spin

Why did Jesus need to die according to the story?

Well, we all know about the atonement for our sins stuff, but if God wanted to save those who he had set aside for death, ie everyone, couldn't he have just said, "hey, look guys, I'll overlook your stupidity as long as you make your attempts to honour my desires", instead of sending someone to "bear our sins" for us? God doesn't need it -- hell, he doesn't need anything. It's not a particularly "ergonomic" solution.

This dying for us stuff sure is glitzy ancient thought, but isn't it superfluous?

(If our xian brethren want to come into the fray, please don't use this opportunity for dialogue to proselytize. The thread is about logic.)


spin

Amos

But that is not even true. You must be reading the false Gospel to entertain such thoughts.

Jesus died for the sins of his world and told us that we must die to the sins of our world. I mean why else should we pick up our cross and follow him? Our cross, then, is our accumilation of sins for which we have been forgiven but are not atoned for and therefore they become a burden upon us. Of course we need a good bunch of these and must be an upright character to be troubled by them and since not all of us are there will be plenty of religionists to do our dirty work for us. . . just as they did for Jesus of Nazareth then. So, really, not much has changed to the ancient method.

Amaleq13

Within the HJ context, it has always seemed to me to be an example of ad hoc rationalization. Their beloved leader had been humiliatingly executed and the whole movement looked doomed. They have to either quit or give the whole thing a new "spin".

In another discussion forum, I asked the Christian members if Jesus had to die or if it was possible that the Jews could have embraced him in this new conception of the Messiah. The discussion rapidly dissolved into an argument about predestination but nobody seemed to think it was ever God's plan that Jesus' preaching be accepted. That seems to be implied by Mark's Gospel story where Jesus is repeatedly trying to get his followers to understand that the "plan" involves him getting killed. Within this context, the whole ministry of Jesus portrayed in the Gospels seems like a complete waste of time and, ultimately, disingenuous.

Paul's gospel and that described in Hebrews suggests that the only reason Christ "took on the appearance of flesh" was to be sacrificed.

Amos

There's nothing new about the "spin" and there is nothing old about the "false gospel." Nothing has changed except that in this modern age the false gospel is preferred and therefore entire nations are ablaze with the fires of hell.

Bold

But did he die, or is that doublethink? I mean all the Xians claim he is still alive - so he didn't really die and it wasn't much of a sacrifice.

It seems to me that the whole notion that this was a huge sacrifice relies on the belief that there is no afterlife for anyone, Jesus included. If my son died, that would be terrible. If he went away for a couple of days - hey that's what weekends are for!

So the story seems to demand simultaneous belief in the existence and non-existence of the afterlife. I think I'll have to upgrade the electric monk.

rlogan

There's a whole host of OT Prophesies they have to cram into the composite Christ. I think the two most pertinant are having his hands and feet pierced (Zechariah 12:10 and Psalm 22:16), along with being crucified with criminals and for our sins (Isaiah 53:12)

But there's a whole bunch of others like being rejected by his own people (Isaiah 53:3, Psalm 2:2) Sold for thirty pieces of silver (Zech. 11:12-13), smitten and spat upon (Isaiah 50:6), suffer for the sins of others (Isaiah 53:4-12), mocked and insulted (Psalm 22:6-8), pierced side (Zechariah 12:10)

That's a partial list. In the composite school, we stress part of the "validation" of the "Christ" is via fulfillment of OT prophesy. So you have to weave a story with all that stuff in there.

Some prophesies would be impossible - given the fall of the temple and the Roman domination. So we just leave those things out and the Jews have some objections to Jesus on that basis.

So Paul the Obscure would be mentioning some of the basics before the gospel accounts got the whole menu of things in there...

Anyway, this is why I don't buy into the whole "shocking and embarassing" business. This was mandatory.

Apikorus

It seems that to the early Christians Jesus was a "signified with no signifier." Consequently, they associated with him every positive signifier in the Hebrew Bible: son of man, son of God, Davidic ruler, "Melchizedek" priest (whatever that is), paschal sacrifice, ruakh haqodesh (holy spirit), Jacob's wrestling opponent, Abraham's visitor, Manoah's interlocutor, Immanuel, pele yoez el gibbor avi ad sar shalom (wonderful counselor mighty god eternal father prince of peace), suffering servant, mashiakh, he who was "pierced", prophet like Moses, savior from Bethlehem, Torah, Temple, etc. The result is an incoherent jumble.

I think spin's question in the OP is one of theology. Forget about the Hebrew Bible and "prophecy" and just ask why God would have to work through this Rube Goldberg apparatus of a dying and resurrected savior in order to bring salvation to humanity.

Amaleq13

That is a good point and one that has always seemed odd to me. The only thing "sacrificed" is the "appearance of flesh" that the Heavenly Messiah took on specifically so that it could be sacrificed. An actual sacrifice seems to require the loss of something valuable but how could the "appearance of flesh" be considered valuable to a Heavenly Messiah through whom the entire world was created?

The End Times are approaching but God decides that humanity must be offered a chance to be saved from the associated Judgment. In God's infinite wisdom, the plan is for the Heavenly Messiah, through whom he created the world, to be sent down to the earth with the appearance of humanity. While there, God has him preach a message God not only doesn't expect anyone to accept but is intended to get the Descended Messiah executed. This trickery, it turns out, will somehow make the sacrifice of the appearance of humanity atone for the sins of all mankind as long as they believe in the "somehow". To prove this to be true, God raises the Sacrificed Messiah from the dead (choosing not to do so in public or before any witnesses) and then the Raised Messiah appears to a select few. The burden is now on this select few who received a personal visit from the Risen Messiah to convince everybody else that the whole plan is legitimate.

Apikorus seems correct in comparing theology like this to Rube Goldberg.

Amos

Of course it is theology but it is not history and not even history if the story took place in history. All we need to do is add just a bit of contemplation to logic and the entire story falls into place.

Salvation was not new to Christianity because it is native to mankind. It is just metamorphosis and that is the same throughout the world. It is the same, perhaps, but not easy to achieve and therefore the mythmakers saw a way to improve the old school of thought that was held by Judaism. There is also a degree of intensity that leads to richess in heaven and that is why and how they sought to increase the richess of the tribe, nation and entire mythology at a faster pace, and that is exactly what they did.

The reason why Jesus was singled out as an example was to start a new religion and that had to be built on the old mythology to benefit from its foundations. This makes the Catholic way as one set by example and the old Jewish way could just continue in its own futuristic way as if mesmerized by the prophets. Note, there is no Christian 'way' because Christian-ity is the final end of both Catholicism and Judaism.

Amos

But the Rube Goldberg is easy once you've done it! As Golding said (after he abandonned his Spire) "it is as easy as eating and drinking."


Time as such is only known in our conscious mind and so the end of time will be when we abandon our conscious mind and take up residence in our subconscious mind. Without the effect of time we become eternal for two reason: First and most obvious is that with our conscious mind placed subservient to our sub-conscious mind we are only vagely aware of time. Second, the Thousand Year Reign (paradise) is present in our subconscious mind and that is what everybody is looking for.