whywontgodhealamputees.com

Main Discussion Zone => General Religious Discussion => Topic started by: Add Homonym on December 09, 2013, 12:24:58 AM

Title: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 09, 2013, 12:24:58 AM
This isn't a trick question, or one that necessarily can't be answered in a sane manner.

Paul argues that Abraham got to heaven by faith, not law. Abe was ordered to kill his son, by Elohim, so he did so. This is the type of faith needed to get to be with God.

However, the synoptic gospels, written by Jewish Christians, seem to be of a view that you can get to heaven by following Jewish law in a different way.

The parable of Lazarus in Luke 16, documents a supposed case of a Jew going to heaven because he was poor and neglected:

[22] And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
[23] And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

In pre-Christian times, it was widely believed by Pharisees that you got to heaven, if you were righteous. The logic and scripture for these beliefs has been destroyed by time; not propagated by Pauline Christians. We have evidence of this from the Ethiopian church.

At the end of the parable, there is the ambiguous statement:

[30] And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
[31] And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

The peculiarity of this statement in Luke, is that you have been warned so clearly by Moses and "the prophets" that you will go to hell, that you don't need any more warning. (Of course there is no warning at all in the O.T, about going to hell or hades. It just says you will go to sheol, no matter who you are.)

In the statement above, I left out some logic. You've been warned clearly that you will go to hell, IF you don't follow Jewish law. So, where do you go, if you do follow Jewish law? Perhaps to some other undiscovered place... or heaven, dare I say.

Christians say you can't go to the kingdom without Jesus, or unless you are a child, or unless God just decides to send you to heaven because you never heard of him, or unless you were good. There is an extensive list of exceptions.

The sneaky thing about the warning that Moses and the prophets have given, is that you have been warned in the O.T, that bad things will happen to you, if you disobey God, but not to any real degree. It's like a parent telling a child not to eat a stash of jelly beans because they are bad for them, but secretly hiding the fact that it's full of cyanide. Children are known to have little impulse control, so when the child eats a jelly bean, and starts to die, the parent can say "There, I told you it would be bad for you, but you disobeyed me." It sounds very like the Adam and Eve story, so it's not without precedent.

The problem is: why is Jesus telling an audience that Lazarus is a candidate for the kingdom of heaven, just because he is poor? Isn't this such a bad way of telling the moral, that he really should be shot? Carrying the jelly bean analogy further. It's like:

The ancient mythology of the jelly beans is that if you eat too many, they are bad for you. Then a great teacher comes along, and tells a story about how someone who didn't eat too many of them, was perfectly OK. He then leaves the jar of jelly beans in front of the children, and says "These are dietarily bad for you, and cause tooth decay, but they taste really good."

Maybe Jesus had to be crucified, because he was such a misleading teacher?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Nam on December 09, 2013, 11:03:21 AM
Or that he was an idiot. Could be many reasons.

;)

-Nam
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 11, 2013, 06:05:37 AM
I think this question is the wrong question - rather it should be 'how di the apostles use the death of Jesus on the Cross? It's OK, for Christians to look at it in the original way but it is clear that there is no god orchestrating life at all so it is clear that the events that took place had to be reacted to after the event.

In this case, an itinerant preacher gets put to death by the Romans  as he was seen as a leader of people who might cause problems in Jerusalem during th4e festival. the disciples saw their leader go  and either really experienced visions of him or invented them and, using the Septuagint as their source of inspiration, created the story believed by Christians today.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Mrjason on December 11, 2013, 06:25:08 AM
...or he wasn't crucified at all but saulos needed a messiah to point to in order to convert people to his new version of judaism having failed as a rabbi himself.

Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 11, 2013, 07:35:43 AM
...or he wasn't crucified at all but saulos needed a messiah to point to in order to convert people to his new version of judaism having failed as a rabbi himself.

I'm not so sure of that. Paul appears to not know any of the stories about Jesus' life at all apart from the words at the last supper. He doesn't really ever mention anything about the earthly Jesus in his letters yet we have gospels full of stories of Jesus' earthly life. For me, I find it hard to conceive the idea that all the stories in the gospels are made up.

I do think some of the gospels is invented or, in some instances, the story is elaborated. We can see this when we compare mark and Matthew - Matthew embellishes Mark's accounts with much more detail. Given the time that has elapsed since the death of Jesus when Matthew is writing in the 70s, it is extremely unlikely Matthew has found a person who can tell him more detail.

Nonetheless, I think some of the basic accounts that Mark has have to have been based on a real person even if subsequently additional stories are made up to fit the problems at the time of writing.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: The Gawd on December 11, 2013, 08:02:18 AM
I'm not so sure of that. Paul appears to not know any of the stories about Jesus' life at all apart from the words at the last supper. He doesn't really ever mention anything about the earthly Jesus in his letters yet we have gospels full of stories of Jesus' earthly life. For me, I find it hard to conceive the idea that all the stories in the gospels are made up.

I do think some of the gospels is invented or, in some instances, the story is elaborated. We can see this when we compare mark and Matthew - Matthew embellishes Mark's accounts with much more detail. Given the time that has elapsed since the death of Jesus when Matthew is writing in the 70s, it is extremely unlikely Matthew has found a person who can tell him more detail.

Nonetheless, I think some of the basic accounts that Mark has have to have been based on a real person even if subsequently additional stories are made up to fit the problems at the time of writing.

I disagree. From what I have read, literally ALL of the evidence for even a historical Jesus seems to be spurious at best, and require you to assume Jesus existed. I read Bart Ehrman's book because he is one that I somewhat trust and not a  theist... I came out of that experience more convinced that no Jesus ever existed. His arguments reeked of theistic reasoning. I suggest reading it and responses to it. The responses confirm what I was thinking during the reading.

Has anyone to your knowledge put forward a convincing argument for Jesus' existence? If so I will read that. At this point I remain unconvinced because I cannot put much faith in the bible.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Graybeard on December 11, 2013, 08:20:28 AM
This isn't a trick question, or one that necessarily can't be answered in a sane manner.

Paul argues that Abraham got to heaven by faith, not law. Abe was ordered to kill his son, by Elohim, so he did so. This is the type of faith needed to get to be with God.
Here Paul directly contradicts Jesus:
Joh:3:12: If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
Joh:3:13: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
Joh:3:14: And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Joh:3:15: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh:3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.[/quote]

No one in the OT went to heaven.
Quote
In pre-Christian times, it was widely believed by Pharisees that you got to heaven,
Paul was a Pharisee, so he was preaching in his own cause (again). I am unsure when in Pharasitical Judaism you got to heaven though.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 11, 2013, 08:25:14 AM
Because he had to sacrifice himself to himself because of an incident he caused making his creation flawed because he let it happen.

Wait...what?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 11, 2013, 10:07:17 AM
to get the guilt flowing before passing the donation plate.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Mrjason on December 11, 2013, 11:09:15 AM
<snip>Nonetheless, I think some of the basic accounts that Mark has have to have been based on a real person even if subsequently additional stories are made up to fit the problems at the time of writing.

Why? If some of the story is made up isn't it entirely possible that all of it is made up?
Surely if the story were true it would be internally consistent enough not to warrant subsequent fabrication to make it work.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Truth OT on December 11, 2013, 11:36:35 AM
Paul argues that Abraham got to heaven by faith, not law. Abe was ordered to kill his son, by Elohim, so he did so. This is the type of faith needed to get to be with God.

AH, I'm not sure Paul made the case for Abraham getting into Heaven. As I have read thru the OT, I fail to see even 1 promise concerning Heaven for those who followed God's law and were considered righteous. The whole idea of a Heavenly inheritance seemed to be a new concept 1st mentioned in the gospels that was limited by Jesus to those that were considered his.

However, the synoptic gospels, written by Jewish Christians, seem to be of a view that you can get to heaven by following Jewish law in a different way.

The parable of Lazarus in Luke 16, documents a supposed case of a Jew going to heaven because he was poor and neglected:

[22] And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
[23] And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

The parable in Luke 16 don't mention Heaven at all though. It instead seems to reference the Hellenized view of Hades. Additionally, it never makes the case that the beggar, Lazarus, was in fact a Jew. What it does tell the reader is that in the end, the rich man found himself in agony outside of the favored position of Abrahman while Lazarus got to be in that favored position the rich man saw as his own inheritance.

In pre-Christian times, it was widely believed by Pharisees that you got to heaven, if you were righteous. The logic and scripture for these beliefs has been destroyed by time; not propagated by Pauline Christians. We have evidence of this from the Ethiopian church.

After the end of the Seluclid reign over the Jews in a post Maccabean war society, it is said that the sect of Pharisees arose as sort of a separatist group that was grass roots. This group is said to have emphasized scrict Torah adherance and unlike the priestly class Sadducee counterparts, the Pharisees advocated a literal bodily resurrection of the dead in a future Messianic "age to come" where the Jewish Messiah would reign. As far as I am aware, no mention of going to Heaven was a part of Pharisee beliefs. They seem to have believed that the Kingdom of Heaven was not in Heaven, but on Earth and would be ruled by the Jewish Messiah in the "age to come."

So yes, they did believe that admittance to the Kingdom of Heaven was granted to those (Jews) that practiced righteous, which in their eyes consisted of scrict adherance to the Torah (seeing it as divine), the affirmation of the resurrection of the dead, and believing in divine intervention in human affairs.

Christians say you can't go to the kingdom without Jesus, or unless you are a child, or unless God just decides to send you to heaven because you never heard of him, or unless you were good. There is an extensive list of exceptions.

It's quite sad how this is handled by believers. I find it hard to believe I considered myself intelligent and informed while I promoted these very ideas. I guess it was a clear case of how dogmatic convictions can cloud judgment and make one blind to reality.

As I look back and consider these things now, it becomes apparant how wrong I was because for starters, I like most believers didn't have a clue what the kingdom that those ancient Jews were referencing was very likely not the Heaven we believed in. It's almost unbelievable how many Christians don't realize how little Heaven is mentioned in the OT.

The problem is: why is Jesus telling an audience that Lazarus is a candidate for the kingdom of heaven, just because he is poor?

Great question. There really is no way to answer this other than make wild guesses. My guess is that it was written to spite those, the Jewish leaders and Pharisees that didn't accept Jesus as being the Messiah.

Maybe Jesus had to be crucified, because he was such a misleading teacher?

Back to the OP. Why did Jesus have to be crucified? What a question.

Was it because it was prophesied in the OT that the Messiah would be? NO
 or
Was it because Jesus claimed to be the Jewish Messiah, yet those most familiar with the writings about the Messiah(s) saw him, called BS, and in keeping with the Torah laws concerning false prophets, deemed him worthy of death by capital punishment? MAYBE
 or
Was the story a fabricated one based on an amaglamation of would be Messiahs and Jewish tradition? WHO KNOWS?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 11, 2013, 10:56:54 PM

AH, I'm not sure Paul made the case for Abraham getting into Heaven.

That's interesting. I assumed that Paul had reasoned a semi-faulty case that Abraham had gone to heaven, using the OT. But when I google for whether Abraham is in heaven, all I get is Christians quoting Paul's assertion that he went there.

One shrewd person noticed the parable of Lazarus, that Paul couldn't have read in Luke. It refers to the "Bosom of Abraham". Last time I tried to track down that expression, it went nowhere. I read in Robert Wright's book that the Parable of Lazarus was just a story, based on an Egyptian story.  It may have been going around in Pharisee circles, so perhaps Paul was not reasoning from OT, but utilizing the common urban legend that Abraham went to a heaven.

I was a bit vague about whether Lazarus was in heaven. As you point out, it's a kind of Hellenized storage tank, which is pre-resurrection. However, this has precedent in non-canonical texts. All you really have to do, is demonstrate prior belief, to justify the parable of Lazarus:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html
Enoch Chapter 22

Enoch 22:1 From there I proceeded to another spot, where I saw on the west a great and lofty mountain, a strong rock, and four delightful places.
Enoch 22:2 Internally it was deep, capacious, and very smooth; as smooth as if it had been rolled over: it was both deep and dark to behold.
Enoch 22:3 Then Raphael, one of the holy angels who were with me, answered and said, These are the delightful places where the spirits, the souls of the dead, will be collected; for them were they formed; and here will be collected all the souls of the sons of men.
Enoch 22:4 These places, in which they dwell, shall they occupy until the day of judgment, and until their appointed period.
Enoch 22:5 Their appointed period will be long, even until the great judgment. And I saw the spirits of the sons of men who were dead; and their voices reached to heaven, while they were accusing.
Enoch 22:6 Then I inquired of Raphael, an angel who was with me, and said, Whose spirit is that, the voice of which reaches to heaven, and accuses?
Enoch 22:7 He answered, saying, This is the spirit of Abel who was slain by Cain his brother; and who will accuse that brother, until his seed be destroyed from the face of the earth;
Enoch 22:8 Until his seed perish from the seed of the human race.
Enoch 22:9 At that time therefore I inquired respecting him, and respecting the general judgment, saying, Why is one separated from another? He answered, Three separations have been made between the spirits of the dead, and thus have the spirits of the righteous been separated.
Enoch 22:10 Namely, by a chasm, by water, and by light above it.
Enoch 22:11 And in the same way likewise are sinners separated when they die, and are buried in the earth; judgment not overtaking them in their lifetime.
Enoch 22:12 Here their souls are separated. Moreover, abundant is their suffering until the time of the great judgment, the castigation, and the torment of those who eternally execrate, whose souls are punished and bound there for ever.
Enoch 22:13 And thus has it been from the beginning of the world. Thus has there existed a separation between the souls of those who utter complaints, and of those who watch for their destruction, to slaughter them in the day of sinners.
Enoch 22:14 A receptacle of this sort has been formed for the souls of unrighteous men, and of sinners; of those who have completed crime, and associated with the impious, whom they resemble. Their souls shall not be annihilated in the day of judgment, neither shall they arise from this place. Then I blessed God,
Enoch 22:15 And said, Blessed by my Lord, the Lord of glory and of righteousness, who reigns over all for ever and for ever.


I can't really make out the logic of what is what, but clearly, everyone in this place, is awaiting judgment. I think there are 3 categories of person. Cat1 makes it's way to heaven. Cat2 gets judged and slain. Cat3 gets to stay in hell forever, because they eternally execrate(?).  Maybe they are just unrepentant sinners.

This page discusses the legitimacy of the Book of Enoch.
http://www.geocreationism.com/history/book-of-enoch-introduction.html
The writer is unsure of whether the OT was derived from it, or whether Enoch is midrash. The writer thinks that it is part of Pharisee oral law, and has been around since the beginning.

This ancient afterlife model is very similar to the situation in the parable, but makes no mention of Abraham. Perhaps Abe was inserted later. In any case, it shows that Pharisees believed in hell after death, and a judgement, later. (ALL WITHOUT JESUS, OF COURSE)

The Saduccees did not believe in judgement or resurrection, so they presumably kept the text out of the Jewish canon.

Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 14, 2013, 09:52:36 PM
Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.
Sin entered the world and the natural and observable order of things in our world and our universe can be likened to the first law of thermodynamics.  That energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed.  So when sin entered the world and continues to this day.  Each time, there is a payment that must be made for sin.  For example:  If I steal from you, you lose something and I get it.  If I destroy that thing, then I must pay for it, or insurance does, or you.....but someone has to pay for that item.
So in the big picture, when we all sin, the payment is stacking up.  Because God's plan for the universe is a plan for it to be sin free and perfect.  So Christ came into our world to pay for the sin of all who will believe in Him.  In the end, there will be a judgement day for those who do not believe.  They will make their own payment. 
- Patrick Henry
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 14, 2013, 10:28:33 PM
Patrick, you fail to realize that getting justice by sacrificing an innocent (apparently sinless) man is certainly not how a civilization should work.

You should also realize that "sin" often relates to almost anything most men do, i mean lets face it, men lust for women often, there will always be homosexuals, in all reality, its discrimination.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Willie on December 14, 2013, 10:40:05 PM
Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.

I don't think any modern judge would require or accept one man's punishment in payment for another man's crime. Nor do I think that any person of sound mind and good conscience could consider that "justice".
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Willie on December 14, 2013, 11:10:29 PM
Sin entered the world and the natural and observable order of things in our world and our universe can be likened to the first law of thermodynamics.  That energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed.  So when sin entered the world and continues to this day.  Each time, there is a payment that must be made for sin.  For example:  If I steal from you, you lose something and I get it.  If I destroy that thing, then I must pay for it, or insurance does, or you.....but someone has to pay for that item.
So in the big picture, when we all sin, the payment is stacking up.  Because God's plan for the universe is a plan for it to be sin free and perfect.  So Christ came into our world to pay for the sin of all who will believe in Him.  In the end, there will be a judgement day for those who do not believe.  They will make their own payment. 

Sin is neither matter nor energy. It is an idea. It cannot be meaningfully quantified or measured. Your equating it with matter and energy and asserting that it should be governed by the first LOT has no basis, neither empirical nor theoretical. It doesn't even qualify as a hypothesis, but is merely fantasy. Tell me, Patrick, if you covet your neighbor's wife, exactly how much sin is that, and what's the unit of measure? And since, according to you, sin can be neither created nor destroyed, where exactly did that sin come from? Did some other potential sinner have to commit less sin so that you could commit yours? And if you choose not to commit a sin, does someone else then have to commit more? Do you not see how absurd this is?

Did you really think that you could come here and convince us by dressing up your religious fantasies to make 'em look more "sciency"?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 14, 2013, 11:13:23 PM
Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.
Sin entered the world and the natural and observable order of things in our world and our universe can be likened to the first law of thermodynamics.  That energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed.  So when sin entered the world and continues to this day.  Each time, there is a payment that must be made for sin.  For example:  If I steal from you, you lose something and I get it.  If I destroy that thing, then I must pay for it, or insurance does, or you.....but someone has to pay for that item.
So in the big picture, when we all sin, the payment is stacking up.  Because God's plan for the universe is a plan for it to be sin free and perfect.  So Christ came into our world to pay for the sin of all who will believe in Him.  In the end, there will be a judgement day for those who do not believe.  They will make their own payment. 
- Patrick Henry

Well, first of all, welcome, Patrick Henry, even though I don't think the two of us are going to agree on much. Lets hope that you have more than one life to give this thread, though.

As a full-blown atheist who sees what you call "sin" as merely the byproduct of a less than perfectly evolved set of beings, living in a less than perfect world and in a less that perfect set of social situations, I see this "balance" thingy as yet another set of excuses for christians.

This payment deal: how can humans measure it? We're the ones doing it, how in the world are we supposed to measure it too? If I steal five bucks from you, you lose it. Now you said if I destroy it, than I have a debt. But what if I spend it? I get something else, like food. What if I eat the food. I get the energy, do I also destroy the five bucks and make my sin somehow worse? What if I steal it, feel bad, and give the five bucks to the Salvation Army? Am I even in that specific case, or did I make it worse somehow?

What if I stole five bucks from you, but you earned that five bucks by overcharging for a bag of popcorn? Do two wrongs make a right? What if, when I am running across the road to escape your attempt to get the money back I cause an accident, and a person injured in the crash goes to the hospital and while there being treated for non life threatening wounds, the doctor finds cancer and the medical community is able to save that persons life because they found it in time. Do I get any credit for doing something good?

We have no economy for sins. The bible doesn't describe one. It describes sins, yes, but there are no lessons about how to measure them, how to reconcile the sin books, how to figure out our sin taxes. As per your book, we are born into sin debt and it only gets worse with every breathe we take, because as much as your god loves us, he's still a bit piqued about the garden affair, something that he, since he is only omniscient, couldn't see coming. I have been told by other christians that if a person is not "saved" before they die, into the overheated basement they go. Which means my wonderfully warm and caring great grandmother, who carefully carried bugs out of her house instead of squishing them, is deep-frying even as we speak while some mass murderer who found JC three minutes before his execution is hanging around in heaven with Pat Boone and 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses.

Which means human sins, if measured and balanced and the cause of indebtedness and bought and old on the stock market and such, are horrible, horrible, horrible, while the game your god is playing is the ultimate frisbee of righteousness.

I prefer being an atheist. I don't have to steal five bucks to put in the collection plate on Sunday and I can measure right and wrong on a sliding scale, versus one where every sin is equally wrong, no matter how minor or major.

People aren't perfect. And a good way to keep them that way is to make up stuff and pretend its real. It gives folks even more ways to do it wrong.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: xyzzy on December 14, 2013, 11:29:40 PM
Patrick, welcome.

Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.
I'm not sure that this a good analogy. First, if justice was done, then there would be no more need for further justice. So, did Jesus atone for mankind's sins or not?

Taking your analogy further, other than Christianity, can you tell us of system of justice that condemns people to infinite torture for finite actions committed by others? Further, which justice system judges the majority of people in this planet as guilty without a trial, particularly when many would have no reason to be aware of this law?

Quote
Sin entered the world and the natural and observable order of things in our world and our universe can be likened to the first law of thermodynamics.  That energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed.  So when sin entered the world and continues to this day.  Each time, there is a payment that must be made for sin.  For example:  If I steal from you, you lose something and I get it.  If I destroy that thing, then I must pay for it, or insurance does, or you.....but someone has to pay for that item.
What, in your interpretation, is "sin"?

You mention the laws of thermodynamics by way of analogy. Does your god obey the natural laws as we understand them? If not, then how can you claim that "sin" is something that in any way has an analog to the laws of thermodynamics? You seem like reasonable fellow, I hope you won't do the science when it suits you but not when it doesn't thing.

Insurance, That's when you pay someone else to pay you back should you have a loss. With insurance you pay twice. Once for the item, once for the insurance. Also, even when aggregated, the money I might get back from insurance is not from some guilty party, it's from someone who is innocent of my loss. Or, is your analogy of insurance more akin to protection money as demanded from the mob?

So, back to sin. What is the payment for sin? Earlier you said that Jesus satisfied this matter with his death. Now he hasn't because I have to pay even though he paid? Pretty much a waste of his time then, wasn't it? What did Jesus achieve that everyone forever must continue to pay for his supposed payment? This is where I go "Huh?".

Quote
So in the big picture, when we all sin, the payment is stacking up.  Because God's plan for the universe is a plan for it to be sin free and perfect.

Still wondering what sin is and if I've never had an opportunity to be aware of the rules how you hold me accountable? Also, is your god omnipotent, omniscient and omni-benevolent? Apparently not seeing as (a) his plan as Jesus failed and (b) I'm supposed to pay because Jesus' sacrifice wasn't enough?

Quote
So Christ came into our world to pay for the sin of all who will believe in Him.  In the end, there will be a judgement day for those who do not believe.  They will make their own payment.

Oh, so Jesus came to pay, but it wasn't enough, even though he was god and now we mortals have to pay your god because his payment to himself wasn't sufficient?

That doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps you could clarify these contradictions? And welcome again.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 15, 2013, 12:42:28 AM
Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.
Sin entered the world and the natural and observable order of things in our world and our universe can be likened to the first law of thermodynamics.  That energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed.  So when sin entered the world and continues to this day.  Each time, there is a payment that must be made for sin.  For example:  If I steal from you, you lose something and I get it.  If I destroy that thing, then I must pay for it, or insurance does, or you.....but someone has to pay for that item.
So in the big picture, when we all sin, the payment is stacking up.  Because God's plan for the universe is a plan for it to be sin free and perfect.  So Christ came into our world to pay for the sin of all who will believe in Him.  In the end, there will be a judgement day for those who do not believe.  They will make their own payment. 
- Patrick Henry
So the first few times failed,when he kicked A&E out of the Garden,the flood and then the sacrifice of "Jesus" still not a perfect world,God is a fuck up. If he wanted a perfect world there would be no snake in the garden to begin with and A&E would have intelligence enough to know they were being swindled by a "talking snake"

 God is a failure from the start,or of course,the clearest explanation he does not exist
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 15, 2013, 01:42:47 PM
I'm sure it was God's plan all along.  The garden, flood.....everything.  BTW.....using curse words isn't helpful, and makes you sound unintelligent.  Though I'm sure you are a smart person.  If you want to have an adult conversation then let's have one.  Otherwise I won't respond in the future.
Patrick
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 15, 2013, 01:54:38 PM
I'm sure it was God's plan all along.  The garden, flood.....everything.  BTW.....using curse words isn't helpful, and makes you sound unintelligent.  Though I'm sure you are a smart person.  If you want to have an adult conversation then let's have one.  Otherwise I won't respond in the future.
Patrick

Mmm, so in that case why did god life to Adam, telling him that if he ate the fruit he would die, whereas the wily snake gets it right saying, 'of course you won't die.' Why, too, does god blame Adam when he does not have the means to distinguish good from evil (as he had not eaten the fruit)? Really, god does seem to have got some things wrong in this story - unless we don't understand it correctly and it is really an explanation of how snakes come to be and why we don't like them.

We could have a run through creation to see if god got things right there, but let's stick with the apple and snake story first.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 15, 2013, 02:33:06 PM
I'm sure it was God's plan all along.  The garden, flood.....everything.  BTW.....using curse words isn't helpful, and makes you sound unintelligent.  Though I'm sure you are a smart person.  If you want to have an adult conversation then let's have one.  Otherwise I won't respond in the future.
Patrick
I could care less if you respond to my posts. If it was God's plan to bring about the flood through failure he is a murdering insane being,not a god. If it was further to this beings plan to murder himself,,,again through a failure to educate the beings he created,he is again a failure

 Education through trial and error on this gods part,it means he either failed to do the work to bring about success or the most plausible explanation he is an imaginary construct of ancient cave dwellers that somehow still works to control idiots through fear.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 15, 2013, 02:36:57 PM
I'm sure it was God's plan all along.  The garden, flood.....everything.  BTW.....using curse words isn't helpful, and makes you sound unintelligent.  Though I'm sure you are a smart person.  If you want to have an adult conversation then let's have one.  Otherwise I won't respond in the future.
Patrick

Mmm, so in that case why did god life to Adam, telling him that if he ate the fruit he would die, whereas the wily snake gets it right saying, 'of course you won't die.' Why, too, does god blame Adam when he does not have the means to distinguish good from evil (as he had not eaten the fruit)? Really, god does seem to have got some things wrong in this story - unless we don't understand it correctly and it is really an explanation of how snakes come to be and why we don't like them.

We could have a run through creation to see if god got things right there, but let's stick with the apple and snake story first.
As we see Eve did not die so the snake told the truth and this god character lied about what happens if you eat the fruit. Deception from God,truth from Satan
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 15, 2013, 02:42:33 PM
We got us another one. Paying attention to one person's swearing and totally ignoring the comments of others who didn't happen to choose to four letter words at the time. Presumably because he had no good response.

Guess I should have cussed. Then at least he would have been able to understand one thing I said. Oh well.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 15, 2013, 02:51:10 PM
We got us another one. Paying attention to one person's swearing and totally ignoring the comments of others who didn't happen to choose to four letter words at the time. Presumably because he had no good response.

Guess I should have cussed. Then at least he would have been able to understand one thing I said. Oh well.
I noticed as well he failed to address the question,other to say God must have planned it that way. This makes this god a crazed murderous psychotic,not something to be praised
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: G-Roll on December 15, 2013, 03:02:03 PM
15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Planned bitches!

Italics are mine. When you eat it. Not if you eat it or if you get hungry and think the fruit of knowledge looks tasty. Or incase you know... some talking snake suggests you give it a try.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 15, 2013, 03:12:01 PM
I rather thought this god we are talking about was one of the 3 omni kind -all knowing, all-powerful, and all-present. Now if that's the case,

1. He would have know before he created anything what would happen if he created in a particular way

2. he would have know what would happen when he told Adam about the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Heck, if this tree was so significant, why plant it within reach of the people? )

3. By the time he has killed everyone with a flood (as he knew he would have to), surely he would have known how to re-populate the earth so as to make sure he didn't need to deploy Jesus.

These are important questions and ones that there ought to be good answers for. Frankly, if we resort to things like, 'we don't know' not only are we giving up on knowledge but we are also opening the door wide to the question, 'why should this god be worshipped or even believed in when he couldn't create that well?'

Of course, as usual, this has already been thought of by the Greeks....

Quote
Epicurus [341–270 B.C.] Greek philosopher:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 15, 2013, 03:18:43 PM
I rather thought this god we are talking about was one of the 3 omni kind -all knowing, all-powerful, and all-present. Now if that's the case,

1. He would have know before he created anything what would happen if he created in a particular way

2. he would have know what would happen when he told Adam about the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Heck, if this tree was so significant, why plant it within reach of the people? )

3. By the time he has killed everyone with a flood (as he knew he would have to), surely he would have known how to re-populate the earth so as to make sure he didn't need to deploy Jesus.

These are important questions and ones that there ought to be good answers for. Frankly, if we resort to things like, 'we don't know' not only are we giving up on knowledge but we are also opening the door wide to the question, 'why should this god be worshipped or even believed in when he couldn't create that well?'

Of course, as usual, this has already been thought of by the Greeks....

Quote
Epicurus [341–270 B.C.] Greek philosopher:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
flooding the earth with pre-knowledge of the fact he would,makes him no more than a mass murderer
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 15, 2013, 03:25:59 PM
Genocide, really!
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 16, 2013, 12:02:16 AM
This isn't a trick question, or one that necessarily can't be answered in a sane manner.

Paul argues that Abraham got to heaven by faith, not law. Abe was ordered to kill his son, by Elohim, so he did so. This is the type of faith needed to get to be with God.
Here Paul directly contradicts Jesus:
Joh:3:12: If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
Joh:3:13: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

I might have figured out how this magic trick is done:

Exodus 3

[6] Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.

Mark 12

[26] And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
[27] He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

It's a linguisitic trick.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 16, 2013, 12:05:24 AM
I'm sure it was God's plan all along.  The garden, flood.....everything.

Everything except the flood, because it didn't happen. There would have been a garden, somewhere.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 16, 2013, 01:09:30 AM
Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.

I don't think any modern judge would require or accept one man's punishment in payment for another man's crime. Nor do I think that any person of sound mind and good conscience could consider that "justice".

Your right.  No modern judge would do that.  It wouldn't be justice to punish an innocent man for the sins of another.
In this case, the Judge Himself took the punishment for sin.   Because He loves you.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ParkingPlaces on December 16, 2013, 01:35:29 AM
Patrick

It usually takes us at least four or five days to figure out where any given theist is coming from. I tend to think that there must be an 11th commandment, one that says you guys have to beat around the bush. Now you just posted a long,detailed and commendably thorough response to wheels in another post, and that one certainly narrows things down a bit. But it doesn't clear up all of our questions.

We like to know so that we don't go complaining about some detail of scripture that you don't agree with anyway. Each of us atheists has to work with out own version of a generic Christian until the details get cleared up. With literally tens of thousands of versions out there, simply saying that one is a Christian isn't quite enough to define even the most basic and important aspects of your belief.

It sometimes takes us days to find out if a person is a fundamentalist christian who believes in a young earth. Other times it sort of sounds like that is what they are then they tell us they aren't. So anything you could say to make it clear where you're coming from would be appreciated. It will keep us from making erroneous assumptions, that can quickly muck up an otherwise fruitful conversation.

Clearly, at least so far, your biggest interest in in Jesus and the sacrifice, etc. The emphasis on that aspect of the bible tends to miff a lot of us for myriad reasons. If that is all you want to discuss anyway, that's fine. But again, the more we know about your religious position, the better for all of us.

Just to play fair, I'll start. I'm an atheist, I don't believe in any god, even yours. I do not see the "evils" in the world as being anything other than a natural variation in human behavior, spurred on by genetics, family experiences, social conditions, propensities towards selfishness and other very human variables. As one who accepts the premise that we evolved, along side other animals, I see no reason for humans to behave perfectly, as much as I would love it if we could. I do not find aberrant behavior mysterious, and I cannot make it generic, as most Christians do (stealing bubble gum and killing are both sins, both will get you into hell (it would help to know your stance on the hell thing, by the way), and hence they are considered by most christians to be functionally equal).

Anyway, I'm trying to streamline the discussion process so that we don't all make bad assumptions about each other. The more you can do to clarify your version of Christianity, the better. If only to streamline of the conversation.



Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 16, 2013, 01:42:29 AM
Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.
Sin entered the world and the natural and observable order of things in our world and our universe can be likened to the first law of thermodynamics.  That energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed.  So when sin entered the world and continues to this day.  Each time, there is a payment that must be made for sin.  For example:  If I steal from you, you lose something and I get it.  If I destroy that thing, then I must pay for it, or insurance does, or you.....but someone has to pay for that item.
So in the big picture, when we all sin, the payment is stacking up.  Because God's plan for the universe is a plan for it to be sin free and perfect.  So Christ came into our world to pay for the sin of all who will believe in Him.  In the end, there will be a judgement day for those who do not believe.  They will make their own payment. 
- Patrick Henry

Well, first of all, welcome, Patrick Henry, even though I don't think the two of us are going to agree on much. Lets hope that you have more than one life to give this thread, though.

As a full-blown atheist who sees what you call "sin" as merely the byproduct of a less than perfectly evolved set of beings, living in a less than perfect world and in a less that perfect set of social situations, I see this "balance" thingy as yet another set of excuses for christians.

This payment deal: how can humans measure it? We're the ones doing it, how in the world are we supposed to measure it too? If I steal five bucks from you, you lose it. Now you said if I destroy it, than I have a debt. But what if I spend it? I get something else, like food. What if I eat the food. I get the energy, do I also destroy the five bucks and make my sin somehow worse? What if I steal it, feel bad, and give the five bucks to the Salvation Army? Am I even in that specific case, or did I make it worse somehow?
  Maybe you are making it too complicated.  If you steal $5 from me.  You owe me $5.  I don't care what you do with the money after that.  Even our laws reflect this reality.

Quote
What if I stole five bucks from you, but you earned that five bucks by overcharging for a bag of popcorn? Do two wrongs make a right? What if, when I am running across the road to escape your attempt to get the money back I cause an accident, and a person injured in the crash goes to the hospital and while there being treated for non life threatening wounds, the doctor finds cancer and the medical community is able to save that persons life because they found it in time. Do I get any credit for doing something good?
Not sure why you are trying to make the analogy more complicated than it is. See answer above.

Quote
We have no economy for sins. The bible doesn't describe one. It describes sins, yes, but there are no lessons about how to measure them, how to reconcile the sin books, how to figure out our sin taxes. As per your book, we are born into sin debt and it only gets worse with every breathe we take, because as much as your god loves us, he's still a bit piqued about the garden affair, something that he, since he is only omniscient, couldn't see coming. I have been told by other christians that if a person is not "saved" before they die, into the overheated basement they go. Which means my wonderfully warm and caring great grandmother, who carefully carried bugs out of her house instead of squishing them, is deep-frying even as we speak while some mass murderer who found JC three minutes before his execution is hanging around in heaven with Pat Boone and 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses.

The answer on how to reconcile the "sin books" as you say, are in the bible.  It is Christ crucified on the cross for your sins, if you will believe.  Regarding your question of  "measurement", the bible seems to say that some sins are worse than others. But the point isn't that.  We are all eternally lost in our sins without Christ.  But Christ took the eternal punishment for your sin if you will believe.  Yes He could take an eternal punishment for your sin because He is eternal Himself.  If your grandmother believed that bugs were more important than believing in Christ, then it's possible that she isn't saved.  I certainly hope that isn't the case.  God knows her heart better than anyone though. 

Quote
Which means human sins, if measured and balanced and the cause of indebtedness and bought and old on the stock market and such, are horrible, horrible, horrible, while the game your god is playing is the ultimate frisbee of righteousness.

I prefer being an atheist. I don't have to steal five bucks to put in the collection plate on Sunday and I can measure right and wrong on a sliding scale, versus one where every sin is equally wrong, no matter how minor or major.
Right and wrong doesn't matter without Christ really.  You could be a very moral person by society's standard, but without Christ you will die in your sin of pride and disbelief.  But first you must realize there is not a sliding scale that you create for yourself.  God sets the bar. 

Quote
People aren't perfect. And a good way to keep them that way is to make up stuff and pretend its real. It gives folks even more ways to do it wrong.

PatrickHenry, Please give some time to learning to quote. Merely using bold text does not help, especially when you do not leave line breaks. I have spent some time making this post readable.

GB Mod
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 16, 2013, 02:58:16 AM
Patrick, welcome.

Jesus had to be crucified to satisfy justice.  Justice needs to be done and that idea even is what we practice in our court system today.
I'm not sure that this a good analogy. First, if justice was done, then there would be no more need for further justice. So, did Jesus atone for mankind's sins or not?[/b]
Jesus atoned for the sins of those who will believe.  "....whoever believes in Him will not perish"

Quote
Taking your analogy further, other than Christianity, can you tell us of system of justice that condemns people to infinite torture for finite actions committed by others? Further, which justice system judges the majority of people in this planet as guilty without a trial, particularly when many would have no reason to be aware of this law?
Honestly, I love that question! That is a great question and one that I have wondered myself.  It doesn't make sense that people who live in a finite world would have to pay infinitely for their sins.  It bugs me that more Christians don't openly ask about it.  First of all I think we have to realize that what we do here on earth matters.  A lot!  So there is an accountability that is incredible.  We don't take our lives seriously enough.  God has gone to unimaginable lengths to save us from our sins and still give us the dignity of free will.  I believe that free will within humans is a gift from God that will ultimately settle the issue of eternal punishment as well.  The short answer is a quote from CS Lewis. He said the gates of hell are locked from the inside. It is real, and people actually go there. But they are there by their own consent. Hell is a place of self-exile.  So in that sense people choose eternal separation from God. 

Quote
What, is your interpretation, is "sin"?
Sin is breaking the laws of God as listed in the bible.  Sin at its core is idolatry.  Putting anything ahead of God in your life.  Since all have sinned, and the only way of salvation is through faith in Christ as the atonement for your sins on the cross, then the ultimate thing that separates you from eternal salvation is your choice not to trust in what He has already done.   

Quote
You mention the laws of thermodynamics by way of analogy. Does your god obey the natural laws as we understand them? If not, then how can you claim that "sin" is something that in any way has an analog to the laws of thermodynamics? You seem like reasonable fellow, I hope you won't do the science when it suits you but not when it doesn't thing.

Simply, I see a parallel to our physical universe that the bible calls sin and the atonement for it as being necessary.  It makes sense to me that the God who made our physical universe and the laws of physics also made spiritual parallels for us to see and relate to in the physical realm. Does God obey the natural laws?  God is the creator of the natural laws and He uses them to accomplish His will. 


Quote
Insurance, That's when you pay someone else to pay you back should you have a loss. With insurance you pay twice. Once for the item, once for the insurance. Also, even when aggregated, the money I might get back from insurance is not from some guilty party, it's from someone who is innocent of my loss. Or, is your analogy of insurance more akin to protection money as demanded from the mob?

No

Quote
So, back to sin. What is the payment for sin? Earlier you said that Jesus satisfied this matter with his death. Now he hasn't because I have to pay even though he paid? Pretty much a waste of his time then, wasn't it? What did Jesus achieve that everyone forever must continue to pay for his supposed payment? This is where I go "Huh?".
Certainly not a waste of time.  Many believe in Christ and are being saved. Jesus paid for those who believe.  Those who don't will stand before Him and give an account of their lives.  Romans 14 & Revelation 20

Quote
Still wondering what sin is and if I've never had an opportunity to be aware of the rules how you hold me accountable? Also, is your god omnipotent, omniscient and omni-benevolent? Apparently not seeing as (a) his plan as Jesus failed and (b) I'm supposed to pay because Jesus' sacrifice wasn't enough?
First of all I don't hold you accountable.  The bible says that God is the Judge.  Jesus sacrifice was absolutely enough if you believe in Him and what He has done.  There is no salvation for those who do not believe. Mark 16

Quote
Oh, so Jesus came to pay, but it wasn't enough, even though he was god and now we mortals have to pay your god because his payment to himself wasn't sufficient?
It was enough.  You just need to accept the free gift and believe. 

Quote
That doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps you could clarify these contradictions? And welcome again.
Thanks for welcoming me.  I hope it makes better sense to you now.    

PatrickHenry, Please give some time to learning to quote. Merely using bold text does not help, especially when you do not leave line breaks. I have spent some time making this post readable.

GB Mod
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 16, 2013, 03:13:20 AM
Patrick

It usually takes us at least four or five days to figure out where any given theist is coming from. I tend to think that there must be an 11th commandment, one that says you guys have to beat around the bush. Now you just posted a long,detailed and commendably thorough response to wheels in another post, and that one certainly narrows things down a bit. But it doesn't clear up all of our questions.

We like to know so that we don't go complaining about some detail of scripture that you don't agree with anyway. Each of us atheists has to work with out own version of a generic Christian until the details get cleared up. With literally tens of thousands of versions out there, simply saying that one is a Christian isn't quite enough to define even the most basic and important aspects of your belief.

It sometimes takes us days to find out if a person is a fundamentalist christian who believes in a young earth. Other times it sort of sounds like that is what they are then they tell us they aren't. So anything you could say to make it clear where you're coming from would be appreciated. It will keep us from making erroneous assumptions, that can quickly muck up an otherwise fruitful conversation.
Old earth.  Though God could certainly do it anyway He chooses.  I think to make the earth and especially the universe look old then tell us it's young seems misleading and out of character. I don't think the bible tells us that it's young.  That's my quick answer.  I will say that the evolution v creation debate could go on forever.  Unless you are a boots on the ground scientist, then we are all just quoting someone else.  So pick who you want and the next guy will quote another.  On and on and on......been there done that.  Willing to do it more, but I have a another life, family, etc.  Time is limited.


Quote
Clearly, at least so far, your biggest interest in in Jesus and the sacrifice, etc. The emphasis on that aspect of the bible tends to miff a lot of us for myriad reasons. If that is all you want to discuss anyway, that's fine. But again, the more we know about your religious position, the better for all of us.

Just to play fair, I'll start. I'm an atheist, I don't believe in any god, even yours. I do not see the "evils" in the world as being anything other than a natural variation in human behavior, spurred on by genetics, family experiences, social conditions, propensities towards selfishness and other very human variables. As one who accepts the premise that we evolved, along side other animals, I see no reason for humans to behave perfectly, as much as I would love it if we could. I do not find aberrant behavior mysterious, and I cannot make it generic, as most Christians do (stealing bubble gum and killing are both sins, both will get you into hell (it would help to know your stance on the hell thing, by the way), and hence they are considered by most christians to be functionally equal).
aberrant?  Who decides what is aberrrant?  Who is qualified to do such a thing?  Is right and wrong relative to the times and society in which it is judged?  I don't think so.  I believe that it is absolute.  That God sets the standard and that standard shows us that none of us meet it.  We all need Christ.

Quote
Anyway, I'm trying to streamline the discussion process so that we don't all make bad assumptions about each other. The more you can do to clarify your version of Christianity, the better. If only to streamline of the conversation.
PatrickHenry, Please give some time to learning to quote. Merely using bold text does not help, especially when you do not leave line breaks. I have spent some time making this post readable.

GB Mod

Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: magicmiles on December 16, 2013, 03:35:13 AM
Hi Patrick

You'll need to learn how to quote text. There is an FAQ section located here:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/board,75.0.html

And a test area to practice in here:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/board,28.0.html
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 16, 2013, 03:36:44 AM
We got us another one. Paying attention to one person's swearing and totally ignoring the comments of others who didn't happen to choose to four letter words at the time. Presumably because he had no good response.

Guess I should have cussed. Then at least he would have been able to understand one thing I said. Oh well.
I noticed as well he failed to address the question,other to say God must have planned it that way. This makes this god a crazed murderous psychotic,not something to be praised

I'll answer it with a question to you.  Why does that make God crazed and murderous in your eyes?  Is it possible that there is something that you just don't understand?  If God were real, and you were rejecting Him as you are right now, doesn't it stand to reason that you wouldn't understand much?  After all He is God, and you are, well........ you.  Human, frail, weak, not smart at all compared to Him.  You are a created being.  Not equal to Him. 

 Maybe your pride and lack of understanding are simply getting in the way.  God is saying that you need to have faith in Him.  He has given all of us a good way to live, how to treat people, etc through the example of Christ.  It works if you are willing to drop your pride and follow Him.


Thank you

GB Mod
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 16, 2013, 05:08:30 AM
Patrick,

If, as you suggest, us atheists could not understand the mind of god as we are humans then what you say makes good sense. After all, this god might some much higher purpose in his mass killing that anything we can think of. (Of course this god is whole lot nicer that the Babylonian gods who also sent a flood to kill the people but because they were too noisy!)

The major snag with this line of thinking is the fact the it is often argued in favour of god that he is the one that set up all the laws of nature and is responsible for everything going on the way it does. I suppose that implies he makes sure the moon doesn't crash into the earth and so forth. In practice this means that this god has produced a universe that has laws we can work out and that we can use to predict things in the future. So this is a god of order.

Another thing we are told about god is that he is the source of morals - the objective morals which guide our lives. Now it is interesting that, for example, in the Decalogue the only killing banned is murder. There is nothing to suggest that fighting wars and killing afterwards is bad. In fact the OT god gives Joshua instruction at various times to enter a town and kill everyone in that town, men, women and children. In other cases, the soldiers are allowed to keep virgins for their own use. So the impression we get from the Torah is that in fact mass killing is actually not such a bad thing.

Combining these two ideas, I think I agree with you, Patrick, that god probably did plan to kill everything in the world. I think that sort of extermination is quite within his character and his way of working. I suspect Jesus would violently disagree with this sort of action, advocating, as he did, turning the other cheek. There's nothing in Jesus' teaching to suggest fighting wars and mass killing are OK. Quite the opposite - he defines thinking badly of someone is the equivalent of murder. So, yes, this god in the OT certainly seems capable of killing any number of things - but there is  catch....

There is not the slightest evidence of a world-wide flood anywhere. Most cultures in the world have this story in some form and it may well refer to a localised flood but what's sure is that there never was 29,000 feet of water flooding the earth. So what we have here is a nice story telling us what the killing mad god of the OT would do- if he had existed of course.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 16, 2013, 12:57:51 PM
I'll answer it with a question to you.  Why does that make God crazed and murderous in your eyes?  Is it possible that there is something that you just don't understand?  If God were real, and you were rejecting Him as you are right now, doesn't it stand to reason that you wouldn't understand much?  After all He is God, and you are, well........ you.  Human, frail, weak, not smart at all compared to Him.  You are a created being.  Not equal to Him. 
I would like to make something very clear here Patrick:

I am not rejecting god.  I do not believe the entity exists.  I think the entity is not real.  If there is anyone that I am "rejecting", it is the other people purporting that this god entity exists.

I really think that this is an important distinction.

Quote
Maybe your pride and lack of understanding are simply getting in the way.  God is saying that you need to have faith in Him.  He has given all of us a good way to live, how to treat people, etc through the example of Christ.  It works if you are willing to drop your pride and follow Him.
May I be so bold as to suggest that perhaps it is your pride that gets in the way of seeing the world for what it is - that you do not have a special place in the cosmos, that you will not have eternal life?  That your pride is getting in the way of seeing that you are not entitled, at all, to even earn eternal life in some form or fashion?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 16, 2013, 01:35:41 PM
Actually, Jdawg, you have picked up on an important point so I'd like to join in here.

Patrick,

1. the reason why we are atheists is simply, and only, because we have not found any convincing evidence that any god exists. Over the years there have been lots of god, thousand upon thousands but we have not found any evidence for any of them.

2. The only difference between you and us atheists is one god. You reject all the countless gods that have been around in various culture for thousands of years and you pick on just one god. we ought to discuss, sometime, why you picked that one and not Allah or any other gods.

3. To reject something requires that the something exists to be rejected. Atheists think the evidence for the existence of gods is so thin that it is reasonable to conclude that there are no gods. Thus no one here rejects any god - they are not there to reject.

4. God is not saying anything - indeed in all probability he has never ever said anything. Let's look at the evidence for this claim. The only records we have of god saying anything are from people who made records of it years after the event and no doubt the story passed down generation to generation before being put in writing. That no longer counts as evidence or anything except that there was a story. Even when we come to the gospels, the stories about what Jesus said have passed through a couple of generations  so that we cannot know whether any of them are original Jesus let alone which. So, if you want to claim the god says anything you will probably have to back up your claim.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Truth OT on December 16, 2013, 02:05:31 PM
So in the big picture, when we all sin, the payment is stacking up.  Because God's plan for the universe is a plan for it to be sin free and perfect.  So Christ came into our world to pay for the sin of all who will believe in Him.  In the end, there will be a judgement day for those who do not believe.  They will make their own payment. 
- Patrick Henry

The above begs the question that if God's plan was to have a universe free of sin, why would he not have created it so that sin would not enter? With him being God surely he could have accomplished that feat if that was what he wanted. If we presumme God is, a better case can be made that God's plan included and called for the existence of sin in his universe because he set things up so that sin would be not only probably, but a reality.

We must also keep in mind the definition of sin and that is missing the target or mark. If God had not set marks/rules, then no sin could exist. It's a real case of God rigging the game against the participants so that we cannot win.

To God, nothing is ultimately or should I say innately wrong. Eating fruit is not wrong, unless he forbids it. Killing non virgin women and children and taking virgins as war spoils is not wrong, unless he declares it so. Taking slaves is not wrong, unless it's it a slave from among one's countrymen that God as dictated otherwise about. Attempting to kill (Gen 22:2) or having your own son killed as a sacrifice to God (Rev 13:8 ) is not wrong, but don't dare offer your kids to Molech (Lev 18:21). In God's view wrong or sin is simply the act of not obeying or falling in line with his guidelines so as long as God doesn't speak against something (take slavery for example), then it's okay to engage in.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 16, 2013, 02:16:53 PM
4. God is not saying anything - indeed in all probability he has never ever said anything. Let's look at the evidence for this claim. The only records we have of god saying anything are from people who made records of it years after the event and no doubt the story passed down generation to generation before being put in writing. That no longer counts as evidence or anything except that there was a story. Even when we come to the gospels, the stories about what Jesus said have passed through a couple of generations  so that we cannot know whether any of them are original Jesus let alone which. So, if you want to claim the god says anything you will probably have to back up your claim.
Follow on to this point:

Patrick, the bible is a pretty...dated...work at this point in time.  It's over a thousand years old.

Why no new bible[1] or otherwise written/divinely inspired work[2]?  I mean...it seems to me rather evident that some additional communication - some additional guidance - from god is in order here.  There are thousands of different sects of Christianity; there are large disparities on what god's will is within Christian ranks alone - further disparities still when considering other religions.  To me, it is unabashedly clear that we, as a society (i.e. all of humanity), could use a little bit of help in understanding what's all going on here, in particular with respect to the nature of god and the nature of god's will.

At one point in the past, god saw it fit to pen a book of instruction (or 'inspire' a book of instruction).  Back then, there were far fewer literate people and far more difficulty in passing the message around.  Today that is not the case.  I think it's fair to say that at least the majority of people in the world are literate, and thanks to advances like the printing press and the interwebs, passing information back and forth is rather trivial.  There is clearly confusion as to what god wants from his cherished creation.  Would it not be sensible for god to once again step in and try to make his intentions and his guide to life clear?  I simply cannot get over how silly it is - the idea that god, who possess vast (infinite?) power, who possess vast (infinite?) knowledge, who possess vast (infinte?) compassion, would be so adamantly against being clear and direct about...well, anything, but, at the very least, about what it is he expects from humanity.

And you can always say that he's already made himself clear...but here's the thing - he hasn't.  He just plain hasn't.  A number of people on this planet do not believe he exists.  A number of people on this planet do not believe that Jesus was his son[3].  A number of people claim that god will protect you from handling snakes.  A number of people claim that god only 'helps those who help themselves'.  A number of people claim that god is nothing but 'the ground of being' (or whatever wootastic contentless collection of words they want to use).  A number of people claim that reciting some trite declaration of faith is sufficient to attain salvation.  A number of people claim that declaration of faith is insufficient to earn salvation.  So you can claim that he has made himself clear, but frankly the evidence around you, unabashedly, says otherwise.
 1. Why doesn't the book of Mormon count?  Why doesn't the Quran count?  Or do they?
 2. The Blog of God or somesuch perhaps?  Maybe the occasional text from THE ALMIGHTY to remind people that making people DIE is a bad thing?
 3. and him at the same time
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Truth OT on December 16, 2013, 02:28:27 PM
God is saying that you need to have faith in Him.  He has given all of us a good way to live, how to treat people, etc through the example of Christ.  It works if you are willing to drop your pride and follow Him.

Here is a point most believers miss about the position non believers like myself take. You assume that the god you believe in has actually said anything while we look at the writings you believe to be god's words and we see them as the writings of men with no objective verifiable evidence those writers were inspired by the god you claim exists.

What I would assert is that your worship of god is in vain because what you follow are merely as Matthew 15:9 says, are the doctrines and commandments of men that claim to speak for god.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: jtk73 on December 16, 2013, 04:16:46 PM
You just need to accept the free gift and believe.

Which is it? Free gift or gift with requirements? If it has strings attached, it is not a free gift.

Also, in what way is it a gift if the gift giver placed me/you/whoever in the predicament where a 'gift' is required?



Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: MadBunny on December 16, 2013, 04:17:45 PM

Maybe Jesus had to be crucified, because he was such a misleading teacher?

I made a thread on this topic a while back, rather than repost the whole Op, here's a link.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,8319.msg187801.html#msg187801



Sacrifice.

If you are to look up the term scapegoat, you'll see that it is rooted in sacrifice.

Quote
The scapegoat was a goat that was driven off into the wilderness as part of the ceremonies of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, in Judaism during the times of the Temple in Jerusalem. The rite is described in Leviticus 16.

Since this goat, carrying the sins of the people placed on it, is sent away to perish, the word "scapegoat" has come to mean a person, often innocent, who is blamed and punished for the sins, crimes, or sufferings of others, generally as a way of distracting attention from the real causes.

The point here is that the goat, or animal is used to absorb whatever various sins and is sent off to die, or just killed.

Sacrifice is just a more abbreviated version of this.  The animal metaphorically absorbs sins, usually if the animal is more valuable (A bull rather than a goat, a 'perfect' specimen rather than an old or lame one) is would be considered a better sacrifice.  This sacrificing, or scapegoating would be to appease whatever anger the gods, or god had toward a group.  The Christian bible is filled with many examples of sacrifice to please their god.  History, in fact is also full of examples.

What would have more sacrificial value than a human?  A pure human.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice

We see that societies would frequently try to skirt this purity theme by sacrificing alternatives such as captured warriors, or even servants.
When it comes to value though, the virgin is the gold standard.  A pure, beautiful virgin.

Jesus represents the perfect metaphorical sacrifice.
Pure and virginal, check.
Valuable (son of god), check.
Human, yep.

So, Jesus, representing the perfect storm of metaphorical value for sins absorbs not just the guilt and sin of those around him but apparently the sin of all mankind and is killed.  When he dies he takes all this sin with him and mankind is forgiven.


I gets a little weird after that, but hey, this is religion we're talking about.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 17, 2013, 01:26:35 AM
Patrick,

If, as you suggest, us atheists could not understand the mind of god as we are humans then what you say makes good sense. After all, this god might some much higher purpose in his mass killing that anything we can think of. (Of course this god is whole lot nicer that the Babylonian gods who also sent a flood to kill the people but because they were too noisy!)

The major snag with this line of thinking is the fact the it is often argued in favour of god that he is the one that set up all the laws of nature and is responsible for everything going on the way it does. I suppose that implies he makes sure the moon doesn't crash into the earth and so forth. In practice this means that this god has produced a universe that has laws we can work out and that we can use to predict things in the future. So this is a god of order.

Combining these two ideas, I think I agree with you, Patrick, that god probably did plan to kill everything in the world. I think that sort of extermination is quite within his character and his way of working. I suspect Jesus would violently disagree with this sort of action, advocating, as he did, turning the other cheek. There's nothing in Jesus' teaching to suggest fighting wars and mass killing are OK. Quite the opposite - he defines thinking badly of someone is the equivalent of murder. So, yes, this god in the OT certainly seems capable of killing any number of things - but there is  catch....



I disagree with your depiction of God using words like extermination, as if God is evil and His purposes are not good.  From my point of view it lowers the accountability of human beings at that time.  I believe they were accountable for their sins and yes it even affected their children, who were killed along with their parents in a few cases.  If God were true, then it makes sense to me that He has every right to take away the lives that He gave in the first place.  For His purposes.  It may be entirely possible that those children were given eternal life.   
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 17, 2013, 01:33:24 AM
Are....are you seriously suggesting that a mother/father has every right to murder their children if they are sinners?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 17, 2013, 01:41:58 AM
4. God is not saying anything - indeed in all probability he has never ever said anything. Let's look at the evidence for this claim. The only records we have of god saying anything are from people who made records of it years after the event and no doubt the story passed down generation to generation before being put in writing. That no longer counts as evidence or anything except that there was a story. Even when we come to the gospels, the stories about what Jesus said have passed through a couple of generations  so that we cannot know whether any of them are original Jesus let alone which. So, if you want to claim the god says anything you will probably have to back up your claim.
Follow on to this point:

Patrick, the bible is a pretty...dated...work at this point in time.  It's over a thousand years old.

........  There is clearly confusion as to what god wants from his cherished creation.  Would it not be sensible for god to once again step in and try to make his intentions and his guide to life clear?  I simply cannot get over how silly it is .......

And you can always say that he's already made himself clear...but here's the thing - he hasn't.  He just plain hasn't.  A number of people on this planet do not believe he exists.  A number of people on this planet do not believe that Jesus was his son[1].  A number of people claim that god will protect you from handling snakes.  A number of people claim that god only 'helps those who help themselves'.  A number of people claim that god is nothing but 'the ground of being' (or whatever wootastic contentless collection of words they want to use).  A number of people claim that reciting some trite declaration of faith is sufficient to attain salvation.  A number of people claim that declaration of faith is insufficient to earn salvation.  So you can claim that he has made himself clear, but frankly the evidence around you, unabashedly, says otherwise.
 1. and him at the same time

I'm actually impressed with the bible and how such old texts still do speak relevantly to modern man.  Solomon in Ecclesiastes talks about how the soul is never satisfied.  He doesn't hide his struggle, and we see that all over the place in western culture especially.  The wisdom in Proverbs is a good example of teaching. There is also in the new testament particularly, teaching of forgiveness, grace, discipline, love.  All good stuff and applicable for us today. 
I see the bible as clear teaching with a clear message about who God is and where salvation comes from.  Christ commands His followers to tell others, so I think that it is important that you not be confused and think that we need another new revelation from God.  It's here. 
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 17, 2013, 01:47:28 AM

May I be so bold as to suggest that perhaps it is your pride that gets in the way of seeing the world for what it is - that you do not have a special place in the cosmos, that you will not have eternal life?  That your pride is getting in the way of seeing that you are not entitled, at all, to even earn eternal life in some form or fashion?
I don't see how it's prideful to submit to God as my creator. Christians don't think they are "entitled" to eternal life by their own merits.  Just the opposite, in fact.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 17, 2013, 01:51:29 AM
I don't see how it's prideful to submit to God as my creator. Christians don't think they are "entitled" to eternal life by their own merits.  Just the opposite, in fact.

I find that if anyone even thinks of life after death, especially infinite life, their intentions for the life can only be that of greed.

There surely cannot be any other reason as to why someone would even think of such a thing.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: wheels5894 on December 17, 2013, 03:31:47 AM


I disagree with your depiction of God using words like extermination, as if God is evil and His purposes are not good.  From my point of view it lowers the accountability of human beings at that time.  I believe they were accountable for their sins and yes it even affected their children, who were killed along with their parents in a few cases.  If God were true, then it makes sense to me that He has every right to take away the lives that He gave in the first place.  For His purposes.  It may be entirely possible that those children were given eternal life.

Well, if there were an all-powerful god, I suppose he would have the right to do anything, though there is a moral dimension we might get to later that could affect that. There again, god is also said to be all-loving. Now bad people, however bad, have the chance of reforming and cutting their live short gives them no chance to do that so killing, by an all-loving god would seem to be against his nature... at least it would if he was the god of the NT. The god of the OT is very much less loving and more more inclined to war - at least to sending men out to fight wars.

Then there are the children. Now if you think that it is OK to kill children because of the acts of their parents, well, you are not like anyone I have ever met. Children who have not done anything wrong are not for killing on any grounds. Any claims to moral superiority by a god that orders the killing of children vanish as he says the words. Even atheists don't do that!

Oh, and to make it clear, god is shown as wanting get rid of all the people in Israel so that the Hebrews can take it over so I still say that is genocide.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Ataraxia on December 17, 2013, 03:53:38 AM
BTW.....using curse words isn't helpful, and makes you sound unintelligent.
Patrick

Bollocks. I wouldn't normally pick up on this, because spelling and grammar are simple mistakes to make (even when you have spell check available), but since you are playing the curse card, if anything makes you look unintelligent, it's this:

Your right.

That's not including your inability to grasp a fairly simple quoting system.

No modern judge would do that.  It wouldn't be justice to punish an innocent man for the sins of another.
In this case, the Judge Himself took the punishment for sin.   Because He loves you.

No modern judge would be so psychology screwy to do that either.
There's a problem here for God - the problem of sin, yet he thinks the best way to deal with that is to diminish all responsibility of it on to himself, and anybody who doesn't agree with that and prefers to make amends and deal with the problem themselves isn't deserved of his company. No, that's left to those are happy for the judge to be slayed for it because they think that shows how awesomely loving he is.
No, it makes him look like a friggin' weirdo. I really can't see you cheering with adulation on the prosecution in court, watching a self-harming judge take the rap for the man found guilty of murdering your child. Replace that with God though, and suddenly that judge becomes some love genius. Buzz! Wrong. He's loopy-doop - he's off his tree. He is not acting lovingly.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Ataraxia on December 17, 2013, 04:24:59 AM
I disagree with your depiction of God using words like extermination, as if God is evil and His purposes are not good.  From my point of view it lowers the accountability of human beings at that time.  I believe they were accountable for their sins and yes it even affected their children, who were killed along with their parents in a few cases.  If God were true, then it makes sense to me that He has every right to take away the lives that He gave in the first place.  For His purposes.  It may be entirely possible that those children were given eternal life.

What word would you like to replace "extermination" with? How are you going to spin such a word around so not to emit negative connotations here? People die. People die at the 'apparent' order of God. People die at the 'apparent' hand of God. Civilisations have been eradicated at the 'apparent' hand /order of God. If you replaced God with any dictator throughout human history you'd be cursing them, but because it's God who has done it then somehow you flip 180 and it's all fine and dandy.
....And what about free will? What happened to the free will of these children? I keep hearing that God has free will on pretty high priority, if not the highest, yet here you have the purposes of God superseding it. What have these children done so that they deserve to be slaughtered? If you can't think of a valid reason why innocent children deserve to be killed, and lay it all on "well God knows why and knows best" kinda bullshit, then you have surrendered your compassion and integrity to sycophantically follow a dictator who you find unquestionable.

This is where this moral quiz that apologists throw out gets flipped on its head, the "would you torture a child to death just for fun" nonsense. Well no, I wouldn't, and I wouldn't torture a child to death just for God either. I can't say I'm too confident that your answer would be the same.

Oh, and while in this theology it may be possible for these children to be given eternal life it's also possible that they won't, and since you don't consider yourself the judge of who's in who's out, then just throwing the possibility out there to cover you and your Gods arse serves no purpose but to show that you will do anything to spin the slaughter of children into a positive. It's disgusting. No, it's fucking disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 17, 2013, 09:22:41 AM
I don't see how it's prideful to submit to God as my creator. Christians don't think they are "entitled" to eternal life by their own merits.  Just the opposite, in fact.

I find that if anyone even thinks of life after death, especially infinite life, their intentions for the life can only be that of greed.

There surely cannot be any other reason as to why someone would even think of such a thing.

I hardly call not wanting to die, 'greedy.' It may seem so if you think of it as "infinite" but not wanting to die today isn't greedy, and it is always today.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: xyzzy on December 17, 2013, 09:27:10 AM
I disagree with your depiction of God using words like extermination, as if God is evil and His purposes are not good.  From my point of view it lowers the accountability of human beings at that time.  I believe they were accountable for their sins and yes it even affected their children, who were killed along with their parents in a few cases. If God were true, then it makes sense to me that He has every right to take away the lives that He gave in the first place.  For His purposes.  It may be entirely possible that those children were given eternal life.

Earlier I asked you what "sin" was, and you replied:

Quote
Sin is breaking the laws of God as listed in the bible.  Sin at its core is idolatry.  Putting anything ahead of God in your life. 

Now, back to the part that I put in bold. Here you are telling us several things.

God gave people life and if those people don't idolize him (sin at it's core), they are at risk of death. Further, their children too are at risk. And their children's, children.

This god is petty and vindictive. It "gives" something, something that people didn't ask for; it attaches conditions that people have no choice over (out the window goes the free-will excuse); and the penalty for not adhering to those dictates is death.

Worse still, those people have to choose between adhering to the rules or dozens, if not hundreds, of competing gods. That's assuming that a god even exists.

At this point, theists often call life a "gift from god" - do you think this is a "gift"? A "gift" that comes with conditions so stringent that the punishment is death and, possibly, eternal torture.

Knowing that you don't respond to people who cuss, I'll say that I think that's whacked. Frankly, I think it's way worse that that. Worse than that, though, is your attempt to justify the actions of this morally repugnant monster that you call god.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 17, 2013, 09:43:05 AM
Are....are you seriously suggesting that a mother/father has every right to murder their children if they are sinners?

Funny how Christians always try to wriggle off the hook of this line of thinking. The reasons for their "but that's not the same" are universally lacking.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 17, 2013, 09:55:00 AM
I hardly call not wanting to die, 'greedy.' It may seem so if you think of it as "infinite" but not wanting to die today isn't greedy, and it is always today.

That is fine, as i do not want to die.

But eventually i must, no?

If i lived to the age of 3000 years, i would probably be so outright bored and tired that i would simply want to die.

But the thought that people want more than what they need is greedy.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 17, 2013, 10:16:00 AM
I hardly call not wanting to die, 'greedy.' It may seem so if you think of it as "infinite" but not wanting to die today isn't greedy, and it is always today.

That is fine, as i do not want to die.

But eventually i must, no?

If i lived to the age of 3000 years, i would probably be so outright bored and tired that i would simply want to die.

But the thought that people want more than what they need is greedy.

Then define 'need;' I think "staying alive" is as basic of a need as it gets. This is something I lock horns with other atheists on; they conceptualize wanting to die at some point. I really think that, unless you are talking about pain and disability(and yes mental pain does count) that every person will not want to die today. And it is always today.

None the less we are talking about impossibilites here.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Ataraxia on December 17, 2013, 10:24:09 AM
If we are talking about an eternal existence where anything that can possibly happen will happen, then the time will come when one day you will want to die, and then that day will come again..., and again..., and again in perpetuity. Not that you will be able to of course, as that negates the eternal existence.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Truth OT on December 17, 2013, 11:04:41 AM
I see the bible as clear teaching with a clear message about who God is and where salvation comes from.  Christ commands His followers to tell others, so I think that it is important that you not be confused and think that we need another new revelation from God.  It's here.

If the books and writings that comprise the Bible could be described accurately in a one word description, I doubt the word 'clear' would be at the top of the list. Other C-words like confusing, conflicting, and condescending would pop up 1st.

An additional idea you'd do well to consider is the whole subject of salvation you mentioned. Have you ever stepped back and really thought about it? You have God offering conditional salvation from a penalty that is nothing more than his wrathful expression of displeasure and angry indignation. If this supposedly all powerful god really was "unwilling that any should perish", then he'd simply get a grip on his temper and solve the whole problem of the danger that man is thought to be in danger of and need saving from.

The Bible and its god(s) are a bit behind the times as it relates to the philosophy of human behavior. Its punishment to affect behavior solution is very, Bronze Age. It seems to overlook the idea that their are better motivators and sources of instruction than fear and punishment. Its primal solutions could really use some updating.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: ThatZenoGuy on December 17, 2013, 11:25:13 AM
Then define 'need;' I think "staying alive" is as basic of a need as it gets. This is something I lock horns with other atheists on; they conceptualize wanting to die at some point. I really think that, unless you are talking about pain and disability(and yes mental pain does count) that every person will not want to die today. And it is always today.

I guess "need" in this case is the biological limit of the human life span?
I agree with you that humans do not want to die, but it is inevitable, and people should focus on living, rather than what happens after death.

None the less we are talking about impossibilites here.

Yeah...lets move on.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Willie on December 17, 2013, 11:39:20 AM
If i lived to the age of 3000 years, i would probably be so outright bored and tired that i would simply want to die.

I don't get why people think this. We live in a vast universe. Do you really think that 3000 years would be enough to even scratch the surface on what can be learned, explored, and created? And, a very long lifespan would create much greater freedom to try different things. One could dedicate all the decades of study and experience needed to become a great scientist, then do the same for becoming an artist, then an engineer, a doctor, a philosopher, etc., then do it all again because being a scientist, artist, etc. in the 1800's is very different from those same disciplines today, and I'm sure it will be quite different in the future as well. You wouldn't have to worry about squandering your one tiny little lifespan on an occupation that might turn out to not be where your talent or passion lies. You could just go for it, and if it isn't what suits you, or if you get tired of it, then you'd be free to go a different way. How could you ever get bored?

But the thought that people want more than what they need is greedy.

Want is all we really have. Need exists only in relation to what we want. i.e. we want to survive, therefore we need food, water, and breathable air. But without wanting something, we have no need even to exist at all.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 17, 2013, 02:50:39 PM

I don't get why people think this. We live in a vast universe. Do you really think that 3000 years would be enough to even scratch the surface on what can be learned, explored, and created? And, a very long lifespan would create much greater freedom to try different things. One could dedicate all the decades of study and experience needed to become a great scientist, then do the same for becoming an artist, then an engineer, a doctor, a philosopher, etc., then do it all again because being a scientist, artist, etc. in the 1800's is very different from those same disciplines today, and I'm sure it will be quite different in the future as well. You wouldn't have to worry about squandering your one tiny little lifespan on an occupation that might turn out to not be where your talent or passion lies. You could just go for it, and if it isn't what suits you, or if you get tired of it, then you'd be free to go a different way. How could you ever get bored?

This is part of my point. In the last year there's been more scientific advancement and art created than I can learn in my lifetime. Hell with a few millenia to play with, I would try and take apart and put tegther a volkswagon bug enough times in an attempt to acheive zen, or at least an understanding of German engineering.

Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 17, 2013, 03:23:58 PM
I'm actually impressed with the bible and how such old texts still do speak relevantly to modern man.  Solomon in Ecclesiastes talks about how the soul is never satisfied.  He doesn't hide his struggle, and we see that all over the place in western culture especially.  The wisdom in Proverbs is a good example of teaching. There is also in the new testament particularly, teaching of forgiveness, grace, discipline, love.  All good stuff and applicable for us today. 
I see the bible as clear teaching with a clear message about who God is and where salvation comes from.  Christ commands His followers to tell others, so I think that it is important that you not be confused and think that we need another new revelation from God.  It's here.
And again, what I've put in bold above is just clearly incorrect.  It is not clear.  Otherwise, why are there so many people in this world - you know, the people that god apparently actually cares for - who have the message so wrong or outright reject it as nonsense?  The success rate of the bible to convince people that salvation through belief in Jesus (and/or good works - again, depends on who you ask), is far too low.  Especially from a being purported to be omnipotent, omniscient, and omni-benevolent.

If you were teaching a class and 25%[1] of your students were outright failing, wouldn't you think to yourself that there is probably a better way to teach the material?
 1. And I'm being very generous here.  Ask India, China, or various Islamic countries about it.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: 12 Monkeys on December 17, 2013, 09:29:20 PM
So you actually mean a 66% fail rate Jdawg? Christians are 33% of world Pop. and the "true Christian" population has to be in the 15% range
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 17, 2013, 10:17:35 PM
  It doesn't make sense that people who live in a finite world would have to pay infinitely for their sins.  It bugs me that more Christians don't openly ask about it.

If you fish around in Revelation there is evidence that those who are not beast worshippers, will be simply disposed of in the lake of fire.

Luke 16 implies that nasty people will burn in Sheol, while they wait for judgement. And those who are relatively innocuous will sit around in the Bosom of Abraham.

The word "eternal" and "everlasting" was slipped into the Vulgate, to make the punishment accord with contemporary human desires to sell the religion. Infinite hell is terrifying, and because of it, more people are willing to take Pascal's wager. Pascal's wager only works with an infinite hell, because people are generally not stupid enough to believe in Christianity if there is only a finite punishment. (Except if they are Jehovah's witnesses, or SDAs)

If someone comes to you and says "Believe in this ridiculous shit, or I'll torture your unproven soul for 100 years", you will respond "LOL".

Matt "but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." -->> The soul is destroyed in hell.

Quote
  First of all I think we have to realize that what we do here on earth matters.  A lot!

Matters to whom? It matters to me.

Otherwise you have the problem that humans have been hanging around on Earth for millions of years, and we mattered so much, nothing much happened, except we built bark huts, and ate fish. Once you realize how old the world is, you realize how much we don't matter to a god.

If you believe in Intelligent Design, then why didn't He work a bit faster?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 17, 2013, 10:30:10 PM
You just stepped on your own booby trap, Pat.

Those who don't will stand before Him and give an account of their lives.  Romans 14 & Revelation 20[/b]

Quote
There is no salvation for those who do not believe. Mark 16

The point of this thread, is that the Jews believed that there was a salvation without Jesus. The Pharisees were working on the book of Enoch. It seemed perfectly reasonable to them, that if there was a resurrection, then righteous people would go to it. (and unrighteous would be left behind in the silence of Sheol)

It's the same problem you still have. You SAY you are saved, but you don't really know. Christians are hard pressed to know if they are achieving the bare minimum "works" they need to do. It seems reasonable to you, that if you behave like a good western capitalist, who generally helped his neighbour, then if you believe in Jesus, you will go to heaven. The Jews believed that, too. It's a community perception of where the you think the bar is.

Jesus needed to be crucified, to re-brand the religion to Jesus, away from the Jewish religion.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 17, 2013, 10:38:03 PM
I will say that the evolution v creation debate could go on forever.  Unless you are a boots on the ground scientist, then we are all just quoting someone else.  So pick who you want and the next guy will quote another.

I can quote sky pixies. I think the evolutionist quotes are significantly stronger than the creationist quotes, because the creationists don't stick to any particular story, nor do they have any science, nor are there many of them, nor have any of them won any prizes, because they are too lazy to even award prizes to themselves.

But you are right, the debate can go on forever, because people are unwilling to let go of an infinite threat of hell, over something which is uncertain, like fossils being found 2km underground in oil drills.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2006/04/0426_060426_dinos.html

Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 17, 2013, 11:09:32 PM


But you are right, the debate can go on forever, because people are unwilling to let go of an infinite threat of hell, over something which is uncertain, like fossils being found 2km underground in oil drills.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2006/04/0426_060426_dinos.html

Which is odd because from what I heard, fossils tend not to be near oil deposits
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Add Homonym on December 17, 2013, 11:11:55 PM
I'm actually impressed with the bible and how such old texts still do speak relevantly to modern man.  Solomon in Ecclesiastes talks about how the soul is never satisfied.

Well, the soul is never satisfied in Ecclesiastes, because the premise of the book, is that there was no afterlife. Either way you look at it, this holds.

I'm not sure what the point of the book is, at all. This site: https://www.biblicaltraining.org/blog/curious-christian/6-12-2012/what-main-point-book-ecclesiastes
says that the point of the book is a "what if" there was no afterlife judgement, and in the last lines, says God will judge us. Yet, the person who wrote the book, was from an era who didn't believe in any afterlife.

Notice that the character of the writing suddenly changes in chapter 12, almost as if an afterlife believer got to it, and changed the point of it.


Oh, wait. Who knows. Maybe it's not even from any era.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecclesiastes#Title.2C_date_and_author
Quote
Most commentators admit that knowing the date of Ecclesiastes with any certainty is impossible with the current available evidence,[14] though a post-exilic date is the current consensus position among critical scholars.[15] Many evangelical scholars argue a pre-exilic date, up to and including the time of Solomon,[16] but this view has not gained wide acceptance among critical scholars.[17]On linguistic grounds (the presence of Persian loan-words) the book points to a date no earlier than about 450 BC,[1] while the latest possible date for its composition is 180 BC, when another Jewish writer, Ben Sira, quotes from it.[18] Yet scholars disagree whether Ecclesiastes belongs to the Persian or the Hellenistic periods. The dispute revolves around the degree of Hellenization (influence of Greek culture and thought) present in the book. Scholars arguing for a Persian date (c. 450–330 BC) hold that there is a complete lack of Greek influence in the book;[1] those who argue for a Hellenistic date (c. 330–180 BC) argue that it shows internal evidence of Greek thought and social setting.[19]

apparently there is no basis to judge anything in Ecclesiastes, because nobody can decide what it means:

Quote
There is considerable disagreement among scholars as to just what Ecclesiastes is about; is it positive and life-affirming or deeply pessimistic?[24] Is Koheleth coherent or incoherent, insightful or confused, orthodox or heterodox? Is the ultimate message of the book to copy Koheleth, the wise man, or to avoid his errors?[25] Some passages of Ecclesiastes seem to contradict other portions of the Old Testament, and even itself.[24] One suggestion for resolving the contradictions is to read the book as the record of Koheleth's quest for knowledge: opposing judgements (e.g. the dead are better off than the living (4:2) vs. a living dog is better off than a dead lion (9:4)) are therefore provisional, and it is only at the conclusion that the verdict is delivered (11–12:7). On this reading, Koheleth's sayings are goads, designed to provoke dialogue and reflection in his readers, rather than to reach premature and self-assured conclusions.[26]

The subject of Ecclesiastes is the pain and frustration engendered by observing and meditating on the distortions and inequities pervading the world, the uselessness of human deeds, the limitations of wisdom and righteousness; all this coexists with a firm belief in God, whose power, justice and unpredictability are sovereign.[27] History and nature move in cycles, so that all events are predetermined and unchangeable, and life has no meaning or purpose: the wise man and the man who does not study wisdom will both die and be forgotten: man should be reverent ("Fear God"), but in this life it is best to simply enjoy God's gifts.[22]

Even if I could come up with a coherent way of interpreting it, there is no telling when it was written, or what purpose.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Hatter23 on December 17, 2013, 11:37:31 PM


I'm actually impressed with the bible and how such old texts still do speak relevantly to modern man.

You are impressed with a message of hate then:

Luke 24:26
Dt 13:6-106(yes one hundred passages of hate)
Mark 6:11
Cor 11:6
Leviticus 20:13
Psalm 14
Dt 20:10-14
Genisis 19:24-26
Exodus 11:04
Exodus 7:5, 17
Exodus 10:02
Numbers 1:51, 3:10, 3:38
Numbers 11:1-2
Numbers 14:18
Numbers 14:43-45
Numbers 16:28-35
Numbers 17:12-13
Numbers 33:50-52
Dt 2:14-16
Dt 2:25
Dt 3:3-6
2Kings: 1:9-12
Dt 4:3
Dt 7:10
Dt 22:22
Dt 25:1-3
Dt 28:20
Joshua 6:17
Joshua 9:21-27
Judges 1:4
Judges 4:15-16
Judges 11:29-39
Judges 12:06
Judges 14:04
1 Samuel 2:06, 25
1 Samuel 15: 18-19 (Particularly good in that God is upset that people aren't hating others sufficiently for his desire)

Yeah the amount of hate is impressive.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Patrick Henry on December 18, 2013, 02:07:06 AM
I'm actually impressed with the bible and how such old texts still do speak relevantly to modern man.  Solomon in Ecclesiastes talks about how the soul is never satisfied.  He doesn't hide his struggle, and we see that all over the place in western culture especially.  The wisdom in Proverbs is a good example of teaching. There is also in the new testament particularly, teaching of forgiveness, grace, discipline, love.  All good stuff and applicable for us today. 
I see the bible as clear teaching with a clear message about who God is and where salvation comes from.  Christ commands His followers to tell others, so I think that it is important that you not be confused and think that we need another new revelation from God.  It's here.
And again, what I've put in bold above is just clearly incorrect.  It is not clear.  Otherwise, why are there so many people in this world - you know, the people that god apparently actually cares for - who have the message so wrong or outright reject it as nonsense?  The success rate of the bible to convince people that salvation through belief in Jesus (and/or good works - again, depends on who you ask), is far too low.  Especially from a being purported to be omnipotent, omniscient, and omni-benevolent.

If you were teaching a class and 25%[1] of your students were outright failing, wouldn't you think to yourself that there is probably a better way to teach the material?
 1. And I'm being very generous here.  Ask India, China, or various Islamic countries about it.
In Romans, Paul addresses why people don't accept the message of the gospel.  The bible message is clear to me. Salvation is by the grace of God through faith in Christ as the Redeemer of our sin.   
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 18, 2013, 10:32:43 AM
In Romans, Paul addresses why people don't accept the message of the gospel.  The bible message is clear to me. Salvation is by the grace of God through faith in Christ as the Redeemer of our sin.
Salvation[1] is by the grace[2] through faith in Christ[3] as the Redeemer[4] of our sin[5].

Not terribly clear.  It's short though - I'll give you that.

Again...there are a significant number of people who, for one reason or another, reject this ill-defined proclamation of the biblical message.  It's a low hit rate for an entity that supposedly wants to be known and wants his message to be clear.  It really is.  You're going to have to be specific with which passage(s) you're referring to from Paul, because the passages that excuse it as 'people just wanna be bad against god's message' doesn't really cut it.  Or is that really what you're sold on?  That big chunks of humanity are just wicked people?

I dunno.  You seem to have a pretty low opinion of god.  Either he is incapable of reaching out to large swaths of the people he so loves, or he just doesn't give a s**t about large swaths of the people he so loves.
 1. What does this mean?  Salvation from what?
 2. It's just given?  Gratis?
 3. I guess not just given.  Something is stipulated, but what is this something?  What do you mean by 'faith in Christ'?  Like, believe that he existed?  Exists?  Have faith that he will do certain actions?  Have faith that whatever someone wrote in a book is an accurate description of who this Christ is?
 4. Why the caps?
 5. What is sin?
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: jdawg70 on December 18, 2013, 10:38:06 AM
So you actually mean a 66% fail rate Jdawg? Christians are 33% of world Pop. and the "true Christian" population has to be in the 15% range
Well, I was intentionally conservative with the number.  I always have a sneaking suspicion that many devout Christians have no idea the sheer number of people on the planet that do not share their belief.  I figured saying 25% would be easy enough to accept and still gets my point across.  I didn't want to get into an argument on the accuracy of the numbers - the ballpark will do.
Title: Re: Why did Jesus have to be crucified?
Post by: Bumpy Ride on January 25, 2014, 01:00:08 PM
Quote: If it feels like your going through hell right now, keep going! lol.

This isn't a trick question, or one that necessarily can't be answered in a sane manner.

Paul argues that Abraham got to heaven by faith, not law. Abe was ordered to kill his son, by Elohim, so he did so. This is the type of faith needed to get to be with God.

However, the synoptic gospels, written by Jewish Christians, seem to be of a view that you can get to heaven by following Jewish law in a different way.

The parable of Lazarus in Luke 16, documents a supposed case of a Jew going to heaven because he was poor and neglected:

[22] And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
[23] And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

In pre-Christian times, it was widely believed by Pharisees that you got to heaven, if you were righteous. The logic and scripture for these beliefs has been destroyed by time; not propagated by Pauline Christians. We have evidence of this from the Ethiopian church.

At the end of the parable, there is the ambiguous statement:

[30] And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
[31] And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

The peculiarity of this statement in Luke, is that you have been warned so clearly by Moses and "the prophets" that you will go to hell, that you don't need any more warning. (Of course there is no warning at all in the O.T, about going to hell or hades. It just says you will go to sheol, no matter who you are.)

In the statement above, I left out some logic. You've been warned clearly that you will go to hell, IF you don't follow Jewish law. So, where do you go, if you do follow Jewish law? Perhaps to some other undiscovered place... or heaven, dare I say.

Christians say you can't go to the kingdom without Jesus, or unless you are a child, or unless God just decides to send you to heaven because you never heard of him, or unless you were good. There is an extensive list of exceptions.

The sneaky thing about the warning that Moses and the prophets have given, is that you have been warned in the O.T, that bad things will happen to you, if you disobey God, but not to any real degree. It's like a parent telling a child not to eat a stash of jelly beans because they are bad for them, but secretly hiding the fact that it's full of cyanide. Children are known to have little impulse control, so when the child eats a jelly bean, and starts to die, the parent can say "There, I told you it would be bad for you, but you disobeyed me." It sounds very like the Adam and Eve story, so it's not without precedent.

The problem is: why is Jesus telling an audience that Lazarus is a candidate for the kingdom of heaven, just because he is poor? Isn't this such a bad way of telling the moral, that he really should be shot? Carrying the jelly bean analogy further. It's like:

The ancient mythology of the jelly beans is that if you eat too many, they are bad for you. Then a great teacher comes along, and tells a story about how someone who didn't eat too many of them, was perfectly OK. He then leaves the jar of jelly beans in front of the children, and says "These are dietarily bad for you, and cause tooth decay, but they taste really good."

Maybe Jesus had to be crucified, because he was such a misleading teacher?