Why Did Jesus Have To Die?

[AugustineA]

[Credo in Deum]

When I see myself like a metatron then I realized who is my Lord after it was gone. This is how you will see your body which is actually not your body anymore. That body is burning like the burning bush of Moses in the sacred mountain. You are like that man mentioned by Apostle Paul who was taken up in paradise, the man of lawlessness.

 

After that I realized who is my Lord. He is me in the very beginning but, now he left me for a while to come back again and I will be gone forever in Him. 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Jesus had to die to ascend back to being above heaven and earth, his rightful place as GOD almighty. :)

 

Jesus iz LORD!

[reyb]

‘Why did Christ have to die? Couldn't God have forgiven sins without this?’ is an interrogation that touches the very nature of the righteousness of God and since it is hidden, especially to traditional Christians, it is not uncommon to hear all unfounded explanations about this issue. By their faith and through their words, they truly believe that their sins are forgiven thru Jesus’ death since the scripture speaks clearly about it. Nevertheless, they fail to see its justification in as much as they cannot see the tight connection between one man’s sin and Jesus’ death. If you cannot explain, even to your own self, how your sins are forgiven thru his death then, you can never describe it to others. And that is the condition of traditional Christians.

By faith alone they accepted it and even in the absence of any rational or logical explanation, they embraced it. I am not saying, Apostle Paul did not explain or impart it to us. Actually, he explains it too well every time he speaks about the righteousness of God. But, traditional Christians failed to see it since they speak of their own version of atoning sacrifice thru their own rendition of Christ. Thus, they cannot see the logical explanation of the Apostle, ‘Why did Jesus have to die and Why God couldn’t truly forgive us without it’. 

 

Let us continue this discussion....

 

Edited August 23, 2015 by reyb

[little2add]

everybody is born, everybody suffers, everybody sins, everybody dies

[Peace]

‘Why did Christ have to die? Couldn't God have forgiven sins without this?’ is an interrogation that touches the very nature of the righteousness of God and since it is hidden, especially to traditional Christians, it is not uncommon to hear all unfounded explanations about this issue. By their faith and through their words, they truly believe that their sins are forgiven thru Jesus’ death since the scripture speaks clearly about it. Nevertheless, they fail to see its justification in as much as they cannot see the tight connection between one man’s sin and Jesus’ death. If you cannot explain, even to your own self, how your sins are forgiven thru his death then, you can never describe it to others. And that is the condition of traditional Christians.

By faith alone they accepted it and even in the absence of any rational or logical explanation, they embraced it. I am not saying, Apostle Paul did not explain or impart it to us. Actually, he explains it too well every time he speaks about the righteousness of God. But, traditional Christians failed to see it since they speak of their own version of atoning sacrifice thru their own rendition of Christ. Thus, they cannot see the logical explanation of the Apostle, ‘Why did Jesus have to die and Why God couldn’t truly forgive us without it’. 

 

Let us continue this discussion....

 

Bro. I think I have at least average intelligence. But I find it a bit difficult to understand exactly what it is you are trying to say here. Can you explain what you want to say a little more simply?

But anyway, I do not think that the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus had to die, so I do not see any reason why anyone should have to explain it.

[Luigi]

Because the wages of sin is death. That sentence was imposed on Adam & Eve after their original sin. 

Since Jesus took our sins on himself at the crucifixion, he had to die to pay for our sins. 

Period. 

Amen. 

Alleluia. 

[reyb]

Bro. I think I have at least average intelligence. But I find it a bit difficult to understand exactly what it is you are trying to say here. Can you explain what you want to say a little more simply?

But anyway, I do not think that the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus had to die, so I do not see any reason why anyone should have to explain it.

There is a standing question, even before the time of St. Augustine of Hippo (c 4th AD) and up to now, with a theme, ‘Why did Jesus have to die to save sinners?’ (Please see St. Augustine’s - On the Holy Trinity, Book XIII, Chapter 10).

Of course, this is a valid challenge to all Christians. Unfortunately, traditional Christians, including St Augustine of Hippo, did not or cannot answer it squarely since he said. ‘these, I say, it is not enough so to refute, as to assert that that mode by which God deigns to free us through the Mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus’.

Thus, a follow-up question ‘Couldn’t God has forgiven sins without this?’, will aggravate the situation since they will answer ‘Yes, it is possible because nothing is impossible with God’  - even Thomas Aquinas responded that way (please see Summa Theologica, Third Part, Question 46, Article 2).

So, why did Jesus have to die if God could forgive sin without it?

Above is the subject of this challenge and it will lead to a much higher question regarding God’s righteousness. 

 

Because the wages of sin is death. That sentence was imposed on Adam & Eve after their original sin. 

Since Jesus took our sins on himself at the crucifixion, he had to die to pay for our sins. 

Period. 

Amen. 

Alleluia. 

I know since you are a believer.... But why? Are you saying, God couldn’t forgive sin without it? 

 

Edited August 24, 2015 by reyb

[Peace]

So, why did Jesus have to die if God could forgive sin without it?

Thanks for the explanation. The premise of the question seems invalid - Jesus did not have to die (or at least the Catholic Church does not formally teach that he had to die). You seem to acknowledge that given the people you cite above.

So - I think that it is impossible to answer the question you have posed. It is kind of like trying to answer this question: "Why are squares round?"

Perhaps you can rephrase your question?

[reyb]

Thanks for the explanation. The premise of the question seems invalid - Jesus did not have to die (or at least the Catholic Church does not formally teach that he had to die). You seem to acknowledge that given the people you cite above.

So - I think that it is impossible to answer the question you have posed. It is kind of like trying to answer this question: "Why are squares round?"

Perhaps you can rephrase your question?

Are you equating your belief with an irrational proposition? Anyway, I think you do not really get me in saying, it is a valid issue. ‘Why did Jesus have to die to save sinners?’ is a valid question because it may wake you up.

Okay let me clarify…

We all know that the Roman Catholic Church never teaches that Jesus must die. Actually, all traditional Christians (Catholics, Protestants, etc..etc) never offered that kind of idea since all of them believed that the passion of Jesus Christ is a gift of God to humanity. It is a God’s plan and not a believer’s agenda, so to speak. But these issues, whether they teach that Jesus must die or not, or it is God’s plan or not, or whatever theology you may have or have not, are all immaterial and irrelevant to the intention of the inquirer since they are simply asking you for an explanation, why you’ve come to accept such kind of theology. They are not asking for your theological-reasoning since they do not accept your belief and tradition but rather, they are asking for your logical, rational and understandable explanation on how your sins are forgiven thru his death.

Let me give you an example. Aztech priests offered human sacrifices to gods since they believe that their on-going human sacrifices sustains life in the universe. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture)

Of course, you will never accept that kind of stupidity since you know the  truth that their human sacrifices have nothing to do in sustaining life in the universe.  But, Aztech people truly believe in their ritual and its blessings even in the absence of anything factual, as if they are saying ‘I believe it is true because I have faith. Period’.  

So, how can you help them in their religious fantasies? One of the many ways is by asking them to prove and describe to you the truthfullness of their belief, and hoping that one day, they may come into realization that something is really, really, really wrong, and thus to seek the truth from God himself. This is the reason why I said this interrogation – ‘Why did Jesus have to die to save sinners? ‘- is a valid question and a pepper to wake you up.

I will repeat again what I already discuss in this forum. Apostle Paul and all God’s true witnessess are not referring to your historical Jesus as the Christ. They are referring to another Jesus different from the one you already accepted.

[Peace]

Are you equating your belief with an irrational proposition?

 I sure hope not.

They are not asking for your theological-reasoning since they do not accept your belief and tradition but rather, they are asking for your logical, rational and understandable explanation on how your sins are forgiven thru his death.

Sure. But that doesn't change the fact that the question assumes something that I do not advocate. If you (or someone else) desires an explanation of how I believe that my sins are forgiven through Jesus's death - the Catholic Encyclopedia or Wikipedia article on atonement should suffice. I think the Council of Trent also has a long section on justification. All of those views make some degree of sense to me, although I do not fully understand them to the point where I would say that one is right and others are wrong. I would guess that the "penal-substitution" view would be the one that most non-Catholics could most easily relate to.

And I think that theological reasoning is perfectly logical, rational, and understandable as any other form of reasoning.

I will repeat again what I already discuss in this forum. Apostle Paul and all God’s true witnessess are not referring to your historical Jesus as the Christ. They are referring to another Jesus different from the one you already accepted.

Oh. That is an interesting hypothesis. By this I take it to mean that you believe that the Catholic view of Jesus is not consistent with the Jesus of the Bible? Tisk. Tisk. Them sounds like fighting words.

What Jesus is it that they are referring to in your opinion? I hope we are not talking Reza Aslan's Jesus or something along those lines . . .

[reyb]

 I sure hope not.

Sure. But that doesn't change the fact that the question assumes something that I do not advocate. If you (or someone else) desires an explanation of how I believe that my sins are forgiven through Jesus's death - the Catholic Encyclopedia or Wikipedia article on atonement should suffice. I think the Council of Trent also has a long section on justification. All of those views make some degree of sense to me, although I do not fully understand them to the point where I would say that one is right and others are wrong. I would guess that the "penal-substitution" view would be the one that most non-Catholics could most easily relate to.

And I think that theological reasoning is perfectly logical, rational, and understandable as any other form of reasoning.

Oh. That is an interesting hypothesis. By this I take it to mean that you believe that the Catholic view of Jesus is not consistent with the Jesus of the Bible? Tisk. Tisk. Them sounds like fighting words.

What Jesus is it that they are referring to in your opinion? I hope we are not talking Reza Aslan's Jesus or something along those lines . . .

 

I was once a Catholic and a believer of whatever you honestly adored today, and I too, may possibly feel, whatever concern you have for me if I were on shoes and you are on mine at this very moment. I am talking like this because, I know, you do not or may not trust me but, I am not lying or playing around with you. This ‘Jesus of Ignatius’ is not the same ‘Jesus of Apostle Paul’. They are not preaching one and the same Jesus Christ.

In early days of Christianity, different groups of people see or look or honor different kind of Jesus. Gnostic Christians see Jesus, a ghost like Jesus as your early fathers called it, while Ignatius taught about this historical Jesus. Ironically, both of them are claiming that theirs is the same ‘Jesus of Apostle Paul’ since they honored the same book and letters of Luke and Apostle Paul.

Actually, Gnostic Christian Marcion of Sinope (c85-c160) canonized the Book of Luke and Letters of Apostle Paul (see http://www.bible.ca/b-canon-canon-of-marcion.htm) ahead than that of your early fathers. Marcion was a student of Gnostic Scholar Valentinus(c100-160) (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinus_(Gnostic), who was in turn a follower of Apostle Paul’s disciples named Theudas (died c46AD) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theudas_(teacher_of_Valentinius).  While, according to Catholic tradition, especially from Eusebius (c260-c340), Ignatius of Antioch (35-117)(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignatius_of_Antioch) was one the children ‘whom Jesus took in his arm’, a student of John the Apostle, and succeeded Saint Peter and St. Evodius. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evodius).

Now, why I am telling you about this? Because, I want you to see that this ‘ghost-like Jesus’ and ‘historical Jesus’ are different rendition of Christian believers to the letters of Apostle Paul and Luke. They are different interpretation to ‘Jesus of Apostle Paul’. 

How come Theudas, a disciple of Apostle Paul, do not believe in a ‘historical Jesus’ if Apostle Paul was truly referring to him, and considering Theudas was (probably ) born first before Ignatius?

Nevertheless, let us set it aside since it is already a dead topic but, I want you to realize that none of your early fathers (Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement,…etc) and even Luke and Apostle Paul, saw this ‘Jesus of Ignatius’.

So, let us agree on this, that this ‘Jesus of Ignatius’ or ‘historical Jesus’  is just another rendition or interpretation of your early fathers to the letters of Luke and Apostle Paul.

Now, can you explain how your sins are forgiven (by God) thru the death of this historical Jesus? (I am asking you like this because Apostle Paul clearly explain it.) 

Edited August 27, 2015 by reyb

[Socrates]

Bro. I think I have at least average intelligence. But I find it a bit difficult to understand exactly what it is you are trying to say here. Can you explain what you want to say a little more simply?

But anyway, I do not think that the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus had to die, so I do not see any reason why anyone should have to explain it.

Honestly, I wouldn't expect him to make any more sense than he has in the the previous 16 pages (and in countless similar now long-buried threads).  Reyb and reason are like oil and water.

[Peace]

I was once a Catholic and a believer of whatever you honestly adored today

Somehow I have my suspicions that our beliefs did not coincide.

and I too, may possibly feel, whatever concern you have for me if I were on shoes and you are on mine at this very moment. I am talking like this because, I know, you do not or may not trust me but, I am not lying or playing around with you. This ‘Jesus of Ignatius’ is not the same ‘Jesus of Apostle Paul’. They are not preaching one and the same Jesus Christ.

Yeah I know right! Why would I read someone like St. Paul or St. Ignatius when I can go on the Internet and be enlightened by the Gospel of ReyB instead? What I have I been thinking all of these years?

Now, why I am telling you about this?

You read my mind. You really did. And yet I still do not understand you in the least.

So, let us agree on this, that this ‘Jesus of Ignatius’ or ‘historical Jesus’  is just another rendition or interpretation of your early fathers to the letters of Luke and Apostle Paul.

Now, can you explain how your sins are forgiven (by God) thru the death of this historical Jesus? (I am asking you like this because Apostle Paul clearly explain it.) 

I can't agree to that. Sorry. Because I have no idea what you are talking about.

As for your question, I thought I had already tried to answer that, but perhaps I can try again. But before I am to begin to engage in earnest conversation with a heretic, I am going to need some definitions first please. Because I honesty have no idea what you are talking about:

1) Please define "Jesus of Ignatius".

2) Please define "historical Jesus".

3) Please define "Jesus of the Apostle Paul".

4) Are you asserting that one of your "Jesus of Ignatius", your "historical Jesus", or your "Jesus of the Apostle Paul" is correct?  If so, which one are you asserting is correct?

5) Do you believe that Jesus Christ is a real person that existed in history - just as you and I exist today?

6) Do you believe that Jesus Christ is God?

7) If you believe that Paul clearly explains the answer to your question - why exactly is it that you want me to answer it? It would seem that this conversation would be a bit more efficient if you just come out and state whatever it is that you desire to convey.

Peace

Edited August 28, 2015 by Peace

[reyb]

 ....... If you (or someone else) desires an explanation of how I believe that my sins are forgiven through Jesus's death -......

 

......

As for your question, I thought I had already tried to answer that, but perhaps I can try again. .....

 

I am not asking for an explanation on how or what you believe….…but rather, how do you ‘know’ that your sins are truly forgiven by God thru it. I know you believe in ‘penal-substitution’. But this ‘penal-substitution’ is also a part of your religious ‘belief’.  

 Let me give you some example. In Jewish tradition, they truly believed that their sins are forgiven by God thru this ‘sin offering’. Do you think they really ‘know’ how it become possible?

 Another example…. Aztec truly believed that their human sacrifices sustains life in the whole universe. Do you think they really 'know' how this human sacrifices sustain life in the Universe?

 Another example…Catholics believed that the Eucharist is the true body and blood of Jesus. How do you know its truthfulness if it cannot be detected by senses and understanding? (Summa Theologica ,Q75).

 Are you saying, it is really true because you believe and have faith? How about them (Jews and Aztec)? Do you think they are aware that they are wrong?

 So, again,  How do you know that your sins are truly forgiven by God thru his death?  

Edited August 28, 2015 by reyb