Why Did Jesus Come? Did He Actually Need To?

[jimmyjimmy]

God had laid out the law to His people. He gave them prophets, priests, and kings. He gave them a sacrificial system to cover their sins. . . . The entire system was in place, if only one chose to obey it.

If men have the ability to choose God, and choose to follow His ways, why Christ? The old covenant fit the bill in every way that most people speak of the new one, right? Many say, "Follow the rules, and you are good with God. Don't and you are cut off".

If "Choose this day whom you will serve. . ." is all that's needed, again, why Christ? Why did mankind need something more that what God had already provided?

 

[Eryk]

Hebrews 10

1The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship.
2Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins.
4It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
5Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:
“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but a body you prepared for me;
6with burnt offerings and sin offerings
you were not pleased.
7Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written about me in the scroll—
I have come to do your will, my God.’ ”a
8First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them”—though they were offered in accordance with the law.
9Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second.
10And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

 

[SkyWriting]

God had laid out the law to His people. He gave them prophets, priests, and kings. He gave them a sacrificial system to cover their sins. . . . The entire system was in place, if only one chose to obey it.

If men have the ability to choose God, and choose to follow His ways, why Christ? The old covenant fit the bill in every way that most people speak of the new one, right? Many say, "Follow the rules, and you are good with God. Don't and you are cut off".

If "Choose this day whom you will serve. . ." is all that's needed, again, why Christ? Why did mankind need something more that what God had already provided?

God prefers Faith. Believing is the Law is too easy.

 

[stuart lawrence]

God had laid out the law to His people. He gave them prophets, priests, and kings. He gave them a sacrificial system to cover their sins. . . . The entire system was in place, if only one chose to obey it.

If men have the ability to choose God, and choose to follow His ways, why Christ? The old covenant fit the bill in every way that most people speak of the new one, right? Many say, "Follow the rules, and you are good with God. Don't and you are cut off".

If "Choose this day whom you will serve. . ." is all that's needed, again, why Christ? Why did mankind need something more that what God had already provided?

Jesus came to preach to sinners, not the righteous( he said)
I guess a lot of Christians today wouldn't have wanted to listen to him as that was the case.

 

[Adstar]

God had laid out the law to His people. He gave them prophets, priests, and kings. He gave them a sacrificial system to cover their sins. . . . The entire system was in place, if only one chose to obey it.

If men have the ability to choose God, and choose to follow His ways, why Christ? The old covenant fit the bill in every way that most people speak of the new one, right? Many say, "Follow the rules, and you are good with God. Don't and you are cut off".

If "Choose this day whom you will serve. . ." is all that's needed, again, why Christ? Why did mankind need something more that what God had already provided?

The Law was given to make man aware they could not do the law.. The Law was to convict people.. To convince people of their imperfection and inability to be good.. The law sets honest people up to embrace the solution that Jesus came to provide,, That being the atonement for ones sins..

So Jesus had to come to bring about the Way that men Could be Redeemed.. Without His coming and succeeding in His mission all people would be condemned to eternal destruction..

 

[jimmyjimmy]

God prefers Faith. Believing is the Law is too easy.

So, the problem was that Israel obeyed the law, but it was to easy for them to do so, so God made things much more difficult. Everyone was getting A's so he made the test more difficult. Got it. Which version of the OT do you read, BTW?

 

[bling]

The Law was given to make man aware they could not do the law.. The Law was to convict people.. To convince people of their imperfection and inability to be good.. The law sets honest people up to embrace the solution that Jesus came to provide,, That being the atonement for ones sins..

So Jesus had to come to bring about the Way that men Could be Redeemed.. Without His coming and succeeding in His mission all people would be condemned to eternal destruction..

I really enjoy the first paragraph and agree with it.

I have issue with: “Without His coming and succeeding in His mission all people would be condemned to eternal destruction”

First off: can God and did God forgive some sinners prior to Christ going to the cross?

Also, Ro. 3:25 teaches something different 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement,

through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished

What sins and what sinners were left “unpunished” beforehand (prior to what)?

Ro. 3:25 is contrasting the way sins are handles after the cross (providing “punishment” which is really discipline) with prior to the cross when the sins of repentant followers were forgiven by God yet not punished (disciplined). Forgiven sinners prior to the cross were not disciplined and after the cross forgiven sinners are disciplined for all the good reasons of disciplining.

 

[stuart lawrence]

I really enjoy the first paragraph and agree with it.

I have issue with: “Without His coming and succeeding in His mission all people would be condemned to eternal destruction”

First off: can God and did God forgive some sinners prior to Christ going to the cross?

Also, Ro. 3:25 teaches something different 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement,

through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished

What sins and what sinners were left “unpunished” beforehand (prior to what)?

Ro. 3:25 is contrasting the way sins are handles after the cross (providing “punishment” which is really discipline) with prior to the cross when the sins of repentant followers were forgiven by God yet not punished (disciplined). Forgiven sinners prior to the cross were not disciplined and after the cross forgiven sinners are disciplined for all the good reasons of disciplining.

Rom3:25 refers to past sins committed by those under the OC.
No one could be truly righteous under the law, therefore Christ died for those who lived under the OC as well as the new one

 

[bling]

Rom3:25 refers to past sins committed by those under the OC.
No one could be truly righteous under the law, therefore Christ died for those who lived under the OC as well as the new one

What chapter and verse do you have for that idea?
There is Old testament scripture talking about God forgiving sinners with no mention of Christ.
Paul in Ro. 3:25 is giving a contrast between the way repentant sinners were forgiven and handled under the OT and NT, so if they are both handles by Christ than there is no contrast.
Also if you say Christ was punished (and/or disciplined) for sins prior and after who is doing the punishing (disciplining)?

 

[stuart lawrence]

What chapter and verse do you have for that idea?
There is Old testament scripture talking about God forgiving sinners with no mention of Christ.
Paul in Ro. 3:25 is giving a contrast between the way repentant sinners were forgiven and handled under the OT and NT, so if they are both handles by Christ than there is no contrast.
Also if you say Christ was punished (and/or disciplined) for sins prior and after who is doing the punishing (disciplining)?

Christ paid the price for the sin of those under the OC.
To be TRULY righteous under the law requires perfect obedience of it. Hence David's words:

Do not bring your servant into judgement, for no one living is righteous before you
Psalms143:2

 

[stuart lawrence]

In I Peter 3:18-20 Peter tells us when Christ was put to death in the body he went and made proclamation of the message to those who had previously died.
Christ went to paradise, not heaven.
No one gets to heaven without Christ's death at Calvary. NO ONE

 

[Adstar]

I really enjoy the first paragraph and agree with it.

I have issue with: “Without His coming and succeeding in His mission all people would be condemned to eternal destruction”

First off: can God and did God forgive some sinners prior to Christ going to the cross?

Also, Ro. 3:25 teaches something different 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement,

through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished

What sins and what sinners were left “unpunished” beforehand (prior to what)?

Ro. 3:25 is contrasting the way sins are handles after the cross (providing “punishment” which is really discipline) with prior to the cross when the sins of repentant followers were forgiven by God yet not punished (disciplined). Forgiven sinners prior to the cross were not disciplined and after the cross forgiven sinners are disciplined for all the good reasons of disciplining.

Yes Jesus did forgive sins before He obtained the Atonement But the very next day or maybe even the very next hour after Jesus forgave them their sins they would have sinned again.. Because.. Well we are all sinners and as far as i know people sin every day.. The Atonement of Jesus once believed and trusted in obtains for us forgivness for our sins each and every day for every sin we shall ever sin in our lives in our current faulty flesh..

As for Romans::

Romans 3: KJV
25 "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;"

What version of the Bible did you quote ?

 

[bling]

Christ paid the price for the sin of those under the OC.
To be TRULY righteous under the law requires perfect obedience of it. Hence David's words:

Do not bring your servant into judgement, for no one living is righteous before you
Psalms143:2

Right, no one can follow the Law, but they can turn and rely on God's mercy, Love, charity and power to forgive them. We do not want to be "judged" by our behavior, but we will humbly accept God's pure charity.
Did God forgive David without any mention of Christ?

 

[bling]

In I Peter 3:18-20 Peter tells us when Christ was put to death in the body he went and made proclamation of the message to those who had previously died.
Christ went to paradise, not heaven.
No one gets to heaven without Christ's death at Calvary. NO ONE

So did Christ go to hell to talk with Moses and Elijah?

 

[bling]

Yes Jesus did forgive sins before He obtained the Atonement But the very next day or maybe even the very next hour after Jesus forgave them their sins they would have sinned again.. Because.. Well we are all sinners and as far as i know people sin every day.. The Atonement of Jesus once believed and trusted in obtains for us forgivness for our sins each and every day for every sin we shall ever sin in our lives in our current faulty flesh..

As for Romans::

Romans 3: KJV
25 "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;"

What version of the Bible did you quote ?

Where do you get the idea: “before He obtained the Atonement”?

Did Christ obtain atonement or do we obtain Atonement?

So you see Christ’s forgiveness as just being for living individual’s past sins so if they sin further they will not be forgiveness again, unless Christ shows up?

Were there people who never new Christ forgiven in the Old Testament?


I do not speak Victorian English so the KJV is not the best for us to use in this case. Do you want to go back to the Greek?

I think I was using the NIV, but most multiple scholar translations are very similar.

NKJV whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,

RSV whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins;

HCSB God presented Him as a propitiation through faith in His blood, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His restraint God passed over the sins previously committed.

 

[-V-]

God had laid out the law to His people. He gave them prophets, priests, and kings. He gave them a sacrificial system to cover their sins. . . . The entire system was in place, if only one chose to obey it.

If men have the ability to choose God, and choose to follow His ways, why Christ? The old covenant fit the bill in every way that most people speak of the new one, right? Many say, "Follow the rules, and you are good with God. Don't and you are cut off".

If "Choose this day whom you will serve. . ." is all that's needed, again, why Christ? Why did mankind need something more that what God had already provided?

You seem to think that choosing God precludes being dependent on Him for salvation. That is an utterly false dichotomy.

Someone is drowning at sea. They will die if someone doesn't throw them a life preserver or flotation device. They are completely reliant on someone else to throw that preserver to them, but they also have to choose to grab on to it.

Christ's atoning sacrifice is the lifeline that God threw to us, we are completely dependent on that act of God. But we still have to choose to grab on to it.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

You seem to think that choosing God precludes being dependent on Him for salvation. That is an utterly false dichotomy.

Someone is drowning at sea. They will die if someone doesn't throw them a life preserver or flotation device. They are completely reliant on someone else to throw that preserver to them, but they also have to choose to grab on to it.

Christ's atoning sacrifice is the lifeline that God threw to us, we are completely dependent on that act of God. But we still have to choose to grab on to it.

Ever try throwing a lifeline to a dead man?

 

[-V-]

Ever try throwing a lifeline to a dead man?

Sure, cuz spiritually dead is 100% identical to physically dead. Good point. I should have realized that.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Right, no one can follow the Law, but they can turn and rely on God's mercy, Love, charity and power to forgive them. We do not want to be "judged" by our behavior, but we will humbly accept God's pure charity.
Did God forgive David without any mention of Christ?

They can't because they won't.

 

[stuart lawrence]

So did Christ go to hell to talk with Moses and Elijah?

He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption
Acts2:31