Why did Jesus have to die?

by Crazyguy 33 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  little_Socrates

  Christ had to die so that God could be like us in all things. It was the ultimate form of empathy from a loving God. Instead of relieving all our suffering... He joined himself to that suffering.
  
• 

  prologos

  Jesus had to die, because it is the way. Even stars with all their mass, energy die. He should have been baptized at the age of 1003 as a young man and only then braved the executioners. as it is, even in the story, nothing remarkable, he had to die because those in power protect their turf at all cost, to everyone else's detriment. He was in the way.
• 

  CalebInFloroda

  The idea of a personal Messiah that comes to redeem humanity NEVER occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures in that you never, ever read things like "the Messiah will do such and such" or "the Messiah is expected to fulfill this or that prophecy." There IS however talk of a future age in which peace and prosperity come to all, but the words "Messianic age" or mention of people being "ruled by the Messiah" don't appear.

  It was the Christians who began interpreting the Hebrew Scriptures this way as they began to claim that such and such verse applied to Jesus of Nazareth. Their claim is that Jesus was a figure foretold in the Hebrew Tanakh but in ways hidden from the Jews, ways that can only be unlocked by joining the "one true religion" governed by a body of elders who lived in Jerusalem but condemned the unbelieving Jewish world around them. When Jesus unexpectedly died the death of a criminal excommunicated from Judaism, his followers merely applied texts from the Hebrew Bible to support the events (again "hidden" in the Scriptures and requiring the special insight of those anointed ones in Jerusalem to comprehend). Jesus didn't have to die anymore than the Messiah was expected to. It just happened he was killed as a criminal, and those who believed in him wouldn't let go of their beliefs. They would next force the Hebrew Bible to serve their needs.

  The term "messiah" in Hebrew means one who has been appointed to an office of oversight, like a priest or an official, employing the ritual of anointing the subject with oil before witnesses as a "swearing in" type of ceremony. It does not refer to a redeemer or someone who saves anymore than someone who is called "sworn in" means they will save others.

  You will also note that Christians have to rely on their own translations of the Hebrew texts to ensure that their prophecies about Jesus fit their Messiah. A simple comparison of these "proof texts" about Jesus in something like the NJPS Tanakh will show that like the JWs, most Christians cannot make their religion work unless they rely on a translation that takes many liberties with the actual text.
• 

  Bonsai

  What frustrates me and turns me off to Christianity is the fact that everything that happened up until now - billions of deaths, constant wars and famines - were the result of Adam accepting a piece of fruit from his wife and eating it. Did Adam kill anyone? Rape anyone? No. He ate a piece of fruit. Instead of banishing Adam, god could have continued to show mercy. He could have continued to educate Adam as a father educates his child when he makes a mistake. Instead he abandons Adam and his family (mankind). Gives us a child sacrifice during a bygone age of desert tribes, goat herders and Roman statue worshipers. 2000+ years later we are supposed to swallow this stuff or face the ultimate sin of becoming the anti-christ. Also we are to go door-to-door and tell everyone how LOVING and LOGICAL this arrangement is.

  Even if somehow this is all true, I can never fathom how Jesus' slaughter is supposed to compel me to love god.
  
• 

  little_Socrates

  CalebinFloroda...

  You say there is no mention or prophesy of a personal savior in Hebrew texts? How would you interpret these passages?
  

  Isaiah 53

  Psalms 22
  
• 

  Brokeback Watchtower

  Jehovah got in a real bad mood over Adam and Eve so he cursed them and all their offspring with death and frustration, Jesus died so that Jehovah could be in a good mood once again and forgive everyone that kisses his ass with proper fear and respect so that they can keep up the ass kissing which Jehovah really loves, and keep getting better and better at it so that Jehovah never wants you to stop(addicted to ass kissing) and thus live forever.
• 

  little_Socrates

  Bonsai have you ever read C.S.Lewis? He has some great thoughts on this in his space trilogy. His claim is that God sending Jesus was a much greater plan than just eliminating sin. It is only because of our sinfulness that we can truly know Gods mercy. Our curse of original sin became a blessing, through the redemptive work of Jesus.
• 

  CalebInFloroda

  @little_Socrates

  Neither of those texts have ever been used by Jews as referring to the Messiah.

  The idea of a personal messiah grew only after the Roman occupation during the Second Temple, and then only among some Jews, most notably the Essenes. Prior to this period there was no clear personification of the Messiah as an actual individual, and even afterward the fall of the Second Temple the idea was often spread among two persons or illustrative of the Messianic Age itself. Many Jews today do not expect that an actual individual called the Messiah will come, understanding references to "him" as symbolic of redeemed humanity during Olam Ha Ba.

  The texts you mention in Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 have far different meanings in Judaism. The idea of a suffering Messiah was so unknown and alien to Jews that even among the apostles the idea that Jesus would suffer was considered ludicrous. Remember how Peter objected to Jesus' own statement of his coming passion?

  Read Matthew 16.21-23. If the Jews had ever expected that the texts you mentioned would apply to the Messiah, why did Peter not believe Jesus that such a fate awaited him? At Matthew 16.16 Peter had just said that he believed that Jesus was the Messiah, but then in verse 22 Peter also adds that a destiny of suffering would "never" come upon the Messiah. Why? Because like all other Jews, Peter did not believe in a suffering Messiah. The idea came from Jesus, and only after his death did Jesus' followers begin to declare that such suffering was necessary, never before.

  The text of Psalm 22 is a prayer used to this day when Jews personally face suffering. It recounts the experiences of David, but it never says these experiences would befall the Messiah. Isaiah 53 is also merely a poetic description of the Jews suffering as if they were one individual.

  Until recently Christian Bibles used to render Psalm 22 quite dishonestly. This has been corrected in newer versions such as the NRSV and the NABRE. Verse 16 in Old Testament renderings used to follow the midrash of the New Testament writers: "They pierced my hands and my feet" meant to describe the nailing of Jesus' feet to the cross. But in reality the text (which in Hebrew is verse 17) reads: "Like lions they maul my hands and feet."

  Similar peculiar wordings of so-called "Messianic prophecies" in the Old Testament based on incorrect quotes in the New Testament have been similarly returned to their more precise translations in these modern versions. Scholars admit that past translators have performed a disservice not merely to the Jewish text but to Christians by failing to provide them with accurate renderings of texts like these and others such as Isaiah 7.14.

  Returning them to their original state has left many Christians uncomfortable, true, but others have been able to embrace the fact that midrash was involved in their application by followers of Jesus.

  This means such texts as you mention are no longer seen as Messianic in and of themselves even by many modern Christian exegetes (in other words not originally composed as or viewed as having any connection to the original Jewish hopes regarding the Messiah), leaving them to find new ways to explain their use by New Testament writers.

  In the end you have Jewish history, present Jewish religious thought, Biblical translation scholars, and even Christian exegetes who you will find formidable in their disagreement to your argument based on the texts you mention.
• 

  jws

  I have a very religious ex-JW friend. My problem is the whole I'm going to send my son to die and that will forgive all of you. Why can't God just forgive? I don't get it. My friend asked me if I was possessed by Satan that I would even question this. Jesus coming and sacrifice are so integral to him.

  This whole idea is so ingrained in people they don't even rationalize and think it over.

  I wasn't the one doing the original sinning. So IMO, I shouldn't be punished. And yet sending another perfect who dies is supposed to undo all of that? If I believe in him? Why does he even have to die? God has all the say in the matter. Can't he just snap his fingers and we're all wiped free of inherited sin?

  His point is basically what the JWs say. The devil and demons are watching so a perfect man has to live without sinning. Showing that a man can do it. Proving God's original theory right. And that he had to die so that he can close that chapter. A perfect man lived and died without sinning. If he lived forever, there would always be a question. After a millennium or so, he could give in to some temptation and not live sin-free. So the case is still open and not settled while he's alive.

  If Satan were clever (he supposedly is), he would have kept Jesus alive forever. The longer he lives, the more chance he'll mess up somehow. Then Satan would be like "Ha! See! A man can't live perfectly". The only temptations aren't food and power.

  Satan, by killing Jesus, either had to be complicit to God's wishes to have Jesus killed or totally ignorant of what would happen. And if he was totally ignorant, then how could this be a test both sides were watching to see if God or Satan were right?

  I still don't see how Jesus dying helps me. OK, he lived perfectly. According to the JWs he was an angel to begin with. So it's hardly apples to apples. That's like sending a genius back in time, knowing what he does, to become a child and take grade school again. 2+2, Please! Give me a break!

  My friend doesn't believe the previous existence of Jesus anymore though. But still. God can pronounce mankind forgiven. He doesn't need to have people live and die.

  And it's still apples to oranges. We aren't wiped out of original sin. We still die. We have to believe in Jesus. That's not the same as things being forgiven and we live forever.
• 

  paradisebeauty

  Jesus's blood is the redemption of all human kind.

  Jesus did receive immortality and incorruptibly when he was resurrected.