How exactly was Jesus' crucifixion a sacrifice?

a reply to: JackReyes

May I refer you here?

What does God have to say about murder?

Kill people who don't listen to Priests. (Deuteronomy 17:12)
Kill witches. (Exodus 22:17)
Kill fortunetellers. (Leviticus 20:27)
Kill homosexuals. (Leviticus 20:13)
Kill nonbelievers. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
Kill followers of other religions. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12, Deuteronomy 17:2-5)
Kill false prophets. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5, 18:20-22, Zechariah 13:3)
Kill an entire town if anyone there worships another God. (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
Kill women who are not virgins on their wedding night. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)
Kill people working on the Sabbath. (Exodus 31:12-15)
Kill sons of sinners. (Isaiah 14:21)
Kill in the name of the Lord. (Jeremiah 48:10)

Death for striking parents. (Exodus 21:15)
Death for cursing parents. (Leviticus 20:9, Proverbs 20:20)
Death for fornication. (Leviticus 21:9)
Death for adultery. (Leviticus 20:10)
Death for blasphemy. (Leviticus 24:10-16)
Death to followers of other religions. (Exodus 22:19)

And here: Examples of God personally killing people

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: mikegrouchy
Free Masons are all over this regarding 'Keys" or the path to achieving enlightenment (heaven). Catholics stand no chance in challenging this and must accept/claim their rightful place as the Overlords of the hell they have FALSLY (through fear mongering) convinced others of existence. As they created the idea/notion of a hell, so should be its eternal diligent caretakers, pruning plucking and nurturing that ugliness it calls an ill-fated destiny (no penance or hail Mary's enough said to save believer innocents) even the absolution of a confession before a priest helps this circumstance.

"Diligent Caretakers"

...all bases covered VHB - either way for them, a self-fulfilling prophecy that has had the 'patchwork' quilt, patchworked, not so much tattering round the edges, more, torn from the centre by the 'discerning' ones...you know..."you don't understand", "if you don't study the lingo..." etc. etc. etc...looping into loops, twisting the yarn, knotting the whole ball of string...
All is allowed, but not everything is necessary - hard one to twig to, but simple as all get-out...'Didn't know I could write, direct and act in my own horror movie...Durden & Krueger were me, but I spooked myself so much, I'd rather blame someone else for this epic Omen pentology'...these threads are full of it...

Å99

originally posted by: Talorc
His sacrifice was taking on our suffering in the name of love. You can't love someone if you don't understand them, and to understand humanity, you must understand suffering. It is one sure thing that defines us.

Agree with this somewhat.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: Talorc

You can't love someone if you don't understand them, and to understand humanity, you must understand suffering.

His omniscience and omnipresence is surely called into question if he needed to incarnate as a human in order to understand the suffering of sentient animals. An all-powerful and all-knowing god didn't understand these things prior growing in Mary's womb?

Disclosure: Ex-Catholic Atheist

There are a lot of potential contradictions in this space for theists. For example, if God has complete knowledge of everything then how can we have free will? If God knows that by changing X or Y I will become a bad person, is God taking this into account or am I just an excess failed human?

Some persons interpret Jesus stating 'father why hast thou forsaken me' on the cross as Jesus not having full knowledge of his future. In essence, Jesus being human. Other people claim it's a mis-translation of 'this is why I was kept' or basically 'this is my destiny.' But if it's destiny then is it a sacrifice?

Ways I've had it explained:
1. God is against sacrifice as in the old testament he put an end to it by refusing the sacrifice of Isaac. This makes historical sense as human sacrifice was a thing back then. Therefore Jesus was not a sacrifice because Jesus had a choice. Jesus is a symbol for humanity on perfect sacrifice, not necessarily a sacrifice for the sake of it. In this hypothesis God at least has enough knowledge to predict results of this sacrifice.
2. Jesus was incarnated as a human with the same limitations and fears as a human albeit with some foreknowledge. It was once put to me that God has knowledge of all things currently but not all things of the future. In this concept it's both proof that Jesus is willing to experience the same pain as humanity but also doesn't violate freewill. God did not know what his creation would do, and this is further cemented by Noah's story. The flood makes more sense if creation rebelled through free will.
3. Often part of Islamic tradition and some Jewish traditions also; there is no freewill. If you don't believe in Allah or God then Allah doesn't believe in your by design and intention. Humans are an elaborate computer macro designed to output a particularly confusing end. It's mysterious, deal with it.

Towards my twilight years as a Catholic I moved towards the concept that God doesn't have true unlimited power. It was the only way to make sense of certain events as well as concepts such as mental illness. These days I believe free will mostly to be incompatible with 'will' as a construct. One cannot have will without compulsions and one cannot have complete free will in the existence of compulsions. If we had no compulsions we would just 'be' as a stone, pulled by whatever force is in effect at any given time.

The human Jesus is a fight against those compulsions I felt (at the time), and if God had unlimited power then people would find that far easier to emulate ... or more than likely, they wouldn't have to.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Ghost147
why, as an atheist you think there is only atheism or christianity? Ever hear of other gods?

When did I ever say there is only atheism or christianity. This topic is about Jesus, why would i include any other religion in it when I'm specifically questioning a particular religions beliefs?

originally posted by: Talorc
The OP reduces the concept to fit his purpose. It's quite obvious that Jesus' sacrifice wasn't in dying on the cross. That is a lazy strawman from someone who has a bone to pick.

How have I reduced any concepts here? No one has the ability to conclusively say what the bible really intends. Sure, we can speculate, but no one agrees on anything in the bible for a reason. You act as if your conclusion is absolute, yet you clearly state your conclusion is based off of opinion only when you state "I've always interpreted it this way". Biblical interpretation is personal interpretation, no one can be certainly correct.

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: Ghost147

We are all eternal beings. Obviously you find great pleasure in demeaning someone and something of importance to me, so it is easy to assume that you yourself do not know sacrifice. Or possibly you are a sad, hurt, and scared soul that lashes out because you want others to know your pain? I have great pity for you, and hopefully someday I will even have empathy for you

I'm not demeaning anything or anyone, this is a simple and obvious issue within the story. It is perfectly reasonable to question something that seems illegitimate.

originally posted by: akushla99

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: mikegrouchy
Free Masons are all over this regarding 'Keys" or the path to achieving enlightenment (heaven). Catholics stand no chance in challenging this and must accept/claim their rightful place as the Overlords of the hell they have FALSLY (through fear mongering) convinced others of existence. As they created the idea/notion of a hell, so should be its eternal diligent caretakers, pruning plucking and nurturing that ugliness it calls an ill-fated destiny (no penance or hail Mary's enough said to save believer innocents) even the absolution of a confession before a priest helps this circumstance.

"Diligent Caretakers"
...all bases covered VHB - either way for them, a self-fulfilling prophecy that has had the 'patchwork' quilt, patchworked, not so much tattering round the edges, more, torn from the centre by the 'discerning' ones...you know..."you don't understand", "if you don't study the lingo..." etc. etc. etc...looping into loops, twisting the yarn, knotting the whole ball of string...
All is allowed, but not everything is necessary - hard one to twig to, but simple as all get-out...'Didn't know I could write, direct and act in my own horror movie...Durden & Krueger were me, but I spooked myself so much, I'd rather blame someone else for this epic Omen pentology'...these threads are full of it...
Å99

Absolutely self fulfilling; as they wrote the script SOLID (no rewrites) must have realized some 'Ad Libbing' high jinks were bound to occur within THIS actors studio. The more insistent louder or 'profound' the voice; is going to change the character/nature of the message within the horror movie idea form. All is allowed; but someone sits in the edit booth tweaking the message (probably a gun to their head). You are the writer director and producer of this life (everyone you have that surrounds you, wives, parents, siblings) YOU HIRED before incarnation. That includes me as well, not sure how we are starring both in the same movie. Blame no one for this but Walt Disney; as he is the original creator of animatronics (or what we perceive to be moving puppet forms resembling humans). I like the twist and turns (me as a child) represented by "Mr. Toads Wild Ride".

In response to the OP - He didn't have to.

originally posted by: Cinrad
In response to the OP - He didn't have to.

Well, that's the conundrum isn't it?

a reply to: Pinke
That was a great post

Don't have much to add to it. I did look into that particular verse though.

Matthew 27:46 from the Latin Vulgate:

et circa horam nonam clamavit Iesus voce magna dicens Heli Heli lema sabacthani hoc est Deus meus Deus meus ut quid dereliquisti me

Translated from Google to English (as accurate as that is):

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice , saying, Eli , Eli, lama sabachthani? that is, My God , my God, why hast thou forsaken me.

Eli , Eli, lama sabachthani according to Strong's Concordance means "God, god, why have you left me?"

So I think your quote of "Some persons interpret Jesus stating 'father why hast thou forsaken me' on the cross as Jesus not having full knowledge of his future." is scripturally sound.

This certainly shapes the OP discussion. If Jesus wasn't cognizant of his coming 'sacrifice' that is.

Jesus didn't sacrifice himself for our sins, but he did sacrifice himself for his beliefs.

I think the sacrifice story was devised after Jesus died and never fulfilled the prophecies expected of the Jewish messiah. That's why Christians believe he will rise again and fulfill everything else. On the contrary, Jews believe that the messiah will be a human who fulfills the prophecies in their life, so they obviously discount Jesus.

It is a sound assumption that Jesus led his own sect of Judaism with its own beliefs - some of which may have been centered on him being the Jewish messiah. Add to this the fact that some scholars believe Jesus was an activist-type figure, and that is a recipe to get him nailed to a cross by the establishment.

He was a Jew with some distinctly different beliefs from his peers. He was a political and religious activist, which we can see in the bible. It's a safe bet that he died because of his own beliefs rather than some story about negating original sin and saving humanity through some divine sacrifice.

With all this said, Jesus was very much human and experienced the trials of life. It would have sucked being nailed to a cross, regardless of the reasons.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy
Hiya,

Thanks and here you go:

The late Aramaic Bible researcher George Lamsa claimed that the traditional "forsaken" interpretation is a mistake in the Aramaic scribing that was transferred to later transcriptions. Lamsa claimed that "the correct translation from Aramaic should be "Eli, Eli, lemana shabakthani" or "My God, my God, for this [purpose] I was spared!" or "...for such a purpose have you kept me!") According to Lamsa's translation, that rather than a "loss of faith" Christ meant, to say "so this is my destiny."

Source

Personally I don't know much about the authority of this particular translation. By the time I learned about it I felt there was already too much wrong with my beliefs to continue to uphold them and I'd left the faith altogether. A quick glance seems to say that most scholars discard the hypothesis (George Lamsa's wikipedia page.)

Even if it was true it would come with its own issues I guess?

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: JackReyes

May I refer you here?

What does God have to say about murder?

Kill people who don't listen to Priests. (Deuteronomy 17:12)
Kill witches. (Exodus 22:17)
Kill fortunetellers. (Leviticus 20:27)
Kill homosexuals. (Leviticus 20:13)
Kill nonbelievers. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
Kill followers of other religions. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12, Deuteronomy 17:2-5)
Kill false prophets. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5, 18:20-22, Zechariah 13:3)
Kill an entire town if anyone there worships another God. (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
Kill women who are not virgins on their wedding night. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)
Kill people working on the Sabbath. (Exodus 31:12-15)
Kill sons of sinners. (Isaiah 14:21)
Kill in the name of the Lord. (Jeremiah 48:10)

Death for striking parents. (Exodus 21:15)
Death for cursing parents. (Leviticus 20:9, Proverbs 20:20)
Death for fornication. (Leviticus 21:9)
Death for adultery. (Leviticus 20:10)
Death for blasphemy. (Leviticus 24:10-16)
Death to followers of other religions. (Exodus 22:19)

And here: Examples of God personally killing people

A time is coming when all wicked mankind, which God has tolerated, will be done away with. And only the meek, and those who love peace, and who love righteousness will remain.

The same standards God has for his people in the past, as their God and king, those will be for all mankind.

You are alive, you breath, you eat, you enjoy life. God isn't bad. It is your own bad heart that condemns his goodness. But do not think his toleration of wickedness in this system will last much longer.

a reply to: JackReyes

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: JackReyes

The meek want you to have it too. The wicked want it all. They don't have the mindset to understand the meek. So they attribute their attitude and understanding toward the humble and peace-lovers.

(Psalm 37:10, 11) Just a little while longer, and the wicked will be no more; You will look at where they were, And they will not be there. 11 But the meek will possess the earth, And they will find exquisite delight in the abundance of peace.

(Matthew 5:5) . . .“Happy are the mild-tempered, since they will inherit the earth.


Of course Jehovah and Jesus want everyone to live life and be happy.

(Ezekiel 18:23) . . .“‘Do I take any pleasure at all in the death of a wicked person?’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘Do I not prefer that he turn away from his ways and keep living?’

a reply to: Ghost147

Wow. For someone who to be able to read the Bible and find the answer this has to be the most ignorant post ever placed in ATS.

a reply to: JackReyes

A time is coming when all wicked mankind, which God has tolerated, will be done away with.

Isn't that an interesting thing. Way back when he didn't tolerate them at all! Quite the contrary! Death to the wicked was the motto. Scripture is full of it.

God isn't bad. It is your own bad heart that condemns his goodness.

It's our ability to reason, and our ability to recognize what is morally sound, that we say this biblical god is bad news.

Of course Jehovah and Jesus want everyone to live life and be happy.

Umm... did you not read WakeUpBeer's post where he posted various verses to the contrary? How is wanting everyone to live life compatible with condemning people to death for such trivial reasons like being gay, being a non-believer, following a different religion, working on the wrong day??...

Sure seems to me like he didn't care about people's lives, and he actively held ill-will towards their lives.

All according to your book.

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Ha ha very funny. But, it isnt that they want it all, it is given to them because they have a meek attitude, they are teachable, you can't teach a proud person, a proud person wont admit they are wrong and certainly not that they need a saviour because they cant save themselves.

Gen 3:4 The snake replied, "That's not true; you will not die.
Gen 3:5 God said that because he knows that when you eat it, you will be like God and know what is good and what is bad."

Go on, drink the koolaid, errr I mean the apple juice.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
It's our ability to reason, and our ability to recognize what is morally sound, that we say this biblical god is bad news.

Seems you already have.

a reply to: Cinrad
Seems I already have what?

Deemed it nonsense and the height of both ignorance and immorality? Yes, I have.

a reply to: Cinrad

Yeah, I understand.

It's just an amusing image is all!