Why did Jesus have to die to save us. Why couldn't he stay alive and save us.
It is such an awkward nonsensical premise that is just accepted, that Jesus had to die for our sins. Why couldn't he stay alive and cleanse us of our sins. Why do we need his blood. Why do we have to washed in the blood. After all, seems like a metaphor anyway.
I guess just because it was said so.
Originally posted by moon1969God has an anger problem and it seems that the only way for him to calm down is to have some Blood flowing from a dead Son .After the outrage in the Garden, God was so ticked off that everybody was going to Hell in a hand basket untill the idea of sending hid Son to be killed on the cross came to mind. I do the same thing with my son. If he messes up I cut him just to see the blood, and then I can forgive him. It's really a very simple and beautiful way to punish and then forgive.
Why did Jesus have to die to save us. Why couldn't he stay alive and save us.
It is such an awkward nonsensical premise that is just accepted, that Jesus had to die for our sins. Why couldn't he stay alive and cleanse us of our sins. Why do we need his blood. Why do we have to washed in the blood. After all, seems like a metaphor anyway.
I guess just because it was said so.
Originally posted by moon1969Hi buddy. This was just discussed in another thread a couple weeks ago so I'll track it down and let you know where it's at....
Why did Jesus have to die to save us. Why couldn't he stay alive and save us.
It is such an awkward nonsensical premise that is just accepted, that Jesus had to die for our sins. Why couldn't he stay alive and cleanse us of our sins. Why do we need his blood. Why do we have to washed in the blood. After all, seems like a metaphor anyway.
I guess just because it was said so.
Well I can't seem to find it now but will keep looking. But here is a clue:
1 Timothy 2:6
J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)
3-6 In the sight of God our saviour this is undoubtedly the right thing to pray for; for his purpose is that all men should be saved and come to realise the truth. And that is, that there is only one God, and only one intermediary between God and men, Jesus Christ the man. He gave himself as a "ransom" for us all—an act of "redemption" which happened once, but which stands for all times as a witness to what he is.
Some Bibles us the term "a corresponding ransom".
So what this is saying in a nutshell is Adam lost life for us. He sinned and as a result all humans now die because of the imperfection we inherited from Adam as we all sin.
God could have turned his back on us and said "oh well" and forget it.
But he is perfect and his ways are perfect. He does not cut corners and his justice is pure justice way beyond our human justice system.
But we do see it still in some ways as a "life for a life" which is God's way as history shows.
So since it was a life, Adam's, that caused us all to die and which was a form of murder on his part that affects us all, it would now take a perfect life as Adam's was to legally make a true ransom or repayment work. This is where Jesus came into action and offered his life a perfect one that would be the legal and equal ransom needed to give us a chance if we decide to do what is necassary in God's eyes, to one day have that perfect life back.
The ransom had to be of equal value of what Adam lost.
Originally posted by moon1969(1) To propitiate the Father's Justice. (2) The risen Christ is alive. (3) The blood is a reference to OT animal sacrifice, which prophetically taught the messiah's still future first advent, ministry, death (no one took His life from Him... He dismissed His Spirit when His work was done), ressurrection, ascension and session. (4) There's no literal blood involved, except as a reference to Christ"s work of reconciling mankind to himself and our voluntary acceptance of His grace gift of salvation, without which there is no personal relationship with the creator or unspeakable joy beyond anything we could ask or think with Him in heaven for all eternity. (5) We're not dealing with metaphorical reference but rather with absolute factual information revealed in God's Word as well as the hard fist of ultimate reality... and the most significant decision we make in our lifetimes. (6) Believe you would appreciate C.S. Lewis' thoughtful search for the truth several decades ago which was similar to yours today. Would heartily recommend his small book "Mere Christianity", which is available for a few bucks at your local used bookstore or on Amazon.
(1) Why did Jesus have to die to save us. Why couldn't he stay alive and save us.
It is such an awkward nonsensical premise that is just accepted, that Jesus had to die for our sins. (2) Why couldn't he stay alive and cleanse us of our sins. (3) Why do we need his blood. (4) Why do we have to washed in the blood. (5) After all, seems like a metaphor anyway.
(6) I guess just because it was said so.
gb
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyOh. I have Mere Christianity around here somewhere. I also have Why I Am Not a Christian by Betrand Russel. I have collected many books over the years. Thanks for the reply.
(1) To propitiate the Father's Justice. (2) The risen Christ is alive. (3) The blood is a reference to OT animal sacrifice, which prophetically taught the messiah's still future first advent, ministry, death (no one took His life from Him... He dismissed His Spirit when His work was done), ressurrection, ascension and session. (4) There's no literal blo ...[text shortened]... , which is available for a few bucks at your local used bookstore or on Amazon.
gb
Originally posted by moon1969Hebrews 9:22
Why did Jesus have to die to save us. Why couldn't he stay alive and save us.
It is such an awkward nonsensical premise that is just accepted, that Jesus had to die for our sins. Why couldn't he stay alive and cleanse us of our sins. Why do we need his blood. Why do we have to washed in the blood. After all, seems like a metaphor anyway.
I guess just because it was said so.
And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
What do you think would clean one of sin without sacrifice?
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayI answered in context of the verse you cited from Hebrews which is misleading at best. The OT provided a number of means for atonement other than blood sacrifice - one of which is "righteousness".
Righteousness cleans sins? I get that it stops one from sinning, but if you
sin which is something against God, man, or yourself. How would your
one word answer make that okay or go away?
Kelly
There was a website that explained it in detail which I wasn't able to find, but I found the following which seems to touch on some of it:
http://www.messianicjewishtruth.com/atone.html
Ezekiel 33 also seems to point to "righteousness" if you're interested in getting a fuller explanation of that aspect.
Originally posted by moon1969It'd be best not to follow Bertrand Russell, for there is a special place reserved for those who strive to separate men from their salvation. This book is especially egregious, since it has turned more men from God than any other atheist essay written since 1927, when it was published.
Oh. I have Mere Christianity around here somewhere. I also have Why I Am Not a Christian by Betrand Russel. I have collected many books over the years. Thanks for the reply.
Originally posted by Suziannewhat special place do you imagine is reserved for him?
It'd be best not to follow Bertrand Russell, for there is a special place reserved for those who strive to separate men from their salvation. This book is especially egregious, since it has turned more men from God than any other atheist essay written since 1927, when it was published.
Originally posted by SuzianneI dont think you should assume he "follows" Russell just because he mentioned it.
It'd be best not to follow Bertrand Russell, for there is a special place reserved for those who strive to separate men from their salvation. This book is especially egregious, since it has turned more men from God than any other atheist essay written since 1927, when it was published.
Really, I gave you more credit than that
Originally posted by SuzianneThat doesn't surprise me. I was fascinated by that book (essays and speeches) as a young adult.
It'd be best not to follow Bertrand Russell, for there is a special place reserved for those who strive to separate men from their salvation. This book is especially egregious, since it has turned more men from God than any other atheist essay written since 1927, when it was published.