Jesus by loving his neighbor as himself, but rather, loving himself before others. By contrast, the atheist, not believing in a heaven or hell, that by sacrificing himself, his life will simply end, but chose to give up his life out of love for the family, he was acting Christlike.”
He said: “Doesn’t matter.”
I said: But he sacrificed his life, just as Christ sacrificed his life for us, that we might live. And the bible states that giving your life for another is the greatest kind of love their is.”
He said, “still doesn’t count.”
I said: Then your religion makes no sense.
You believe that Christ died for the world demonstrating his love for us, but when a human does it for another, regardless of their religion, it’s not as good as Jesus’ death, despite that the Bible says otherwise.
The atheist demonstrated his love for his neighbor without believing there is a heaven nor eternal life awaiting, but simply, nothingness, and still gave up his life.
The Christian husband thought only of himself, and yet, on some technicality of believing in Christ, yet not following Christ in at least thinking of his daughter and wife first, is given a free ticket to heaven.

That makes no logical sense.

You've been talking to too many protestants.

 

[AMM]

You've been talking to too many protestants.

Agreed - just at a quick glance of your post, you may be interested in what the Orthodox have to say about salvation, sin, the atonement, etc

 

[timothyu]

That makes no logical sense.

Nothing man contrives makes sense except to like minded man..

1 Corinthians 18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.

 

[Greengardener]

Most of us would rather not think that sin was so awful that it required a blood sacrifice, the type in the OT looking forward to the ultimate sacrifice of the Son of God. Most of us don't like thinking that Abraham would have obeyed God to the degree that he didn't argue the point but took up his son, the firewood, and his knife and went up to do just what God told him to do, and are secretly happy that Isaac lived to tell about it and wonder what God was doing asking such a difficult thing of Abraham.

There is a deeper part of the story, a depth that we don't really have sufficient words for, of a Supreme Only One who made this all, who made us, and who allowed us, made in His image, to have choice of our actions along with consequences for our choices, of Someone So Righteous and loving that rebellion against Him is totally absurd and awful, yet He allows us to wallow in it while continuing to love us and encourage us to trust Him and walk with Him in the way He instructs so we can have a good life and make progress in a bigger picture about which we can only imagine as His children, Someone So Aware of the consequences and filth of sin that only the precious blood of His Son would be enough to wash our hearts from that filth. I don't have words enough, for sure. We always want to make God in our image, not realizing that there is so much more to the story that we don't know the half. But we do know this: Jeremiah 9:24 That I am the LORD, exercising lovingkindness, judgment and righteousness in the earth for in these I delight, says the LORD.

We haven't yet figured out how as humans to be loving, kind, have correct judgement or be righteous, and we would only create a God in our image who was less than who He really is. It's only natural that we would struggle with those concepts. I recommend trusting Him first, because trying to figure Him out first won't work. Am I recommended some vague adoration of the Universal Spaghetti Monster or something equally silly? No, I am recommending honor and trust toward the One who made it all, and then a serious study of how He used the Bible to show us what He is like, how He hates when people are unrighteous, unjust, hateful and hurting to one another, or so engrossed in their sinful lifestyles that they sell their own children and the children of the community to fulfill their own lusts, and keeps calling us away from that natural vortex into His way of thinking and living.

 

[HTacianas]

Agreed - just at a quick glance of your post, you may be interested in what the Orthodox have to say about salvation, sin, the atonement, etc

I am aware of the Church's teachings on salvation and I agree with them. So much so that if I should hold or express any belief contrary to the teachings of the Church I will change in an instant to conform with the Church.

 

[dzheremi]

Yes, and what if Christ came not because God the Father was eternally upset at two of his creations listening to a talking snake and eating a piece of fruit, but to free us from the chains of sin and death, and restore to life with God? What if His voluntary death was not so much a quasi-monetary transaction, but the actual rending of history in two, the promise of the life to come, the rebirth and transformation of all who partake in His death and resurrection?

What if?

All you heavenly orders, Sing to our God with the melody of praise, Rejoice with us today with gladness, In the Resurrection of the Lord Christ.

Today the prophecies are fulfilled, And the sayings of the forefathers are realized, By the Resurrection of the Lord from among the dead, He is the first-fruit of those who have fallen asleep.

 

[SkyWriting]

The atheist demonstrated his love for his neighbor without believing there is a heaven nor eternal life awaiting, but simply, nothingness, and still gave up his life.

God is love. So you missed that.

 

[timothyu]

Are there any Jews hanging out that could explain the two types of repayments of debts, one which required a sacrifice of some sort, the other no sacrifice especially when God was involved?

For instance the Prophets who were in direct connection with God abhorred blood sacrifice. Yet the Mosaic crew was full into it after leaving Egypt. So why would those directly connected to God say God did not want sacrifice yet we have the idea of sacrifice to pay a debt on the cross. How is the Kingdom by way of grace (a gift) then only a gift with sacrifice? That no longer makes it a gift of grace.

 

[Aussie Pete]

This is going to be controversial, so just keep an open mind before a new jerk response.

What if (I did say if) God did not demand Christ’s death, one who was sinless, as payment for the sins of the world.

Often, to the outsider, and sometimes the believer, this idea of sacrificing animals, etc. is confusing. Add to that that Jesus and the Father are one, and the logic goes:
God made Adam and Eve. They disobeyed God and sinned, as we all do, because they were imperfect, as we all admit we are.
Because of this, they were expelled from Eden and sentenced to toil and eventually die.
In order to save the world from this punishment he created, he impregnated a virgin with himself, and was then crucified by Pilot, and rose again, to appease himself for the world’s sin.

When we forgive another for sinning against us, we do not demand that they kill their dog, or give some other sacrifice. We simply forgive the sin, explaining how it harmed you, and asking them not to do it again.

When the woman was caught in adultery, after her accusers had left, Jesus said “Neither do I condemn you. Your sins have been forgiven. Go and sin no more.”

He didn’t say, “Your sins have been forgiven*
*pending my upcoming crucifixion and resurrection

If the only thing necessary for salvation was Christ’s death, they could have allowed Harod to kill Jesus with the rest of the children he was executing.

Is it possible that Jesus came here to teach us how to love one another?
Jesus, when asked if one should forgive their neighbor 7 times, Jesus says, “70 x 7.” Despite some literalists who have told me that meant one only has to forgive 490 times, and apparently keep a ledger and keep track, I understand it to me to forgive without limit, as many times as you would wish to be forgiven of the Father.
He told Parables of the sheep and goats, of how one is to love actively, versus simply refraining from doing misdeeds toward one another.
He told a Parable of the man forgiven a great debt who refused to forgive the small debt of his servant, angered the master, who then reinstated the debt. Christ is saying that we are forgiven a great debt, way before he was crucified.

So, why the crucifixion? To show how far Christ/God would go for us because of his great love, to the point of being willing to allow us to kill him, and still offer love and forgiveness.

Not completely biblical, but then again, when Jesus flipped over the tables in the temple, it was because people had made sacrifices into a way to make a buck, offering people entering the temple a sacrifice they had bought, but wasn’t really a sacrifice. When I went to my church, I never had to bring a dove or goat to sacrifice to God to show my loyalty or sincerity.
not do I demand it from another, or to find their most prized possession and destroy it as a sacrifice for atonement. I simply forgive.

******
As a side note, a Christian once told a story of how there was a Christian Man, his wife, and their 5 year old child, and an atheist on a boat.
They were caught in a storm, and the boat began to sink.
There was one emergency lifeboat, but it would hold only 3.
The Christian husband panicked, jumped over his wife and child and got in the boat. Then, realizing how bad that looked, said that way he could help others get on the boat.
The atheist then helped the child, and then the wife, before the boat sank and the atheist drowned.

Question: Does the atheist go to heaven?
I said, “Yes, of course.”
He said, “Wrong. Because he did not believe in Christ, he is now burning in hell.”
I argued,” but he sacrificed his own life so that he could save the Christian family.”
He said, “no good works get you into heaven.:
I said, “I’m not saying that he earned his way into heaven by dying. I am saying that he loved his neighbor so much, that he was will to sacrifice himself that they may live.”
He said, “Doesn’t matter. You can’t be saved without Jesus.”
I said, “Then I don’t understand. You have a husband that thought of himself before the atheist, his wife he loves, and even his own child. I get that people panick, but he showed that he was not following Jesus by loving his neighbor as himself, but rather, loving himself before others. By contrast, the atheist, not believing in a heaven or hell, that by sacrificing himself, his life will simply end, but chose to give up his life out of love for the family, he was acting Christlike.”
He said: “Doesn’t matter.”
I said: But he sacrificed his life, just as Christ sacrificed his life for us, that we might live. And the bible states that giving your life for another is the greatest kind of love their is.”
He said, “still doesn’t count.”
I said: Then your religion makes no sense.
You believe that Christ died for the world demonstrating his love for us, but when a human does it for another, regardless of their religion, it’s not as good as Jesus’ death, despite that the Bible says otherwise.
The atheist demonstrated his love for his neighbor without believing there is a heaven nor eternal life awaiting, but simply, nothingness, and still gave up his life.
The Christian husband thought only of himself, and yet, on some technicality of believing in Christ, yet not following Christ in at least thinking of his daughter and wife first, is given a free ticket to heaven.

That makes no logical sense.

Who said that the gospel is logical? It is foolishness to the intellectual.

Such examples are pointless. God's judgement is simple. Are you alive or dead? If you have accepted Christ, you are alive in Him. Contrary to popular opinion, being alive in Christ is far more important than being forgiven. Many people make great sacrifices for many reasons. The only sacrifice that counts is what Jesus did for us on the Cross

Jesus said that He came that we might have life. It is eternal life. If you can destroy what is eternal then (real) Christians will be found in hell.

 

[AMM]

I am aware of the Church's teachings on salvation and I agree with them. So much so that if I should hold or express any belief contrary to the teachings of the Church I will change in an instant to conform with the Church.

sorry if that was misleading. My grammar was very poor and misleading in that sentence.

I intended to state my agreement with you and encourage the OP to check out Orthodoxy, although I see now that my post was very much not that. Mea culpa.

 

[public hermit]

So, why the crucifixion? To show how far Christ/God would go for us because of his great love, to the point of being willing to allow us to kill him, and still offer love and forgiveness.

I'm not sure why this would be so far outside the pale of orthodoxy? You seem to be saying that God didn't require the cross, it's just that God knew humanity would kill him and used that to communicate the divine love. Like Abelard's moral influence theory of atonement, maybe?

 

[dzheremi]

This whole thread could very much benefit from reading HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic on the divine dilemma and its solution in the incarnation as found in His insurmountable work On The Incarnation.

A long sample is below, for our contemplation and edification. To my mind, this is probably the single greatest theological treatise on the necessity of the incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection of Christ ever penned, at least in the style of the apologist rather than the poet.

This, then, was the plight of men. God had not only made them out of nothing, but had also graciously bestowed on them His own life by the grace of the Word. Then, turning from eternal things to things corruptible, by counsel of the devil, they had become the cause of their own corruption in death; for, as I said before, though they were by nature subject to corruption, the grace of their union with the Word made them capable of escaping from the natural law, provided that they retained the beauty of innocence with which they were created. That is to say, the presence of the Word with them shielded them even from natural corruption, as also Wisdom says: God created man for incorruption and as an image of His own eternity; but by envy of the devil death entered into the world." When this happened, men began to die, and corruption ran riot among them and held sway over them to an even more than natural degree, because it was the penalty of which God had forewarned them for transgressing the commandment.

[....]


Man, who was created in God's image and in his possession of reason reflected the very Word Himself, was disappearing, and the work of God was being undone. The law of death, which followed from the Transgression, prevailed upon us, and from it there was no escape. The thing that was happening was in truth both monstrous and unfitting. It would, of course, have been unthinkable that God should go back upon His word and that man, having transgressed, should not die; but it was equally monstrous that beings which once had shared the nature of the Word should perish and turn back again into non-existence through corruption. It was unworthy of the goodness of God that creatures made by Him should be brought to nothing through the deceit wrought upon man by the devil; and it was supremely unfitting that the work of God in mankind should disappear, either through their own negligence or through the deceit of evil spirits. As, then, the creatures whom He had created reasonable, like the Word, were in fact perishing, and such noble works were on the road to ruin, what then was God, being Good, to do? Was He to let corruption and death have their way with them? In that case, what was the use of having made them in the beginning? Surely it would have been better never to have been created at all than, having been created, to be neglected and perish; and, besides that, such indifference to the ruin of His own work before His very eyes would argue not goodness in God but limitation, and that far more than if He had never created men at all. It was impossible, therefore, that God should leave man to be carried off by corruption, because it would be unfitting and unworthy of Himself.

Yet, true though this is, it is not the whole matter. As we have already noted, it was unthinkable that God, the Father of Truth, should go back upon His word regarding death in order to ensure our continued existence. He could not falsify Himself; what, then, was God to do? Was He to demand repentance from men for their transgression? You might say that that was worthy of God, and argue further that, as through the Transgression they became subject to corruption, so through repentance they might return to incorruption again. But repentance would not guard the Divine consistency, for, if death did not hold dominion over men, God would still remain untrue. Nor does repentance recall men from what is according to their nature; all that it does is to make them cease from sinning. Had it been a case of a trespass only, and not of a subsequent corruption, repentance would have been well enough; but when once transgression had begun men came under the power of the corruption proper to their nature and were bereft of the grace which belonged to them as creatures in the Image of God. No, repentance could not meet the case. What—or rather Who was it that was needed for such grace and such recall as we required? Who, save the Word of God Himself, Who also in the beginning had made all things out of nothing? His part it was, and His alone, both to bring again the corruptible to incorruption and to maintain for the Father His consistency of character with all. For He alone, being Word of the Father and above all, was in consequence both able to recreate all, and worthy to suffer on behalf of all and to be an ambassador for all with the Father.

For this purpose, then, the incorporeal and incorruptible and immaterial Word of God entered our world. In one sense, indeed, He was not far from it before, for no part of creation had ever been without Him Who, while ever abiding in union with the Father, yet fills all things that are. But now He entered the world in a new way, stooping to our level in His love and Self-revealing to us. He saw the reasonable race, the race of men that, like Himself, expressed the Father's Mind, wasting out of existence, and death reigning over all in corruption. He saw that corruption held us all the closer, because it was the penalty for the Transgression; He saw, too, how unthinkable it would be for the law to be repealed before it was fulfilled. He saw how unseemly it was that the very things of which He Himself was the Artificer should be disappearing. He saw how the surpassing wickedness of men was mounting up against them; He saw also their universal liability to death. All this He saw and, pitying our race, moved with compassion for our limitation, unable to endure that death should have the mastery, rather than that His creatures should perish and the work of His Father for us men come to nought, He took to Himself a body, a human body even as our own. Nor did He will merely to become embodied or merely to appear; had that been so, He could have revealed His divine majesty in some other and better way. No, He took our body, and not only so, but He took it directly from a spotless, stainless virgin, without the agency of human father—a pure body, untainted by intercourse with man. He, the Mighty One, the Artificer of all, Himself prepared this body in the virgin as a temple for Himself, and took it for His very own, as the instrument through which He was known and in which He dwelt. Thus, taking a body like our own, because all our bodies were liable to the corruption of death, He surrendered His body to death instead of all, and offered it to the Father. This He did out of sheer love for us, so that in His death all might die, and the law of death thereby be abolished because, having fulfilled in His body that for which it was appointed, it was thereafter voided of its power for men. This He did that He might turn again to incorruption men who had turned back to corruption, and make them alive through death by the appropriation of His body and by the grace of His resurrection. Thus He would make death to disappear from them as utterly as straw from fire.
​

+++

I'm not a "mic drop" kind of person, but I believe we have the answer here.

 

[timothyu]

Is it possible that Jesus came here to teach us how to love one another?

Sure Charlie Brown.

Jesus died because of our sins. This was a given.

His only Gospel was the Gospel of the Kingdom. It's message ran contrary to the traditional ways of man. Everything that power and leadership and control is based on by our standards runs opposite to the ways of the Kingdom. It is about self while the Kingdom is about others. Jesus' Kingdom was called in ancient literature the upside down Kingdom, and for good reason. Rather than promoting the self serving ways of man, often seeking gain at the expense of others and redefining good and evil to attain those ends, Jesus taught to serve others rather than self. Opposite. Upside down.

Now what institution of man, especially the governors of such, would put up with someone or another nation undermining their self serving, self appointed positions of authourity, and the system they lived under which required oppression in order to exist? It applied to Rome. it applied to the Pharisees. It applies to governments and religious leaders today.

So in that self serving self protective mode of man, they killed He who could set them free of this backwards world. He died because of the original sin of man, self interest. God spent the whole time saying His will before ours, but man always thinks they have a better way. So in our arrogance we killed that which was seen as an enemy to our way of life. He died because of our sins. There was no doubt of the outcome in God's mind.

However, God's will proved stronger than the arrogant will of man, and the resurrection and that very world/system that they feared came to be as a result So who was smarter? We played right into His hands so that He may bring to life the first born of many of the Kingdom, it's King. Someone who did not question His will.

Jesus was loved by the oppressed but hated by the system. As scripture says, His followers are to be hated for He and His Kingdom also. Jesus taught that we were not to rebel against the system of man but live as an alternative to it, showing by example it's fruits, it's alternate way of life. We may be appreciated for our goodwill but there is never a moment where our alienation to the system of man could not have us labelled as traitors and suffer the punishments. Try telling world leaders they have it all backwards.

Why is a lesser gospel taught? Because the very religion that was to teach and stand out as a beacon of the Kingdom, could no longer teach it because it too rejected the Kingdom and rejoined the world of man to work as partners in a secular world. It sold out as man often does..

To teach against itself by focusing on the Kingdom and it's ways would have shown it's hypocrisy, so the rules were changed so they could have it both ways. God says nope, but in the spirit of leaving them to their own ways as Jesus taught, they shall have their only reward of what they have gained here and none of the Kingdom. The blind have lead the blind for a long time but the blinded still have a chance to look at the upside down Kingdom and switch allegiance, just as the early followers did. The choice is still ours. It's what repentance/change is all about.

 

[Beanieboy]

Sure Charlie Brown.

Jesus died because of our sins. This was a given.

That was an amazing explanation, a very different perspective from what I have heard before.

But I want to clarify something. Are you saying that Christ died because of our sinful nature, or are you saying that God required Christ to die to pay our debt of sin?

The first implies that Christ went to the point of allowing us to kill him as the depth of his love, while the second was that God required a sinless human sacrifice.

 

[timothyu]

Are you saying that Christ died because of our sinful nature, or are you saying that God required Christ to die to pay our debt of sin?

Yes His message was not welcome in the world of man. The Kingdom is a threat to our traditional ways of self. So He died because of our sins, our selfishness, our defense of our system. Would a religion that sold out and rejoined the world of man admit to that or re-work the meaning? Jesus did however have to die in order to be first resurrected into the Kingdom. It showed what scripture says about not fearing those who can kill the flesh but He who can also kill the spirit. If the Kingdom was a gift given out of grace (Jesus' good news) then there is no need for catches to make it a gift. Jesus had to qualify for the position by doing only the will of the Father and not His own. Quite the test. The only catch is for us.. repentance of the will and ways of man for instead the will of God. We've been offered a reprieve from the original death..

 

[Charlie24]

That was an amazing explanation, a very different perspective from what I have heard before.

But I want to clarify something. Are you saying that Christ died because of our sinful nature, or are you saying that God required Christ to die to pay our debt of sin?

The first implies that Christ went to the point of allowing us to kill him as the depth of his love, while the second was that God required a sinless human sacrifice.

God sent His Son to pay for our sins because we can't. Without the sacrifice of a sinless man the sin debt of man could not be paid.

That's how much He loves us, even while we are still sinners.

Jeremiah told us that God demands the blood of man for his sin. That's how serious sin is. That would leave us without hope and doomed.

We got ourselves into a mess with our free will and curiosity which led to sin. Thank God He made a way for us to escape. But it cost His Son a cruel death on the cross that we are not worthy of.

Imagine that, God Himself came down from heaven in the form of man and gave his life that we could live. What kind of love is that?

 

[timothyu]

Love is giving. Man is all about take. Man wants something in return for something given. God is not a capitalist. God/Jesus set the example. We are asked to give freely to others in need. In the case of forgiveness which we are expected to give others, we are expected to do so without reward or remuneration. God sets the example. God asks for no price for forgiveness. The Adversary and man on the other hand would assume that is the way things are done. God offers and shows us the way. Us to put His will before our own. Apply that to salvation/sacrifice.

 

[Kris Jordan]

I said: Then your religion makes no sense.
You believe that Christ died for the world demonstrating his love for us, but when a human does it for another, regardless of their religion, it’s not as good as Jesus’ death, despite that the Bible says otherwise.

The atheist demonstrated his love for his neighbor without believing there is a heaven nor eternal life awaiting, but simply, nothingness, and still gave up his life.
The Christian husband thought only of himself, and yet, on some technicality of believing in Christ, yet not following Christ in at least thinking of his daughter and wife first, is given a free ticket to heaven.

That makes no logical sense.

Hi Beanieboy,

The problem with this scenario is that neither the atheist nor the Christian are able (or would be able) to save anyone (including themselves) through sacrificing their own life, even on their best day. They are both sinners. (Romans 3:10)

Only Jesus is able to save because He was the perfect, sinless sacrifice. He lived a perfect life on our behalf (since we never could) and died a sacrificial death in our place (for our sins). It is only when we put our trust in Him, believing what He did for us on the cross paid our sin debt in full, that we can be saved.

That is grace. It is undeserved. And that's the glorious, good-news message of the gospel.

 

[1213]

This is going to be controversial, so just keep an open mind before a new jerk response.

What if (I did say if) God did not demand Christ’s death, one who was sinless, as payment for the sins of the world....

I think you have a good point. Bible shows clearly that Jesus could forgive sins before his death and he gave that same right for his disciples also. And actually, that he forgave sins was one reason why people wanted to kill him.

The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, "Who is this that speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?" But Jesus, perceiving their thoughts, answered them, "Why are you reasoning so in your hearts? Which is easier to say, 'Your sins are forgiven you;' or to say, 'Arise and walk?' But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (he said to the paralyzed man), "I tell you, arise, and take up your cot, and go to your house." Immediately he rose up before them, and took up that which he was laying on, and departed to his house, glorifying God.
Luke 5:21-25

Whoever's sins you forgive, they are forgiven them. Whoever's sins you retain, they have been retained."
John 20:23

The Biblical reason why Jesus came is this:

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, Because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim release to the captives, Recovering of sight to the blind, To deliver those who are crushed, And to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."
Luke 4:18-19

He said to them, "Let's go elsewhere into the next towns, that I may preach there also, because for this reason I came forth."
Mark 1:38

But he said to them, "I must preach the good news of the Kingdom of God to the other cities also. For this reason I have been sent."
Luke 4:43

And the reason why Jesus died:

For to this end Christ died, rose, and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.
Romans 14:9

Unfortunately it seems that many modern “Christians” are hypocrite and don’t really care about what Jesus preached and the message is rejected and people are rather focused on own doctrines and habits.

It is no wonder why atheism is spreading, “Christians” unfortunately have themselves rejected Jesus and his teachings, so it is no miracle, if other people also do the same. I think Christians should repent and return to Jesus, if they truly want to be disciples of Jesus.

Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, "If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
John 8:31-32

The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
John 6:63