Why did Jesus have to die?
- Thread starter iBrian
- Start date
S
soleil10
Guest
.
I am reading the bible.
There are two prophecies in the bible about Jesus. One of glory and one of suffering. It depended on how fallen humanity was going to receive Christ.
Jesus cried over Jerusalem for rejecting those God had sent including himself.
Fine...show me the prophecies, the scriptures in the Bible that lead you to this conclusion. I want to see.
You make me smile. I am comfortable in my relationship with G!d, seems the feeling is mutual as well.
S
soleil10
Guest
If it is God's responsibility to send the Messiah, it is man's responsibility to believe in him. Unfortunately, by not accepting Jesus, the Israelites failed to fulfill their responsibility; they did not fulfill God's primary prophecies for the Messiah's coming which are in Isaiah 9,11,and 60 and Luke 1:31-33, but to the contrary, carried out the alternative or second prophecy of the of the suffering Messiah, In Isiah 53.
In Addition John the Baptist failed to support Jesus. Just before John the Baptist died in prison, he sent his disciples to Jesus to ask,"...Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another" Mt 11:3. This verse proves beyond a any shadow that John did not realy believe in Jesus.
First of all, all passages came to be. The Israelites not withstanding, had nothing to do with the prophecies that God declared would come to pass. And so they did.
Second, John was about to lose his head...he was a man in fear, and turmoil. He just wanted re-assurance that everything he'd done and said was right or spot on. He wanted God to say to him, "well done faithful servant". And God did just that...
I don't know about you, but if God told me I did it right, I don't care how I'd die. I'd be exstatic knowing I was right with the Lord.
Perhaps you see the glass half empty...but as far as I'm concerned, there is at least four ounces of water for this thirsty soul...
S
soleil10
Guest
I do not think that ending up rejected and abandonned by every one including his first disciple and crucified on a cross represents the prophecy of glory.
John the Baptist denied that he was Elijah (Jn 1:21). Jesus told the people that John the Baptist was the return of Elijah (Mt 17:10-13).
Jesus was proclaiming himself the Messiah. He told the Jewish people that he was the Son of God. They thought that he was simply a young man from Nazareth. They had not yet heard any news of Elijah coming, so they asked "How could Jesus of Nazateth be the Son of God?
Jesus disciples where asking Jesus, "...then why do the scribes say that first Elijah must come?" (Mt17-10)
Jesus responded that Elijah had already come. Jesus himself knew that the people would not easily accept him,"..if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come' (Mt 11-14). But since John himself denied it, whom would the people of Israel believe ?
John the baptist was famous and respected. Jesus was raised in a humble carpenter's home.
God gave John the Baptist a direct revelation. He did testify to Jesus intially but did not testify to Jesus throughout his life. He should have and attended Jesus as his main disciple. However, we cannot find any instance in the bible where John the Baptist actually served Jesus.
Jesus was indignant when John the Baptist sent his own disciples asking him if he was the Messiah and answered quite judmentally, "...blessed is he who takes no offense at me" (MT 11:6). indicating that despite Israel's great respect for John, John had already failed his mission.
Jesus also said,"..among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he" (MT 11:11).
God sent John the Baptist as the greatest of prophets, for he was to serve the Messiah and testify to him before all the people. But he was a dismal failure in fulfilling his responsibility.
John the Baptist denied that he was Elijah (Jn 1:21). Jesus told the people that John the Baptist was the return of Elijah (Mt 17:10-13).
Jesus was proclaiming himself the Messiah. He told the Jewish people that he was the Son of God. They thought that he was simply a young man from Nazareth. They had not yet heard any news of Elijah coming, so they asked "How could Jesus of Nazateth be the Son of God?
Jesus disciples where asking Jesus, "...then why do the scribes say that first Elijah must come?" (Mt17-10)
Jesus responded that Elijah had already come. Jesus himself knew that the people would not easily accept him,"..if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come' (Mt 11-14). But since John himself denied it, whom would the people of Israel believe ?
John the baptist was famous and respected. Jesus was raised in a humble carpenter's home.
God gave John the Baptist a direct revelation. He did testify to Jesus intially but did not testify to Jesus throughout his life. He should have and attended Jesus as his main disciple. However, we cannot find any instance in the bible where John the Baptist actually served Jesus.
Jesus was indignant when John the Baptist sent his own disciples asking him if he was the Messiah and answered quite judmentally, "...blessed is he who takes no offense at me" (MT 11:6). indicating that despite Israel's great respect for John, John had already failed his mission.
Jesus also said,"..among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he" (MT 11:11).
God sent John the Baptist as the greatest of prophets, for he was to serve the Messiah and testify to him before all the people. But he was a dismal failure in fulfilling his responsibility.
Perhaps, but then he was a voice in the wilderness. He also allegedly leaped for joy in his mother's womb at the arrival of Miriam. Maybe he hurt, because he was a mere human, and had to know he wasn't off his rocker. And maybe Jesus reassured him. John failed at nothing. He baptised the Lord, and all witnessed Father/Son/Spirit together, because of John's faith.
BTW, he is not the least...
S
soleil10
Guest
In order to prepare the people of Israel to have faith in Jesus, God gave many testimonies to John's parents, Zechariah and Elisabeth, who were representatives of Judaism at that time. God continually worked miracles so that the people would accept that he was directly working in the conception and birth of John the Baptist. Undoubtedly, John was told by his parents about his being related to Jesus,and, he must have received mny revelations drectly from God.
Yet, despite all of this preparation, John the Baptist failed because of his disbelief which led not only to his individual loss, but also to the disbelief of most of the people and ultimately to Jesus'Crucifixion.
Yet, despite all of this preparation, John the Baptist failed because of his disbelief which led not only to his individual loss, but also to the disbelief of most of the people and ultimately to Jesus'Crucifixion.
John asked a question. He failed at nothing. He sought reassurance. He was a human being.
Faithfulservant
Well-Known Member
Here is the answer as simply as I can put it..
The consequence of the first sin was death. Not only in that Man would die but that God clothed Adam and Eve in skins from animals that He Himself killed. That sacrifice was the first death.. to "cover" the sins of Man... great symbolism here...
Further along.. a blood sacrifice was needed to atone for or cover the sins of Gods chosen people... the people that called Him their God. They sacrificed once a year for the sins for that year for the whole people on the holy day Yom Kippur which means "covering"
By no means belittle that day or make it less than it should be because God was present during that ceremony in the holy of holies where the ark of covenant was present...
on Yom Kippur the covering of sins is what made God approachable... All the sins were placed on the carcass of the sacrifice or the "scapegoat" and they would dispose of it.
So we see that there needs to be a sacrifice for these sins... if the word of God is truth.
Jesus being the Son of God ... the lamb of God pure and sinless.. was a sacrifice once and for all.. for ALL sins.. there doesnt need to be a yearly sacrifice God provided for Himself a lamb to take on the sins of the world.
And the beauty of it is that no longer do we need to do anything but accept His sacrifice in order to approach God. The veil that kept God and man seperate was lifted when Jesus was on the cross and that is why He had to die. So we could have a relationshio with God. Jesus's blood covered all of our sins.
Its an open door. But you have to open it when He knocks.
The consequence of the first sin was death. Not only in that Man would die but that God clothed Adam and Eve in skins from animals that He Himself killed. That sacrifice was the first death.. to "cover" the sins of Man... great symbolism here...
Further along.. a blood sacrifice was needed to atone for or cover the sins of Gods chosen people... the people that called Him their God. They sacrificed once a year for the sins for that year for the whole people on the holy day Yom Kippur which means "covering"
By no means belittle that day or make it less than it should be because God was present during that ceremony in the holy of holies where the ark of covenant was present...
on Yom Kippur the covering of sins is what made God approachable... All the sins were placed on the carcass of the sacrifice or the "scapegoat" and they would dispose of it.
So we see that there needs to be a sacrifice for these sins... if the word of God is truth.
Jesus being the Son of God ... the lamb of God pure and sinless.. was a sacrifice once and for all.. for ALL sins.. there doesnt need to be a yearly sacrifice God provided for Himself a lamb to take on the sins of the world.
And the beauty of it is that no longer do we need to do anything but accept His sacrifice in order to approach God. The veil that kept God and man seperate was lifted when Jesus was on the cross and that is why He had to die. So we could have a relationshio with God. Jesus's blood covered all of our sins.
Its an open door. But you have to open it when He knocks.
S
soleil10
Guest
Jesus could forgive sins before the cross. Even after the cross all humans are still born with the original sins.
The cross does not erase the original sin. It is transmitted from generation through generation through the blood lineage.
After Adam and Eve fell, the first thing they did was to cover their sexual organ in shame. What happened, why where they ashamed of their sexual organ.
Concerning John the Baptist in response to Quahom, John the Baptist did recognize who Jesus was and baptised him. Then he did not follow Jesus anymore and went his own way. He was dealing with the marital affairs of Herod while the Messiah was on the earth and made it very difficult for Jesus to build a new foundation just on his own. If he had united with Jesus, it would have been so much easier for people to accept Jesus. Unfortunately, they reject him.
Jesus said it well when all alone on the cross he said. Father forgive them. They do not know what they are doing. The thief on the right, a criminal was the only one to testify to Jesus. Jesus told him that he will be in paradise with him. Even Peter, his first disciple denied knowing Jesus.
What a sad situation
The cross does not erase the original sin. It is transmitted from generation through generation through the blood lineage.
After Adam and Eve fell, the first thing they did was to cover their sexual organ in shame. What happened, why where they ashamed of their sexual organ.
Concerning John the Baptist in response to Quahom, John the Baptist did recognize who Jesus was and baptised him. Then he did not follow Jesus anymore and went his own way. He was dealing with the marital affairs of Herod while the Messiah was on the earth and made it very difficult for Jesus to build a new foundation just on his own. If he had united with Jesus, it would have been so much easier for people to accept Jesus. Unfortunately, they reject him.
Jesus said it well when all alone on the cross he said. Father forgive them. They do not know what they are doing. The thief on the right, a criminal was the only one to testify to Jesus. Jesus told him that he will be in paradise with him. Even Peter, his first disciple denied knowing Jesus.
What a sad situation
Saltmeister
The Dangerous Dinner
Well, that's the thing. I believe God already accepted people even before Jesus was crucified, meaning that God didn't need Jesus to die to accept people.
This is what I think is wrong with the "Jesus had to die so that God could forgive us" idea. I personally don't think that was the reason why he was crucified.
It was society, not God, that rejected people. God already accepted these people. The purpose of the crucifixion was to show that the moral standards imposed on people by society was morally bankrupt. It was morally invalid because it sentenced an innocent man, Jesus, to death.
The New Testament is a story about the problems associated with a philosophy or mentality where people are taught to follow rules and traditions for the sake of following rules and traditions without questioning why they do it. It is about people taking something as Law or Gospel without putting much thought or reasoning to it.
God's concern throughout the Bible has been about Justice and righteousness. Justice, however, isn't about following rules. It is not about following laws, and nor is it about punishing people.
The reason why people make laws is to establish order. The reason why we punish people is to discourage them from breaking the law.
But Justice isn't about making laws and it isn't about punishing people. Sure, you want to stop people from doing the wrong thing, but if you have to keep making laws and punishing people you are not dealing with the problem. Sin, crime and wrongdoing is the effect, but lack of laws and punishment is not the cause. People sin and commit crimes for a range of reasons and it has nothing to do with lack of laws or light punishments.
Furthermore, Justice itself isn't about stopping people from doing the wrong thing. Justice is about resolutions. Justice is about resolving the damage that crimes from wrongdoing. It is about fixing the actual problem.
The problem with what was happening back there was that people were following rules and laws and punishing people just for the sake of doing it. They were robots. They were slaves of ideology and slogans. They were dead, cardboard people that just did what the elders and religious leaders told them to do.
While yes, Judaism was involved, but I don't believe this crucifixion thing here is even specifically about Judaism. Some will invoke the so-called replacement theology, but if you do, I think you're missing the point.
What Jesus and the apostles said could very well apply to just about any religion or society, even Christianity itself. Don't think that just because Christianity is the religion of the crucified martyr that Christianity is immune from the criticisms laid against religion and society.
No, Christianity is included in that category because Christianity itself is a religion and Christianity has often had an influence in society. Christianity has had its own share of "the killing of the prophets." We have killed the prophets too because we were corrupted by the power that came from being considered sources of morality, and by doing so, ourselves caused injustice.
In much the same way that the purpose of the Law was Justice, achieving morality through laws, the purpose of the Gospel was freedom from fake morality by dissociation from improper and incorrectly applied legalism. It took a man to martyr himself to show that not all things just could be achieved through laws and that even with "good laws," things can go astray. Actually, laws are only as good as the people who follow them. Law is never an indicator of the morality of any society. Only the collective judgments of the people constitute the morality in that society.
Just as people missed the point of the Law, people have also missed the point of the Gospel.
Christians (especially the fundamentalists) have insisted that you must accept Jesus as your saviour, admit that you have sinned, and that Jesus died for you on the cross so that God can forgive you.
This is not only the slogan of fundamentalist Christianity, but the way that it is expressed and projected out into wider society, at friends and relatives, makes it sound like a Law. It is presented in such a way that it sounds like you're sinning against God to not accept Jesus as a saviour. It's like civil disobedience. You're a divine criminal if you don't accept.
This is what I think people don't seem to realise. By saying "you must accept Jesus as your saviour," you are essentially making rules. That is equivalent to gathering together as a mob to stone a woman for cheating on her husband. And you know what Jesus had to say about that . . .
It is Justice based on laws.
But hey, isn't the crucifixion about freeing us from laws? If so, why enslave us to another Law? Doesn't that principle contradict itself?
. . . and that's what I'm saying. Jesus was wrongly condemned by the Law, the Law had him crucified and by condemning an innocent man lost its legitimacy. People are missing the point of the Gospel, just like they missed the point of the Law. If you want to be free from the Law, you don't create another Law, because that is just as bad.
This problem is characteristic of fundamentalist Christianity, which of course, does not represent the whole of Christianity, but the loudest part of it (ie. it's mostly Protestant Christianity, I hear), yet the other sides of Christianity (ie. Catholic and Orthodox) often aren't much better because they have their own rules and traditions.
People getting stoned for stealing or cheating on spouses didn't just happen in first-century Israel. It still happens today in Muslim countries. It's people missing the point of the Law, following rules and traditions for the sake of following them. As I said, Christianity isn't immune. We have people arguing over the Trinity. We have people charging violently into abortion clinics killing the doctors and others who are involved in the performance of abortions. We have people spreading hatred against homosexuals.
I have made references to Judaism, to Christanity and Islam, but really, it isn't about any particular religion. It's about the phenomenon of people following rules and traditions for the sake of following them. If you're doing it for the sake of religious identity or community, that's fine with me, but if you're going to do it because you're fighting a war against heresy or claim that God will smite you if you don't do as you're told, I think that's wrong.
Jewish Law isn't the only Law in the world and the Christian Gospel isn't the only Gospel in the world. Jesus Christ wasn't the only Christ in the world. There are many Christs, many who fought against oppression and persecution and died as martyrs. There is a Scottish Christ (William Wallace) and a French Christ (Joan of Arc), each fighting against English hegemony in the 14th and 15th centuries, a Negro Christ (Martin Luther King), a Chinese Christ (Dr Sun Yatsen), American Christ (Jesse James), British Christ (Guy Fawkes), Australian Christ (Ned Kelly), etc.
Jewish Law and the Christian Gospel are just archetypes. Jesus Christ was just an archetype. It's like Gautama Buddha. He wasn't the only Buddha. There were many more of them before and after.