I got this from the why won't god heal amputees forum. . . .

I really want to hear Christians respond. How is it that you think Jesus actually died for your sins? According to this story, the guy didn't stay dead. What kind of sacrifice is that? In the OT the slaughtered cattle didn't come back. Now, a God named Yahweh supposedly made everything (knowing what would happen), and planned it all out so that it would happen just the way he wanted it to (his "divine plan" just so he could come down and sacrifice himself, to himself, then preach to some people in hell for three days only to come back to life? Does this honestly make any sense to you? If so, how? A real hero would actually stay dead. His sacrifice would be a true loss for him (i.e. - he would lose everything in order that we would gain) - but that is not what happened according to the bible. God didn't kill himself so that we could live. So, why should we think this story is true? Doesn't it just sound more like foolish men made it all up (just like in other religions)?


Christians, please help us non-believers understand why you believe this story (what good reason do you have) and why should anybody think it makes any sense?

Lol.

I remember asking a Christian this same question a year back when I was, erm, still agnostic. His reply was that the TRUE sacrifice was 'GOD' becoming 'man' and taking the shame on the cross. His 'resurrection' is proof that he is GOD.

Christians, thank me later.

You seem unhappy that He rose from the dead.
Well, He sacrificed His life but does not have to be bound in the grave by death. Death has NO power over God. If He did not rise from the dead then we are doomed eternally because we don kpeme too.

twogood: You seem unhappy that He rose from the dead.
Well, He sacrificed His life but does not have to be bound in the grave by death. Death has NO power over God. If He did not rise from the dead then we are doomed eternally because we don kpeme too.

That's not a sacrifice. . .He just died for 2 days according to the story and continued his existence in heaven so how is that a worthy sacrifice?. . .

aManFromMars: Lol.

I remember asking a Christian this same question a year back when I was, erm, still agnostic. His reply was that the TRUE sacrifice was 'GOD' becoming 'man' and taking the shame on the cross. His 'resurrection' is proof that he is GOD.

Christians, thank me later.

Christians will always remix everything and give it new meaning or definition as long as it will help them explain absurdity away. . .

aManFromMars: Lol.

I remember asking a Christian this same question a year back when I was, erm, still agnostic. His reply was that the TRUE sacrifice was 'GOD' becoming 'man' and taking the shame on the cross. His 'resurrection' is proof that he is GOD.

Christians, thank me later.

God didnt become man. He is diff frm Jesus

aManFromMars: Lol.

I remember asking a Christian this same question a year back when I was, erm, still agnostic. His reply was that the TRUE sacrifice was 'GOD' becoming 'man' and taking the shame on the cross. His 'resurrection' is proof that he is GOD.

Christians, thank me later.

God didnt become man. He is diff frm Jesus. God is the father and jesus is the son.

OlamiB:
God didnt become man. He is diff frm Jesus. God is the father and jesus is the son.

Many other believe god is the same with Jesus. . .

i often ask myself the question too.
which means he can repeat the cycle.
-come to earth again, die, save us from our sins(I don't understand this) and go back.
But I truly doubt there can be mass murder protest on someone for doing no wrong. So he will just live, grow old and die an old man.

@OP has had a very wrong information and interpretation of christianity. You guys don't understand the true principles of sacrifice. Making a sacrifice is not about throwing away a thing of value for no reason. Rather it is the giving up of one thing of value, in exchange for another thing of more needed/useful/greater value.

Jesus became the personification of the law of Moses, meaning: his life was absolutely dedicated to the Law of Moses(I suspect these things I write don't make sense to you, but I'm writing them anyway ), so his death signifies the death(sacrifice) of/to the law, and God raising him back to life means he is now alive to God but dead to the law. So this is the sacrifice: Giving up a life of the law, in exchange for a new life of the Spirit(of God).

Oya, make una clap for me nah

twogood: You seem unhappy that He rose from the dead.
Well, He sacrificed His life but does not have to be bound in the grave by death. Death has NO power over God. If He did not rise from the dead then we are doomed eternally because we don kpeme too.

If he Jesus had not risen from the dead, wouldn't his soul have gone straight to heaven anyway?
How would that have been bad for humanity?

Why was it necessary for him to make another stopover on earth, considering that nothing significant really happened afterwards?

okeyxyz: @OP has had a very wrong information and interpretation of christianity. You guys don't understand the true principles of sacrifice. Making a sacrifice is not about throwing away a thing of value for no reason. Rather it is the giving up of one thing of value, in exchange for another thing of more needed/useful/greater value.

Jesus became the personification of the law of Moses, meaning: his life was absolutely dedicated to the Law of Moses(I suspect these things I write don't make sense to you, but I'm writing them anyway ), so his death signifies the death(sacrifice) of/to the law and God raising him back to life means he is now alive to God but dead to the law. So this is the sacrifice: Giving up a life of the law, in exchange for a new life of the Spirit(of God).

Oya, make una clap for me nah

Erm...

Matthew 5:
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

aManFromMars:

Erm...

Matthew 5:
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

The bolded is precisely what Jesus accomplished(fulfill). I also helped you highlight the concluding part of the context of the message(in red). Jesus alone had the perfect understanding of the Law(people then just feared and kept the law without an understanding of it). He lived as the physical and spiritual person of the law, with ultimate authority of it, thus fulfilling it. Until jesus, nobody could fulfill the law because nobody had the understanding of the law. So the understanding, practice and dying as the law is it's fulfillment. Since it is dead, it is therefore abolished. This is the trick God played on the devil, to abolish his tool of sin and death(1 Corinthians 2:8).

okeyxyz: [/quote]

This is interesting, confusing, but interesting. That's what I love about blind faith. lol
Your definition of sacarifice comes from which english dictionary.

[quote author=okeyxyz]@OP has had a very wrong information and interpretation of christianity. You guys don't understand the true principles of sacrifice.

It's funny how it is always the critics of blind faith who are accused not understanding the proper interpretation of scriptures, and yet, we have over 1000 denominations of blind faith christians interpreting scriptures in a 1000 different ways. lol

okeyxyz: Making a sacrifice is not about throwing away a thing of value for no reason. Rather it is the giving up of one thing of value, in exchange for another thing of more needed/useful/greater value.

I think the proper word for your above definition is trade, and I think it is a word that everyone is familiar with.
So please correct yourself. Sacrifice is not trade. Sacrifice is in fact, the opposite of trade.

Sacrifice involves the giving up something of personal value for nothing, or for something of less value to oneself.

okeyxyz:
Jesus became the personification of the law of Moses, meaning: his life was absolutely dedicated to the Law of Moses(I suspect these things I write don't make sense to you, but I'm writing them anyway ), so his death signifies the death(sacrifice) of/to the law and God raising him back to life means he is now alive to God but dead to the law. So this is the sacrifice: Giving up a life of the law, in exchange for a new life of the Spirit(of God).

This is the most interesting and revealing part.
So, according to what is implied here the Law of Moses was what was wrong with the humanity, not sin, not Adam,
And that Jesus came solely to kill the law of Moses and usher in a new era and new life for humanity?
This is the sacrifice of Jesus, according to you.
Wow! This is new.

But sir, this proposition of yours has many many problems.

1. I guess you have not read in the bible where Jesus said the he had not come to abolish the law but, to uphold it, and that not one letter of the law should be removed, and damns anyone who proposes such?

2. If the law of Moses was the problem with world, does it not imply that god and his prophet Moses were wrong and should be rightfully blamed?
Since the Laws of Moses were exclusively for the Jews, in what way was it a problem for the rest of humanity, and therefore why should the rest of humanity give a F... about your so-called sacrifice of Jesus for such laws?

okeyxyz:

The bolded is precisely what Jesus accomplished(fulfill). I also helped you highlight the concluding part of the context of the message(in red). Jesus alone had the perfect understanding of the Law(people then just feared and kept the law without an understanding of it). He lived as the physical and spiritual person of the law, with ultimate authority of it, thus fulfilling it. Until jesus, nobody could fulfill the law because nobody had the understanding of the law. So the understanding, practice and dying as the law is it's fulfillment. Since it is dead, it is therefore abolished. This is the trick God played on the devil, to abolish his tool.

Complete Bs.
This is nothing more than high octane speculation based on nothing whatsoever.
How can you confidently make the assertion that only Jesus understood the law?
With what evidence do you man such bold assertions?
Where the laws not written ?
Was Jesus the only one who could read?Which law school did he attend?


It is utterly preposterous and silly to say that 2000yrs after the laws were written only Jesus was capable of understanding.

Did Moses himself, the author ,understand it too?
What about the prophets, samuel, Elijah, Elisha, Ezekeile, Amos, Etc, did they too not fully understand the laws?
What would have been the purpose of God dictating laws to moses, if at the end no one was fully able to understand the laws.
Which law school did he attend?

You blind faith christians are the funniest lot I have ever seen , even in the irrational world of religion.
You can can pulll out rabbits from any hat in a twinkle of an eye, no matter how contradictory and how silly.

plaetton:
I think the proper word for your above definition is trade, and I think it is a word that everyone is familiar with.
So please correct yourself. Sacrifice is not trade. Sacrifice is in fact, the opposite of trade.

The problem with logics like yours is that you take words at literal value rather than considering the principles underlying them. What's the difference between sacrifice, exchange, trade, transaction? While they are different words indicating different contexts but it is one principle underlying them all: exchange!! Give up one thing and recieve another

Sacrifice involves the giving up something of personal value for nothing, or for something of less value to oneself.

This is a lie. There is no such operation/occurrence anywhere in the universe. I challenge you give us one instance where people(or any entity) throws away something of value for nothing, or for something of a lesser value. It is even against Darwinian evolution that you guys purport to preach.

This is the most interesting and revealing part.
So, according to what is implied here the Law of Moses was what was wrong with the humanity, not sin, not Adam,
And that Jesus came solely to kill the law of Moses and usher in a new era and new life for humanity?
This is the sacrifice of Jesus, according to you.
Wow! This is new.

Correct!! The law of Moses was the problem. The law of Moses was the sin itself. Adam became a sinner by choosing to subject himself to be ruled by the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. This Tree of good and evil was actually the law of Moses, in it's origin. It defined evil/sin. Prior to that God defined everything as Good and fit for use by man. So Adam choosing the tree began to perceive evil in creation that was originally defined as good, sin became his conscience and his corruption, leading to corruption of nature in general and ultimately leading to death.

But sir, this proposition of yours has many many problems.

1. I guess you have not read in the bible where Jesus said the he had not come to abolish the law but, to uphold it, and that not one letter of the law should be removed, and damns anyone who proposes such?

I believe I already addressed this: https://www.nairaland.com/1488548/jesus-what-kind-sacrifice-talking#19012858

2. If the law of Moses was the problem with world, does it not imply that god and his prophet Moses were wrong and should be rightfully blamed?
Since the Laws of Moses were exclusively for the Jews, in what way was it a problem for the rest of humanity, and therefore why should the rest of humanity give a F... about your so-called sacrifice of Jesus for such laws?

Adam signed a contract that would subject him(and his descendants) to be ruled by the Law of Moses(Tree of the knowledge of good and evil). The contract had to be fulfilled, but since nobody had an understanding of this law, how could they fulfill it then? Then enters Jesus Christ...

The law of Moses was binding on Adam and his descendants. It became human nature, alive in our consciences, giving us some sense of right and wrong. This is why every human society has moral codes derived from this law, whether Jews or not. The jews were unique in that they were chosen as a case sample to legally demonstrate the law and bring the messiah through them. But once the contract of the law is fulfilled by Jesus Christ, then it is fulfilled for all men, just like it was binding on all men through Adam.

plaetton:

Complete Bs.
This is nothing more than high octane speculation based on nothing whatsoever.

How can you confidently make the assertion that only Jesus understood the law?
With what evidence do you man such bold assertions?
Where the laws not written ?
Was Jesus the only one who could read?Which law school did he attend?


It is utterly preposterous and silly to say that 2000yrs after the laws were written only Jesus was capable of understanding.

Did Moses himself, the author ,understand it too?
What about the prophets, samuel, Elijah, Elisha, Ezekeile, Amos, Etc, did they too not fully understand the laws?
What would have been the purpose of God dictating laws to moses, if at the end no one was fully able to understand the laws.
Which law school did he attend?

You blind faith christians are the funniest lot I have ever seen , even in the irrational world of religion.
You can can pulll out rabbits from any hat in a twinkle of an eye, no matter how contradictory and how silly.

It's simple. They were given the law without the understanding to go with it. The law itself is a shadow(misrepresentation) of spiritual principles. It was absolutely symbolic but the jews took them literally, just like you yourself take them literal. Their meanings are hidden(symbolic) from all men, until revealed to some.