holysquid

My understanding from several Christian perspectives is that death is the penalty for sin. So since Jesus was "sinless," he must have died for everyone else.

Now if we observe that for a moment (ignore the fairly perverse rationalization), the symbol of Jesus being crucified not only represents the sacrifice in which Jesus made, but also the horrible punishment we all deserve for our sins: death. Throw a little fire and brimstone on top of that and you got a nice little fear induced campaign.

This is where "salvation" supposedly comes in. Now if we belong to the right fan club, we can escape death (and/or eternal torture of fire).

The symbol of Jesus on the cross is so "powerful" because Jesus faced death, which again is the penalty for sin. Pretty clear problems with this explanation:
1. If you are going to maintain a thesis that death is the punishment for sin, is it possible that Jesus sinned?
2. If you are going to maintain that Jesus was sinless and died, is it possible that death ISN'T a punishment for sin?

I maintain that Jesus didn't die for my sins, but rather his own sins to the state.

Chili

Fair enough, but we must also face the fact that we will die. Before that time we, or most of us will have or have had intimations of immortality that arise in us for good reason and this sublime feeling of immortality is what the salvation theory tries to liberate. The shepherd/sheep image presupposes that humans are followers as children but that they are not cowards as adults. As children are we indoctrinated with food for lambs and we are tended to as if we are sheep which really is against our human nature wherein we have a personal identity and an ego to protect . . . but wherein also we know that we will die.

To have the best of both worlds the death of Jesus is the example that is given to us so we may follow in his footsteps and survive our first death to arrive at the place we first started but now know it as if for the first time.

Dave Roberts

While we're taking time to talk of the sacraficial lamb. Let's understand that most of the Bible esp. OT has stories of wandering herdersmen vs evil city dwellers/ farmers. Remember that farmers are people who must be staid in an area, as the must watch thier fields, this will of course lead to the building of cities. Herdsmen on the other hand wander from region to region, in the search for more fertile grounds. Setting up tents does not constitute the building of villages, towns nor cities.
Let us look over the evidence:
Abel- the herdsman vs Cain- the farmer
Lot - the herdsman vs City dwellers
Jacob-Quiet tent dweller vs Esau- man of the field
David-shephard boy vs City dwellers Jew and non Jew
Jesus-the shephard and his flock vs City dwellers
If one was to go back and read the Bible with this idea you'll see what I mean.
The real case in question though was Jesus dying for our sins.
First of all if Jesus was who the Christians claim, He couldn't die. So where does his sacrafice come in? It can't and you can't have it both ways

Dave Roberts

Good call Chili,
After all the story as it is told in Sunday school is that Jesus was to bring about possible salvation from the original sin, eating of the fruit from the tree of knowledge. The penalties for the crime(s) was given, but to refer to the Bible would mean that Christian women would now not feel the pains of child bearing, and for the men, the ground will now be easy to till. So much for that. The penalty spoken of in Sunday school however was death, though that is something God creates a little later. They will tell our children that through Jesus one can have an eternal life in heaven.
For those unfamiliar with the story, they should spend some time reading about the myth of Mithras.
On this site I would suggest the writings of Thomas Paine esp The Age of Reason
Other than this site a good site to go to would be askwhy, it'll provide one with a lot of good reading.

holysquid

I still maintain that there is a redundancy in the view that death is the punishment for our sin, so Jesus died for us all because he was sin free.

Jesus' death, if you are going to maintain that death is punishment for sin, displays inevitably that either Jesus' sinned or death is not punishment for sin. You cannot just rationalize that Jesus died for everyone else's sin because your initial thesis that "sin = punishment of death" is refuted through the death of a sinless person. This, at least to me, inevitably throws the initial thesis into question if entirely maintained.

And again, I think the notion is that Jesus did "die" and this was a sacrifice because Jesus was sinless and those who sin should only face the "punishment" of death.

Jesus' resurrection does alleviate the "death" aspect of it to one who views death as finality, but Jesus himself asks "Why have thy forsaken me?" while on the cross. This exemplifies the notion projected throughout Christianity that death is something to be feared because it is ultimately "punishment." Now we can also get into the post-death rewards and punishments, but I think the emphasis is on the actual torture of the end of mortality itself.

I personally think this is a cruel and pessimistic view of the end of our mortality. Christianity tries to compensate for it by offering "potential" heavenly rewards, but nonetheless still advocates that death itself is an inevitable "punishment."

Vorkosigan

More like GRD

Sgent29

From a Jewish perspective...

Although sacrafice did take place in the OT, and Orthodox Jews will start it again if the Temple is ever rebuilt, it wasn't really for the forgiving of sin, but rather as a form of prayer.

At the most, a sacrafice might forgive a sin against God (eating pork), but it was not capable of forgiving a sin against mankind (lying) -- only man could do that. The way to get forgiveness of sin was through prayer, sacrafice was a way to "enahance" that prayer, but it wasn't a trade-off.

As for Jesus, God does not accept human sacrafice, never did. See the story of Abraham and his son (other issues as well, but this is the main one).

Dave Roberts

Death, or the life span of man is referred to BY GOD himself in Genesis 6:3
As far as those without sin
Noah Gen 6:9, 7:1
Asa 1 Kings 15:14
2 Chr 15:17
Job Job 1:1,8, 2:3
Simeon Luke 2:25
Elizabeth, Luke 1:6
Zehariah
Lot 2 Peter 2:7-8
Now we are all supposedly born of sin, since our parents were sinners. When I was still rather young I presented this question to my uncle, who is a minister. His response was "God planteth the seed." Huh??? How does that stop sin through Mary? Being a virgin doesn't make one blameless.

Dave Roberts

As for as God accepting human sacrifice check out Judges 11:29-39
No where is it said that God didn't accept it.

Siderius Nuncius

Hello everyone... been gone for quite some time now, lurking and such, though I'd throw in my two cents.
As a Searching (Lapsed, some might say) Catholic, I've been doing a good deal of struggling with the whole Atonement thing. Here's how the Traditional explanation goes:

God is perfectly just
God punishes sin justly by death/separation from God ("spiritual death")
Jesus took on the punishment for our sins (death)
Because God punished Jesus, He doesn't have to punish us

Crazy stuff. I suppose it makes a certain amount of sense in a very judicial way- if someone owes a debt, the judge can let someone else pay it, as long as the money is paid.
The problem I see with this is, as Heinlein put it, "men are not potatoes." The more equivalent metaphor is if one man is on death row and another, innocent, person takes their place. How is this possibly just?

And there is a reason why Jews don't accept the "Atonement"- it fulfilled exactly NONE of any of the requirements for a sacrificial offering, except for being "unblemished," and that in a spiritual sense. Take a gander at Leviticus. Specific instruction, to the letter. All animals, and all in the temple, and lots of burning and cutting- no crosses.

Furthermore, all of the sacrifices outlined in Leviticus and elsewhere were not for the remission of individual, intentional sin- only for the remission of unintentional sin that one realizes, even the big yearly sacrifice for the community. In fact, (I'll get a reference for this later, don't have it on hand), intentional sins are said to be unforgiven.

Being a Christian is rough business... ah well, we all need a little insanity in our lives