MVW, I agree. The crucifixion is subject to cultural and societal interpretation. But one interpretation that will eventually give way to reason is the idea of its connection to God's forgiveness of sin.
Isaiah 53:5 But he [was] wounded for our transgressions, [he was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither [was any] deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put [him] to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, [and] shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Ezekial 18:20-22 The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him. But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live: he will not die. None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live. Hmm so how do we need Jesus to fix our original sin? I don't know it would seem to me as though we don't even have original sin The entire seventh Chapter of Jeremiah (which I will not quote) spits in the face of the original sin doctrine. As does the above verses from Ezekial. Oh and by the way Noxious I thought the Old Testament didn't matter. Why use it to justify your beliefs now and why so sloppily at that?
Yes lets base our knowledge of Jesus' trial off of books written by people who never even knew him. Good start
Good lord it just keeps coming! You want to refer to a pagan doctrine to justify Christian belief? A blasphemy at that? What in the world!
Lol you didn't raise any questions. I don't expect you to regard gospel with the same significance that I do, given the fact you're not a Christian! LOL
If you cannot see the questions raised that is up to you. There was a time I did regard the gospel in a Christian way. Then I found the inherent fallacies
No no.. it's not my responsibility to assume your meaning. You throw one fantastical sentence out and expect a response okie dokie. I bet you're great in bed. hehe
Technically it was three fantastical sentences If you want real questions then here. Who wrote the gospels? How many gospels are there? Are some gospels more likely to be more historically accurate?
OH MY GAWD!!!! Ok, Storch the reason why I tell you to refer to the scriptures is because opinion is all you and most ever offer, and opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink. You ask a question that is based in Biblical teaching and really isn't as open to opinion as you may like to think, yet you only want to hear opinion. Sounds as though you are the one that isn't very confident in their position. Maybe your opinion doesn't stand up to scrutiny in light of Biblical teaching. Sorry if I choose to not offer just yet another opinion. If you can not or do not wish to look into or understand what I have referred to, as I said, not my problem. You keep asking about the relationship between the crucifixion and God's forgiveness of sin. I provided a very good starting point for you to understand the relevance of it in the context of the Biblical religions/history. If you choose to not investigate, not my problem, but your lack of effort does not reflect one bit on my knowledge or understanding. Storch, as long as you are stuck in your anthropomorphic conception of God, you will be limited in your comprehension of the topic. Then I ask what would even be the point of engaging in this mental masturbation anyways?? Storch most likely won't be persuaded from his position, nor would I. Just one opinion being slung at another... waste of time IMHO. Storch you stated that by virtue of your experiences, you have arrived at your current belief system, some facets of which you are expressing in this thread. I have also arrived at my current belief system via my experiences. Why are yours more valid or to be "believed" more than mine? @Indy Dude, seriously. When discussing things such as the why's and wherefores of the crucifixion, it is wise to look into those elements as laid out in the Old Testament. Many laws were prophetic, such as the law of the kinsman redeemer. Understanding those points in the OT is very beneficial in understanding the events of the crucifixion. If you don't dig that, than I don't know what to say to you, man. When I previously in another thread said the OT wasn't important it was in relation to the concept of being subject to the law as a Christian. In that sense, the OT doesn't apply. We are saved by grace, not works. The law was rooted in works, the resurrection and subsequent "salvation" are rooted in grace, unmerited favor. Please get with the program. One final thought, the entire God in the flesh, Son of God, crucifixion, resurrection stuff wasn't done for God's benefit or to fulfill some need God had/has, but rather it was all played out in that fashion for OUR benefit. (Deleted)
NG, Again with the "my opinon is in the Bible" thing. My opinion is that God didn't require someone to suffer and hang on a cross until they were dead in order to fulfill his law. You disagree with that opinion and can't for the life of you explain the reason for your disagreement with me. Instead, you refer me to things that you are obviously incapable of putting into coherent thought. That's OK. Being in that position is how we come to learn that the opinions we hold are not our own, but another's--else you would be able to articulate them, which you can't.