Why Did Jesus Have To Die?

[reyb]

Let me revive this issue. Apostle Paul explained ‘why did Jesus had to die’ but he is not referring to your historical Jesus thus you cannot see it. 

[RC Patriot]

I am relatively new to this forum, but reading through these posts, I can agree that Reyb is not especially open to hearing the truth. The question he asks is a very important one, however, and since the thread has been revived, I'll answer it the way I've answered it for myself. If any part of this is lacking in any way, I would greatly appreciate correction.

 

God created Natural Law
Natural Law demands Justice.
Sin is evil.
God is all Good.
Therefore, all Sin offends God.
God is infinite.
Therefore, all Sin is infinite.
Justice demands an equal repayment for what was taken.
     (i.e., When we steal, Justice demands that we pay for what was stolen. When we take a life, Justice demands life be given)
The punishment for a sin is mitigated or exacerbated by the identity of the offended person.
     (i.e. A Crime against a child demands a greater punishment than the same crime committed against an adult)

God holds the highest identity.

Therefore, Sins against God demand the highest punishment: death.
Therefore, only death can satisfy what justice demands for sins against God.
Because all Sin is infinite, no finite repayment can fulfill what Justice demands.
Therefore, Justice demands an infinite repayment.
There is no part of creation which is infinite.
Jesus is not part of Creation.
Jesus is God.
Jesus is Human.
Justice demands that what is paid comes from either the offender, or a representative of the offender.
Because Jesus is both Human and God, Jesus alone can represent Humanity in an infinite way.
Therefore, the death of Jesus is the only way to fulfill what Justice demands.

[Ice_nine]

I'm not a theologian, but what you wrote sounds a lot to me like "atonement theory" and I don't believe that is in sync w/ catholic theology but I'm not 100%.

[BarbTherese]

No teacher, but for me it was the Obedience of Jesus to His Father's Will at all points in His Human Life, even to death on a cross, that won for us salvation.  In this way, Jesus counteracts the disobedience of our first parents.  Being fully human, Jesus entered fully into cause and effect just as we all are - a miracle is when God intervenes in cause and effect. Despite the plea of Jesus in the garden, His Father did not intervene and abort the effect of the life of Jesus in His Times which were the causes of His Death in human history, however one reads that human history.  Jesus embraces His Father's Will by going humbly and quietly to His terrible death.  He also goes quite confidently and trustfully in His Father and His Will, though at one stage He feels complete abandonment - but He does not loose his Faith and confident trust "Father, into Your Hands I commend My Spirit".  He also manifested that Spirit of Forgiveness which perseveres in history down through the ages - and is our vocation and call also.  Many are the perfect virtues manifested by Jesus on Calvary and immediately before.

 

The Death of Jesus, The Cross, is what can give meaning to human suffering.

Edited April 25, 2014 by BarbaraTherese

[Luigi]

I agree with BarbaraTherese AND Jesus' acceptance of his death on the cross is the perfect act of faith in the unseen Father - faith that the Father would indeed raise him up on the third day.

 

So Jesus had to die in order to:

- Atone for our sins (He could have atoned for sins without dying)

- Demonstrate to us what total obedience to God looks like

- Demonstrate to us what total faith in God looks like

 

There are other secondary effects that can be derived from the above, but for me these are the main points.

[Credo in Deum]

thedude asked in CatholicQ&A (see topic Why Did Christ Die?) the following:

Quick question that is bothering me and I can't seem to find any resources. Why did Christ have to die? Couldn't God have forgiven sins without this?
 

 

The answer is given by St. Paul in his letter to the Hebrews, chapter 9.

 

 

11 But Christ, being come an high priest of the good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hand, that is, not of this creation:

12 Neither by the blood of goats, or of calves, but by his own blood, entered once into the holies, having obtained eternal redemption.

13 For if the blood of goats and of oxen, and the ashes of an heifer being sprinkled, sanctify such as are defiled, to the cleansing of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who by the Holy Ghost offered himself unspotted unto God, cleanse our conscience from dead works, to serve the living God?

15 And therefore he is the mediator of the new testament: that by means of his death, for the redemption of those transgressions, which were under the former testament, they that are called may receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

16 For where there is a testament, the death of the testator must of necessity come in.

17 For a testament is of force, after men are dead: otherwise it is as yet of no strength, whilst the testator liveth.

18 Whereupon neither was the first indeed dedicated without blood.

19 For when every commandment of the law had been read by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water, and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people,

20 Saying: This is the blood of the testament, which God hath enjoined unto you.

21 The tabernacle also and all the vessels of the ministry, in like manner, he sprinkled with blood.

22 And almost all things, according to the law, are cleansed with blood: and without shedding of blood there is no remission.

23 It is necessary therefore that the patterns of heavenly things should be cleansed with these: but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

24 For Jesus is not entered into the holies made with hands, the patterns of the true: but into heaven itself, that he may appear now in the presence of God for us.

25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holies, every year with the blood of others:

26 For then he ought to have suffered often from the beginning of the world: but now once at the end of ages, he hath appeared for the destruction of sin, by the sacrifice of himself.

27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment:

28 So also Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many; the second time he shall appear without sin to them that expect him unto salvation.

[RC Patriot]

I'm not a theologian, but what you wrote sounds a lot to me like "atonement theory" and I don't believe that is in sync w/ catholic theology but I'm not 100%.

 

I'm only a chat room theologian, myself. I think that my explanation only fleshes out St. Anselm's idea, which the OP quoted.

 

There's an undistributed middle that I can't help but question. Obedience of Jesus to His Father's Will does not explain why the Father's Will demanded death in the first place. Ancient Judaism is filled with sacrificial atonement, an attempt to pay the price for sin by using an animal to represent the sinner. These attempts were ineffective because the animal was not human, could not not represent humanity, and had no free will in being the representative sacrifice.

 

So on one level, yes, the results of Jesus' sacrifice shows the total abandonment to obedience, shows what love means, offers a model of virtue, forgiveness, etc, etc. (Not that they are unimportant, but they are secondary to answering the question of why Jesus had to die.)

 

From Hebrews (I've always had a hard time understanding St. Paul), "Jesus is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant." The first covenant would be Adam and Eve, to whom God basically said, "I'll give you everything I just made in exchange for your obedience to one commandment. Break this contract, and you will die." So by dying, Jesus paid the price for disobedience. Just as Adam and Eve represented all of humanity in their disobedience, Jesus represented all of humanity in his death, paying the price that they could not.

 

Honestly, I don't see how redemption could have bee accomplished in any way other than death.

[BarbTherese]

I think that attempting to explain the reasons behind God's Will is impossible.  We cannot explain the whys and wherefores of God's Will many times in our journey, in all journeys, and as precise knowledge of why God acted as He did e.g. if many pray for me if I am badly  injured that I will not be paraplegic - and yet I do become paraplegic.  But my Faith tells me that God always acts in the very best interests of me and mysteriously at the same time, in the best interests of all.

Explaining the reasons behind the crucifixion of Jesus might be just as illogical as explaining how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.

Q. Could we have been saved if The Father willed other than Jesus die the terrible death that He did die"

A. Yes we could have been saved without the crucifixion of Jesus.   But The Father did not so will. 

 

God is Mystery and many times we have to allow Him to be what He is to us:  Total Mystery and inexplicable.

[BarbTherese]

The Passion and Death of Jesus is an inexhaustible treasury of spiritual direction for one.  In the acceptance of Jesus of His Father's Will in a dreadful consequence of His Life, there is a light shining, showing my direction, where negative and inexplicable events occur in my own journey.  The key perhaps is in the Garden of Gethsemane where "if it be possible" is a very important inclusion in the prayer of Jesus "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me, but not My Will, but Thine be done".

The Father does not choose to intervene in cause and effect and the terrible Passion and Death of Jesus takes place.  It is a complete mystery to us and our fallible logic and reasoning in the Face of Our Infinite God that in His Father's Will, it is not possible that the cup pass from Jesus.  Mystery!  Yet, indeed, there are many lights and directions revealed for me in my life and through the crucifixion.

Edited April 26, 2014 by BarbaraTherese

[reyb]

I am relatively new to this forum, but reading through these posts, I can agree that Reyb is not especially open to hearing the truth. The question he asks is a very important one, however, and since the thread has been revived, I'll answer it the way I've answered it for myself. If any part of this is lacking in any way, I would greatly appreciate correction.

 

 

 

 

 

Let us clarify this issue because you already branded me as ‘not hearing to the truth’. I can guarantee you that I am for the truth. Maybe, I am not in favour with your belief but, it does not mean I am not for the truth. Yes, I do not honor your historical Jesus Christ. But it does not mean, Jesus Christ – the other Jesus Christ – is not my Lord. With all honesty, in heaven and on earth and for all eternity, I will always confess that Jesus is Lord for He is my God.

 

You should not equate truth with your belief so easily because, they are different. A belief does not necessary mean truth in its real sense. Of course, to every faithful follower, whatever he believes are always true to himself. But belief is something we must scrutinized and tested before we wholeheartedly embraced it. Otherwise, you will unknowingly embracing a lie. So, who will tell us that we are believing a lie if we can hardly see it? Or who will remind us that we are being deceived? Of course, those people who do not believe us.

 

So let reasoned out together – with all honesty, love and respect - so that truth will come out. And let God himself do it to anyone who really seeks. 

Edited April 26, 2014 by reyb

[reyb]

God created Natural Law

Natural Law demands Justice.
Sin is evil.
God is all Good.
Therefore, all Sin offends God.
God is infinite.
Therefore, all Sin is infinite.
Justice demands an equal repayment for what was taken.
     (i.e., When we steal, Justice demands that we pay for what was stolen. When we take a life, Justice demands life be given)
The punishment for a sin is mitigated or exacerbated by the identity of the offended person.
     (i.e. A Crime against a child demands a greater punishment than the same crime committed against an adult)

God holds the highest identity.

Therefore, Sins against God demand the highest punishment: death.
Therefore, only death can satisfy what justice demands for sins against God.
Because all Sin is infinite, no finite repayment can fulfill what Justice demands.
Therefore, Justice demands an infinite repayment.
There is no part of creation which is infinite.
Jesus is not part of Creation.
Jesus is God.
Jesus is Human.
Justice demands that what is paid comes from either the offender, or a representative of the offender.
Because Jesus is both Human and God, Jesus alone can represent Humanity in an infinite way.
Therefore, the death of Jesus is the only way to fulfill what Justice demands.

I think you missed what is that thing being asked. The question is why did Christ have to die? Couldn't God have forgiven sins without this? And all your answers are Christian ‘theological reasoning’.

 

You must remember Muslims and many people in this entire world are not ‘Christian in your likeness’. So how they will accept your theological reasoning in the same way you believe that these reasons are the correct and ‘logical’ reasons.

 

Actually, these things you narrated above are not rational or logical reasons because, the bottom line of all these narrations is a belief that your sins are forgiven thru his death. And because, it is a belief – therefore, the nature of this reason is ‘theological’ rather than ‘logical or rational’.

 

What they expect from you is the rational explanation behind the idea;  Meaning, they do not need to become Christian but still, they will understand that your reason is a clear reasoning or in accordance with formal argument rather than belief.

 

Actually, in that kind of belief, God’s righteousness is missing. Because, where is God’s righteousness if somebody will die in your place? While  it is already written in Ezek 18:20 ‘The soul who sins is the one who will die.’ Meaning, you yourself must pay for your sins. 

 

So, again, can you explain ‘logically’ Why God couldn’t forgive sins without Jesus’ death?

Edited April 26, 2014 by reyb

[add]

thedude asked in CatholicQ&A (see topic Why Did Christ Die?) the following:

Because Everybody born on Earth does and as good Catholics know, no one makes it out alive unless they go through hell

Edited April 26, 2014 by add

[BarbTherese]

I think you missed what is that thing being asked. The question is why did Christ have to die? Couldn't God have forgiven sins without this? And all your answers are Christian ‘theological reasoning’.

 ................edit..............

 

So, again, can you explain ‘logically’ Why God couldn’t forgive sins without Jesus’ death?

 

One reason that I can think of and in previous posts have tried anyway to avoid the strictly theological in order to meet the terms posed for responding to the question:

 

Firstly, God could have saved mankind without the death of Jesus, since God can do all things.

 

God gave us free will and does not take it back.  Hence sin and the consequences : suffering and death remain with us after the death of Jesus.

 

  Through His death, Jesus gives us a witness and example of how suffering and death is to be embraced in our own lives since because of free will and sin, death and suffering will remain with us until the end of time -  and in His Death, we are given a witness and example of how suffering and death can be embraced and overcome - made  powerfully holy and we see this taking place often in the lives of our saints.  As Jesus dies temporarily and is resurrected, so we too, in Him, will die and be resurrected.

 

Jesus had free will, He did not HAVE to accept His terrible death.  He chose to do so and enter fully into cause and effect i.e. fully human and one of us.  Embracing and identifying fully with us.

In His Resurrection, we see The Father accepting Him under His terms as it were i.e. fully human and one of us and The Father affirming as it were "This is my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased".  But Jesus does not go to The Father alone, He has embraced and identified with us and in accepting Jesus, The Father must - as it were - accept us as well and - as it were - the terms of Jesus, who leaves with us a witness and example on how to deal with suffering and death in our own lives and be victorious over it, rather than overcome by it.

 

 

 

 

I am relatively new to this forum, but reading through these posts, I can agree that Reyb is not especially open to hearing the truth. The question he asks is a very important one, however, and since the thread has been revived, I'll answer it the way I've answered it for myself. If any part of this is lacking in any way, I would greatly appreciate correction.
 

 

 

 

 

 

Well said

 

 

[BarbTherese]

The opposite is interesting.  I wonder what questions would be asked of us if Jesus had had a totally successful life with much fame and recognition all the way and died a heralded serene and peaceful death and we claimed Him as our Saviour?  And most especially since our free will would remain intact and sin, suffering and death persevered in our own lives.

Nonetheless, I agree with RC Patriot, that the question posed in this thread is an important one and we need to be able to respond to questions posed to us.  It is possible that no matter how enlightened the answers and to the point or points posed, no answer whatsoever will suffice and all efforts to respond probably quite futile.

[BarbTherese]

Here is a quite logical perspective from CA : http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=6472910&postcount=11

 

Another excellent read if one has the patience and desire to read : http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/philosophy/ph0063.htm

 

Edited April 27, 2014 by BarbaraTherese