Did Jesus sacrifice really mean anything? (page 4)

tec

What can a human possibly do to an infinite God to deserve his wrath?

I'm not sure about that word, wrath... but for argument's sake: we can hurt, rape, kill, torture, crush the spirit of, enslave and dominate one another.

Moral justice cannot take the innocent for the guilty even if the innocent would offer itself.

That would depend on who is making up the morality of such a thing.

I watched a movie (true story) where two american college girls were in china (?), and caught with pot in their backpacks at the airport. (one of the girls was carrying some guys stuff onto the plane... so the video was a lesson never to do that) They were both sent to prison.

At one point, after the judge had just denied their plea to be freed, the girl who had hooked up with that guy who got them into all this trouble said that it was her fault. She did it. The other girl was innocent.

The judge said:

If what you say is true, then your friend deserves to go home.

If what you say is untrue, then your sacrifice has merit, and YOU deserve for your friend to go home.

So the judge let the other girl go back to America, on the basis of either the truth or the sacrifice. (perhaps both)

Thomas Paine's morality is not the only morality out there.

Peace,

Tammy

tec

*based on a true story, sorry. So the above might not have happened as detailed. It is still a good glimpse into other versions of morality.

Knowsnothing

Why do we need to be reconciliated? And why is God unwanting to speak to all of humanity directly?

tec

Why do we need to be reconciliated?

Because our actions separate us from God. Sort of like if someone is a man of peace, and your actions are the unpeaceful... you will have separated yourself from that man of peace.

And why is God unwanting to speak to all of humanity directly

He does not force himself onto us. Plus, as in at the mountain with Moses, the people did not want God to speak to them directly. They wanted Moses to mediate.

Right now we have Christ to mediate. God speaks to us through His Son. He still does not force himself upon us. (other than rare occasions... such as Paul, but that was pretty hard on Paul)

So it isn't that God is unwanting. (or Christ) It is us who are unwanting and unwilling. On top of that; we don't believe it can happen, we don't know what it is like to hear 'in spirit', so we often do not recognize it. Takes practice and faith.

Peace,

Tammy

Knowsnothing

Because our actions separate us from God. Sort of like if someone is a man of peace, and your actions are the unpeaceful... you will have separated

yourself from that man of peace.

No one could ever live up to God's standards. Isn't that what the law was for? Why does God expect us to live upto unreasonable standards (or at least did, in the case of Israel?)

He does not force himself onto us. Plus, as in at the mountain with Moses, the people did not want God to speak to them directly. They wanted Moses to mediate.

Right now we have Christ to mediate. God speaks to us through His Son. He still does not force himself upon us. (other than rare occasions... such as Paul, but that was pretty hard on Paul)

So it isn't that God is unwanting. (or Christ) It is us who are unwanting and unwilling. On top of that; we don't believe it can happen, we don't know what it is like to hear 'in spirit', so we often do not recognize it. Takes practice and faith.

Are you kidding me? How many here have prayed to even have a slight confirmation that God indeed listens? I sure did. Nothing. Nada. I slowly came to realize I was speaking to myself.

He does not force himself upon us, like he doesn't force himself upon Muslims and Hindus.

And, that 'hearing in spirit' makes me cautious. That's something I simply have to take your word to believe it. Which isn't too reassuring, considering you could define that any way you wish to define it.

Ding

In response to Thomas Paine's point, I think the New Testament indicates that somehow Christ actually took our sin on himself, not just the punishment (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Likewise, I think Jesus' statement to Nicodemus in John 3:3 about the need for a new birth indicates that the Christian concept of salvation involves no just pardoning the guilty but a spiritual transformation of the person so that he spiritually he is "in Christ" and not the same person he was before. I think this view is supported by such "in Christ" or "in him" passages as Romans 8:1-4, 1 Corinthians 1:30, Colossians 1:14, and Galatians 2:19-20.

tec

No one could ever live up to God's standards. Isn't that what the law was for? Why does God expect us to live upto unreasonable standards (or at least did, in the case of Israel?)

No one could ever live up to the WTS standards.

God's are not so demanding of perfection. Act in love for one another. Forgive one another. Show mercy to one another. Yes, we will mess up. He knows this. But we can also be honest about the times that we don't act in line with what Christ taugh, repent and ask forgiveness... and Christ covers over our sins, if we put faith in Him and accept this.

So it isn't that we are supposed to be perfect, at all.

We are supposed to act in love and forgiveness and mercy... and keep on seeking those things. SEEK righteousness. Love also covers over a multitidue of transgressions.

I have to go to work. But I will get back to you as per the second part of what you said later.

Peace,

tammy

SweetBabyCheezits

Tammy, I'm confused about your movie reference. Girl A - the one who got them into trouble - is she supposed to be analagous to Jesus or A&E? In either case, Girl A was still guilty in some way, right? The sentence was applied to one of two people found guilty of breaking the law, regardless of what happened to Girl B.

For a parallel to Jesus sacrifice, we need to bring in a third party who had NO involvement in the crime whatsoever. Suppose Girl A's mother asked to serve her daughter's sentence in her stead - how would the judge have responded to that, considering the mother was not involved in the crime?

I never claimed Thomas Paine's morality was the de facto standard but I will take it over a book that condones - and even prescribes - genocide, mysogyny, rape, murder, homophobia, slavery, etc... any day of the week. I'm just glad Thomas Paine reasoned outside of "this is what I was taught as a child" box. When some Christians claim that Jesus died to "pay our debt" they are obfuscating the details of the story. A crime was supposedly committed against god, right? Relabeling the offense as a debt that needed to be paid is a combination of shoehorning and moving the goalposts.

If someone murdered your child, would you feel justice had been served if the judge allowed an innocent bystander to give his life in place of the murderer?

Ding, we're discussing the logic and reason of the doctrine, not the scriptural support (which amounts to circular logic). Take off the Jesus glasses and reason on it like you don't already believe what you believe.

Wasanelder Once

I think if he comes out of his tomb and sees his shadow we get another month of winter, something like that.

Ding

If someone murdered your child, would you feel justice had been served if the judge allowed an innocent bystander to give his life in place of the murderer?

No. Then again, I don't know if I personally would be satisfied that justice had been done no matter what sentence was imposed on the murderer since my child would still be dead.

In fact, is justice served if a rich person pays a parking ticket incurred by a poor person? It's generous, but didn't the guilty person get off? Isn't the substitutionary payment an enabling of further violations? I agree that the argument is all the stronger if we are dealing with serious moral violations rather than minor infractions of the law.

An innocent man pays; a guilty person goes free. I agree if that's all that happens, it isn't justice.

My point is that according to the scriptures, that's not all that happens.

Did Jesus sacrifice really mean anything?

Share this