I can die for my own sins

[Mr Skeptic]

According to the Bible, Jesus died and paid the price for all the sins of all mankind. Therefore, the punishment for all the sins of all mankind is being dead for three days. There's no indication that dying for your own sins has to be a painful death, although I guess if it's for everyone's sins then crucifixion is the way to go -- or maybe that was to fulfill a prophesy, I can't remember. Still, it certainly can't be an eternity in hell, since that would be a harsher punishment than the punishment for the sins of all humanity.

 

While I'm not perfect and so I guess can't die for other people's sins, I do plan to spend at least 3 days dead sometime in the future, and so I might as well die for my own sins rather than have Jesus stuck with the blame. How about you?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

There's finer theology to it than that. Here's the breakdown we got in my philosophy of religion course:

 

1. Because God created us, we owe Him our absolute obedience.
2. Sin is the act of being disobedient to God.
3. If we sin, we now have a debt toward God.
4. There is no Earthly thing we can give God, because God is the Creator, and anything we give Him is something He already made.
5. Thus, the only way for our sins to be repaid is for God Himself to repay them as a human.
6. Thus, God must be incarnated as a man, who then repays our sins.

Pretty neat explanation, actually.

[Moontanman]

I was rather hoping to die while committing a sin, actually a rather specific sin but that's not important....

[Zolar V]

There's finer theology to it than that. Here's the breakdown we got in my philosophy of religion course:

 

1. Because God created us, we owe Him our absolute obedience.
2. Sin is the act of being disobedient to God.
3. If we sin, we now have a debt toward God.
4. There is no Earthly thing we can give God, because God is the Creator, and anything we give Him is something He already made.
5. Thus, the only way for our sins to be repaid is for God Himself to repay them as a human.
6. Thus, God must be incarnated as a man, who then repays our sins.

Pretty neat explanation, actually.

 

But, God also created sin. So why are we being punished for doing something he created for us?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was rather hoping to die while committing a sin, actually a rather specific sin but that's not important....

 

Lol, 2 or 3?

[jcarlson]

I was rather hoping to die while committing a sin, actually a rather specific sin but that's not important....

 

Let me guess... you want to die while eating a lobster, in front of the calf you just cast out of gold to worship, while wearing a shirt made of linen/wool blend, and screaming "God Damnit!"?

[Moontanman]

Let me guess... you want to die while eating a lobster, in front of the calf you just cast out of gold to worship, while wearing a shirt made of linen/wool blend, and screaming "God Damnit!"?

 

 

Not exactly...

 

But, God also created sin. So why are we being punished for doing something he created for us?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lol, 2 or 3?

 

 

Probably closer to 6 and 9 if I remember correctly....

[Zolar V]

Not exactly...

 

 

 

 

Probably closer to 6 and 9 if I remember correctly....

But, even with 6 and 9. 2 would be hard to fulfill and 3 would be neigh impossible.

[Moontanman]

But, even with 6 and 9. 2 would be hard to fulfill and 3 would be neigh impossible.

 

 

Are you talking about the 7 deadly sins or the ten commandments? I'm not sure I know them all in order....

[Zolar V]

Lol no, I'm talking about numbers of a certain kind.

[Moontanman]

Lol no, I'm talking about numbers of a certain kind.

 

 

Well then I hope for 68 and I won't have owe her one....

[Sisyphus]

There's finer theology to it than that. Here's the breakdown we got in my philosophy of religion course:

 

1. Because God created us, we owe Him our absolute obedience.
2. Sin is the act of being disobedient to God.
3. If we sin, we now have a debt toward God.
4. There is no Earthly thing we can give God, because God is the Creator, and anything we give Him is something He already made.
5. Thus, the only way for our sins to be repaid is for God Himself to repay them as a human.
6. Thus, God must be incarnated as a man, who then repays our sins.

Pretty neat explanation, actually.

 

But repaying it Himself is also just Him getting something He already made. Seems like He should have just excused the debt and cut out the middle Man. If I'm a loan shark and I know you can't pay me back, what does breaking my own thumbs accomplish?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

But, God also created sin. So why are we being punished for doing something he created for us?

The theological view is that God did not create sin; rather, he created us with free will, and we chose to disobey.

 

But repaying it Himself is also just Him getting something He already made. Seems like He should have just excused the debt and cut out the middle Man. If I'm a loan shark and I know you can't pay me back, what does breaking my own thumbs accomplish?

 

That's the trick of the Incarnation. Because Jesus was human, he was paying the debt rather than God just forgiving; because he was simultaneously God, he was actually capable of paying back the debt. The Trinity (or at least a man-God duality) is required for the doctrine of the incarnation to succeed.

[jcarlson]

The theological view is that God did not create sin; rather, he created us with free will, and we chose to disobey.

 

 

 

That's the trick of the Incarnation. Because Jesus was human, he was paying the debt rather than God just forgiving; because he was simultaneously God, he was actually capable of paying back the debt. The Trinity (or at least a man-God duality) is required for the doctrine of the incarnation to succeed.

 

Still does not explain why God, who is supposedly a benevolent, omnipotent being with the power to forgive the sins of humanity on a whim should he so choose, instead decided that it was necessary to impregnate a virgin in order to incarnate himself in human form and die, burn in hell for 3 days, then rise from the dead like a zombie before physically flying back up to heaven before the debt was forgiven.

 

It's awfully obtuse.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Still does not explain why God, who is supposedly a benevolent, omnipotent being with the power to forgive the sins of humanity on a whim should he so choose, instead decided that it was necessary to impregnate a virgin in order to incarnate himself in human form and die, burn in hell for 3 days, then rise from the dead like a zombie before physically flying back up to heaven before the debt was forgiven.

 

It's awfully obtuse.

 

I suppose "You guys have really screwed up, but hey, I forgive it all," without any drama, would be sending the wrong message to all the Earthly troublemakers.

[DJBruce]

I could be wrong, but wasn't part of the reason Jesus' was able to forgive our sins was that he descended into hell for three days? Or is the harrowing of hell and the forgiveness of sin unrelated?

[jcarlson]

I could be wrong, but wasn't part of the reason Jesus' was able to forgive our sins was that he descended into hell for three days? Or is the harrowing of hell and the forgiveness of sin unrelated?

 

Whether or not Jesus went to hell should have no effect on what an omnipotent god is ABLE to do. Most Christians say that Jesus went to hell in order to know the suffering that mankind endures (which God is ultimately responsible for) without forgiveness, but an omniscient god should already know what that suffering was like by virtue of the fact that it knows everything.

 

Like I said, all very obtuse.

 

I suppose "You guys have really screwed up, but hey, I forgive it all," without any drama, would be sending the wrong message to all the Earthly troublemakers.

 

Perhaps, but then, what message does god suffering for the sins instead of the people send? Essentially, "You guys have really screwed up, but hey, I forgive it all" IS the message that was sent, it was just sent along with a gory spectacle of suffering for humanity to witness.

[Zolar V]

Maybe God likes suffering? He is the one that invented it, along with sin, satan, hell, heaven, and our fake perception of freewill.

 

The theological view is that God did not create sin; rather, he created us with free will, and we chose to disobey.

Is that really freewill if it is created by a omnipotent being? or is it just an illusion of freewill.

 

 

That's the trick of the Incarnation. Because Jesus was human, he was paying the debt rather than God just forgiving; because he was simultaneously God, he was actually capable of paying back the debt. The Trinity (or at least a man-God duality) is required for the doctrine of the incarnation to succeed.

 

But even if he killed himself to pay his own creations debt to him, isn't that still just him giving himself something he has already created?

 

Instead of his creation giving him something he created himself, he is giving himself to himself for his creation.

 

I suppose "You guys have really screwed up, but hey, I forgive it all," without any drama, would be sending the wrong message to all the Earthly troublemakers.

So we have to have drama to make it right???? I think I am starting to smell the underlines of ancient bs.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Is that really freewill if it is created by a omnipotent being? or is it just an illusion of freewill.

I'd imagine that being omnipotent requires being able to create true free will. However, omniscience may confound things.

 

But even if he killed himself to pay his own creations debt to him, isn't that still just him giving himself something he has already created?

 

Instead of his creation giving him something he created himself, he is giving himself to himself for his creation.

 

Right, but Jesus was also wholly human (while being wholly God) and so Jesus's sacrifice was from a human, not from God. While also being entirely from God.

 

Again, you have to be capable of the logical contortions that make the Trinity possible before this works...

[Mr Skeptic]

I could be wrong, but wasn't part of the reason Jesus' was able to forgive our sins was that he descended into hell for three days? Or is the harrowing of hell and the forgiveness of sin unrelated?

 

I think so. It is repeatedly stated that the wages of sin is death, from Genesis to the epistles. It is stated that Jesus was crucified and was dead for 3 days, but I don't think it says anywhere that he went to hell. In any case, when hell is mentioned it is never a temporary thing.

 

Anyhow, 3 days of hell is rather meaningless. If for my own sins I need to spend eternity in hell, then should not the punishment for the sins of all humanity be at least as bad?

[Marat]

An important point left unsolved by the symbolism of Christ dying to reconcile God and man after mankind's fall into sin is why further suffering or injury, whether of man, God, Christ, or anything else is able to 'pay' a debt. If under modern tort law I negligently damage your car, no court would regard the injury as made good by my wrecking my own car in return, or the two of us going out and destroying someone else's car. What pays a debt is undoing the damage, like giving you money to repair your car, not causing further damage.

 

The only reason that Christ's suffering and 'death' ever seemed a rational way to reconcile God and mankind by settling the debt is that this was consistent with the irrational superstitions of the Eastern Mediterranean cultures of the time, according to which two neighbors having a feud over some issue could settle it by getting together and slaughtering a sacrificial goat and then consecrating it to some pagan deity. Christ's death is analogous to the death of the sacrificial goat or lamb, so it can seem to solve the problem mythologically, though logically of course the whole concept of damaging X to make good the damage to Y makes no sense.

[jcarlson]

An important point left unsolved by the symbolism of Christ dying to reconcile God and man after mankind's fall into sin is why further suffering or injury, whether of man, God, Christ, or anything else is able to 'pay' a debt. If under modern tort law I negligently damage your car, no court would regard the injury as made good by my wrecking my own car in return, or the two of us going out and destroying someone else's car. What pays a debt is undoing the damage, like giving you money to repair your car, not causing further damage.

 

The only reason that Christ's suffering and 'death' ever seemed a rational way to reconcile God and mankind by settling the debt is that this was consistent with the irrational superstitions of the Eastern Mediterranean cultures of the time, according to which two neighbors having a feud over some issue could settle it by getting together and slaughtering a sacrificial goat and then consecrating it to some pagan deity. Christ's death is analogous to the death of the sacrificial goat or lamb, so it can seem to solve the problem mythologically, though logically of course the whole concept of damaging X to make good the damage to Y makes no sense.

 

Indeed, in Leviticus 16 the Old Testament even describes the ancient practice of "scapegoating" (from whence we get the modern term), where the townspeople quite literally piled their sins on a goat and drove it out into the arid wilderness to die. Other cultures from the middle east at that time had similar practices, as well.

[ydoaPs]

I think so. It is repeatedly stated that the wages of sin is death, from Genesis to the epistles. It is stated that Jesus was crucified and was dead for 3 days, but I don't think it says anywhere that he went to hell. In any case, when hell is mentioned it is never a temporary thing.

 

Anyhow, 3 days of hell is rather meaningless. If for my own sins I need to spend eternity in hell, then should not the punishment for the sins of all humanity be at least as bad?

Indeed. The price doesn't seem to be paid in full at all; He didn't even cover the tax. The consequence for your finite sin is infinite torture. The price he paid was a day of torture followed by "death." And by "death" I mean he was alive chillin on Earth a few days later until he got bored and beamed himself up to the sky daddy after 40 days.

 

Let's put this in perspective of the ever overused courtroom metaphor. For our purposes here, we'll go ahead and assume that it's legitimate for one person to take another's sentence.

 

You run a red light and get sentenced to a double life sentence with no possibility of parole. The judge then tells you that he had his son stub his toe and if you believe this happened (despite there being no hard evidence or even eyewitness testimony) and accept the offer, then not only do you get off the hook, but the judge gives you one hundred trillion dollars.

 

What kind of just court system is that?

[lemur]

I think the reason Jesus "died for the sins of man" is that his destruction was the product of cooperation between two forms of worldly social authority that acts in the name of 'God:' church and state. To his church, he was blasphemous as a false prophet and to the state authorities he was blasphemous as a false king. So the fact that people would be so convinced of their judgment to destroy someone else claims of divine authority is itself the ultimate sin of man, i.e. to elevate worldly authority above direct divine revelation, which is what Jesus preached (revelation through Holy Spirit). So by forgiving the sins that destroyed him as an instrument of Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit itself becomes forgiving of its own destruction. That's why, I think, salvation is only supposed to require acknowledgement of Jesus; i.e. because Jesus embodies both the destruction of Holy Spirit and the forgiveness as such. So by acknowledging that Holy Spirit was destroyed, people are "resurrecting" it in the sense that they recognize what it is; which could be simplified to just "belief in Truth itself" or something like that. So, the resurrection of Jesus is supposed to mean the end of all sacrifices because people simply accept that sin is inevitable and they must acknowledge and accept forgiveness for it and try to redeem themselves by good deeds and living better, avoiding sinning as much as possible etc. I don't know if this explanation makes sense to others, but this is how it makes sense to me.

[random]

Actually it's very simple, by acknowledging that Jesus died for your sins you get a free pass.

The trick is actually believing it. Most people don't and are consumed with guilt, shame, humiliation etc. Or they try to redeem themselves through good deeds (buying favor) etc.

 

And then theirs the preacher who breathes fire and brimstone which adds to helpless and hopeless despairity.etc. etc. etc. all God wants is for you to be happy and have a relationship with him the rest is unimportant.

[ydoaPs]

Indeed. The price doesn't seem to be paid in full at all; He didn't even cover the tax. The consequence for your finite sin is infinite torture. The price he paid was a day of torture followed by "death." And by "death" I mean he was alive chillin on Earth a few days later until he got bored and beamed himself up to the sky daddy after 40 days.

 

Let's put this in perspective of the ever overused courtroom metaphor. For our purposes here, we'll go ahead and assume that it's legitimate for one person to take another's sentence.

 

You run a red light and get sentenced to a double life sentence with no possibility of parole. The judge then tells you that he had his son stub his toe and if you believe this happened (despite there being no hard evidence or even eyewitness testimony) and accept the offer, then not only do you get off the hook, but the judge gives you one hundred trillion dollars.

 

What kind of just court system is that?

Hmm....I didn't quite get the analogy right, since it only covers one person; the penalty was for all people, so the stubbed toe needs to pardon and pay trillions of people.

 

Yeah, I don't see this checkbook balancing.