Thread: The Significance of Christ's Death.

Well, heres how I see it. Firstly, the Bible never says God can see the future.
If someone says that with certainty it's paradigm. When he predicts the future he could just as easily made it happen that way when it came along rather than fortell it. Example, I tell someone I that a virus will hit their computer in three days. Then I send a virus to them in three days. I did not fortune tell.

Secondly, here is how I beleive it 'MAY' have happened. God creates angels. A third of angels want power. They fight. The angels loose. God makes man. God tells man if you sin, you'll die to give them free will.

Man sins, God's power is in his word. God must fulfill that promise. He is in a spot. If he doesn't kill them (man) anyway, he loses his power. If he lets them die, the fallen angels can say 'haha you lost one.' God's glory could be compromised if that happened... (Maybe.) And on top of that we die, and we were his only creation in his own image and he loves us.

With some intrinsic law in God, he can cast man's sin on a part of God. (Son.)

Oh, by the way, I believe the trinity are seperate beings but one cannot be God without the other. Not so much they share conciousness but that they need each other's aspects. How that works? I have no friggin idea. But I'm a human and have limited intelectual capacity.

Anyway, God, father, puts sin on Christ. The wages of sin is death, so Christ dies. Somehow, we don't know, he conquered death. Perhaps there was a chance he wouldn 't have. I mean, would the angels have attacked God if there was no chance at victory in the fist place? Maybe I'm totally wrong on this. It's just speculation. Or debt was paid for, but God still wanted to give us our own will. How judgement works I can't say. And none of what I've presented I can say with certainty at all.

It just explains how God can give us an out and partially explains why God did it his way as far as man can comprehend.

Well, there is one explanation. Take it or leave it.

Even Jesus knew not where he came from until he tried hallucinogens for the first time.

I think the explinations are both quite good but the most straight forward answer to your question is that God sent a part of himself to experience the toils of human life and suffering and with this the burden of sin was lifted off humanity so they could enter heavan as originally intended. Its significant for God because he created a loop hole in his law to let his most beloved creation in to heavan again, and it is significant for humanity because, well, we can get in to heavan.

Just a theory, but I think Jesus allowed to be cruscified so that people would get the message of unconditional love towards all beings. Now many people say that his crucifixtion didn't work because people in the christian faith still don't all get this message, but I think it wasn't meant to work immediatly or anything, it was just to plant a seed. This seed is still growing, and eventually people will come to their senses and work together instead of competeing with each other. But Jesus didn't do it start a religion, just spread a message.

The resurrecting god man motif goes back a long way. It mostly has to do with vegetation and seasonal cycles.

Why the need at all for some barbaric and awfully silly ritual of torture and crucifixion if you are all powerful?

Just to piss you off?

Originally Posted by Neruo

Why the need at all for some barbaric and awfully silly ritual of torture and crucifixion if you are all powerful?

To para-phrase Dawkins: "Who was God trying to impress? Why not just forgive the sin without the blood sacrifice and get on with it?". All powerful being with a penchant for street theatre and hangin' about maybe?

I like your theory as well stonedape, and Neuro, I think you should read what I wrote, it may answer your question. Dawkins is smart, but come on, even if you are all powerful you have to keep rules in place.

This is a little off topic but I also dont see why God has to be able to see in to the future. Eventually we may be able to create life too, but that doesnt mean we will be able to see in to the future, silly churches.

Originally Posted by CatBus

I'm curious as to the significance of Christ's death.

Okay, so the Holy Trinity consists of God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit, they're all the same being, even thought they're different.

So Jesus is God, just as God is Jesus.

Wouldn't that mean that Jesus, just as God, knows everything?

If Jesus knows everything, then he knew from the start that one day he would sacrifice himself for the betterment of mankind, so there were no surprises during the time of the crucification, which would have made it astronomically more bearable than if someone else had partaken in the events and did NOT know what the outcome would be.


So wheres the significance in Christ's death? I'm sure many people would have done what he did (especially since they'd know what to expect) if it meant that people could spend eternity in heaven.

Often time people will recite John 3:16 to help convert people because it really pulls on their heart strings. "Man, he let his son die for me."

But when looked at rationally, when Jesus died he would have gone right back to heaven (except for that whole going to hell and witnessing thing, or whatever he did), so it's not like God lost his only son forever, only for the 33 and however years that he was on Earth, and figuring he's been around forever, I'm sure that wasn't a very long time to wait.


Basically I see no significance in the death of Jesus Christ, but I'd really like to hear the counter arguments to it, because if there was a significance to Jesus's death I'd definitely like to know what it is.

Answer to any question about the Bible:

Because God can do anything.

Pwned.

/thread

Originally Posted by tkdyo

Its significant for God because he created a loop hole in his law to let his most beloved creation in to heavan again, and it is significant for humanity because, well, we can get in to heavan.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

Dawkins is smart, but come on, even if you are all powerful you have to keep rules in place.

If you are all powerful, you have no use for "rules". If you want something to occur in a particular fashion, it becomes so. There is no need for you to offer yourself a sacrifice. That doesn't sound like the thought pattern of an all powerful being. That sounds more like the superstition of some ancient humans.

In the Old Testament, people's sins were atoned for through sacrifices. The animal had to be spotless, not diseased, not blemished... perfect. A man would lay hands on the animal before it was sacrificed, symbolizing the transfer of sins from him on to the animal. Thus, man's sins were washed away by blood. Jesus, the perfect God-man, came and died as a final sacrifice for all sins, shedding his blood on the cross. In Hebrews it states "Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins."

When the Jews were still in Egypt, the tenth plague (chosen by pharaoh) was that wereby the angel of death came through Egypt and killed the first-born of each household. The Jews were instructed to take the blood of a spotless lamb (before the Law was written later on) and spread its blood on the door posts. When the angel came by and saw the blood, they would know that those people in that house had chosen to follow God's instruction, and the angel passed over that house.

(Which is what Passover is all about.)

Originally Posted by Amethyst Star

In the Old Testament, people's sins were atoned for through sacrifices. The animal had to be spotless, not diseased, not blemished... perfect. A man would lay hands on the animal before it was sacrificed, symbolizing the transfer of sins from him on to the animal. Thus, man's sins were washed away by blood. Jesus, the perfect God-man, came and died as a final sacrifice for all sins, shedding his blood on the cross. In Hebrews it states "Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins."

When the Jews were still in Egypt, the tenth plague (chosen by pharaoh) was that wereby the angel of death came through Egypt and killed the first-born of each household. The Jews were instructed to take the blood of a spotless lamb (before the Law was written later on) and spread its blood on the door posts. When the angel came by and saw the blood, they would know that those people in that house had chosen to follow God's instruction, and the angel passed over that house.

(Which is what Passover is all about.)

Thats another thing that always bugged me, was the conditions of the exodus. God knowingly tortured every single citizen of Egypt regardless of whether or not they supported the Pharaoh, and than killed the first born of every Egyptian family, no matter what anyone ever says to me, I will ALWAYS consider that act murder. Every Christian I've always met has always acted like this was such a just and good act yet I am revolted and it makes me want to puke.

The bible is all over the place, in some it's all about unconditional love, in others, its god being a total dick to everyone because he can't just exercise his godly might and make things the way he wants them without fucking up everyone involved and hoping for the best.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

I think the explinations are both quite good but the most straight forward answer to your question is that God sent a part of himself to experience the toils of human life and suffering and with this the burden of sin was lifted off humanity so they could enter heavan as originally intended. Its significant for God because he created a loop hole in his law to let his most beloved creation in to heavan again, and it is significant for humanity because, well, we can get in to heavan.

Yea 'heavan' is a swell place isn't it? What kind of an incompetent person would have loop holes in his divine plan? Why would he need to send a person down to earth for him to 'understand' anything. Last time I checked, this 'god' guy was all-knowing and all-powerful. He doesn't go at a certain point in time "Oh bullocks, I screwed up, lets fix this by using a loop-hole in my law".

Or you are implying god made a mistake. Fine with me. Just a small step to 'the bible made a mistake' and 'the Church made a mistake'. Which is the case. Lots of mistakes. Ah well, even the brothers Grim probably had some inconsistencies in their stories, don't be to hard on yourself.

lol, you say that like Im actually a member of a dogmatic church. I am not a member of any world religion, but that doesnt mean that I am not knowledgeable about them. I was simply answering this guys question in the form of what people believe, thats what he asked for isnt it?

Also, according to the Bible, he didnt screw things up, Lucifer did. And this is quite possible if God cant tell the future, which he couldnt if he gave free will. Free will means the future can take many turns. Hence, his need to sacrifice part of himself in place of humanity to allow them back in to heaven. So, if you consider not being able to tell the future an imperfection, then yes he is imperfect, but alas many christians think of this fact. Also, I didnt say that he needed to "understand" anything, it was the point that he put part of himself through the experience as a sacrifice, not to gain knowledge.

Mark, with what I just wrote, then that means yes, he would need rules if he cant tell the future.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

Also, according to the Bible, he didnt screw things up, Lucifer did.

The only way Lucifer could have screwed things up is if god made things in such a way that they could be screwed up. Whether he knows the future or not is irrelevant. If he is all powerful, he certainly has the power to create a condition of things that can't be "screwed up". The only other possibility is that he intentionally allowed for the possibility for things to be "screwed up" in which case they aren't really "screwed up" at all since it's supposed to happen like that. But then why would he go back and fix it if he left the ability for it to be screwed up on purpose? Wouldn't it make more sense just to not let it get screwed up in the first place? It makes no sense.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

Free will means the future can take many turns. Hence, his need to sacrifice part of himself in place of humanity to allow them back in to heaven.

Actually, that is complete non-sequitur. Again, if he is all powerful, there is no need for a sacrifice. In fact, there would be no such thing as a "need" for an all powerful being. So why the big spectacle? Why is it that this incredible, timeless being of infinite power acts like a tribal human?

With all the extreme mental gymnastics going on here you would think the Olympics were still on!

The only gymnastics I see here are the bible thumpers coming up with absurd apologetics to counter the rational arguments being presented.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

The only gymnastics I see here are the bible thumpers coming up with absurd apologetics to counter the rational arguments being presented.

are you referring to me? Because if you are I already stated my position on religion, and also I stated two things which are very easy to understand if you are looking from a christian perspective. One, if you are all powerful you still have to have rules because if you give beings free will, then obviously some of them are going to act immorally. Two, it is impossible for God to see the future if people have free will, if he already knows what people will do, then obviously free will is an illusion. This also goes with why there has to be rules. Why is it so hard to wrap your mind around the fact that he CHOOSES to grant free will, and therefore cant use his powers to their full extent, otherwise freewill would be an illusion? It all comes down to free will and it takes no great long jump to comprehend.

Anyways, Im not stating my position again, Im just going to say that looking from this way, its not so illogical that people couldnt believe. Just because I dont and you dont doesnt make it "sad"

The only gymnastics I see here are the bible thumpers coming up with absurd apologetics to counter the rational arguments being presented.

Where is there apologizing for God here? I certainly didn't. At any rate, your generalizing use fo the term 'Bible thumpers' goes to show your prejudices. Prejudical stereotyping is not 'rational' but a preconcieved notion that prohibits 'rational' thought.

Originally Posted by spockman

Where is there apologizing for God here? I certainly didn't. At any rate, your generalizing use fo the term 'Bible thumpers' goes to show your prejudices. Prejudical stereotyping is not 'rational' but a preconcieved notion that prohibits 'rational' thought.

That's like saying I'm prejudiced against ants by assuming a priori that I can beat them in a chess match.

No, you generalized all Christian's on forums as Bible thumpers and thus you assumed you could analyze who they were not as individuals but as a group.

Oh, and now you are insulting the intelligence of Christian's and saying that your own intellect is superior.

That's prejudice.

Originally Posted by spockman

Oh, and now you are insulting the intelligence of Christian's [sic] and saying that your own intellect is superior.

That's prejudice.

It's not pre-judging, it's judging.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

It's not pre-judging, it's judging.

What happens to the Christians that don't read the bible?