How can sins be redeemed by a sacrifice?

[Conn]

I don't think Catholics have much of a different view of God, Jesus, or the relationship between them than other Christians.

Just because Jesus was God doesn't mean he didn't also have free will the respect to the crucification.

I also don't know of any reason to believe that Jesus (not the copreal body, but the actual being) was created just for the crucifiction or forgiveness of sins.

If God is omniscient, then he knew Jesus' role and always did. That would seem to indicate that that was his "purpose", don't you think? Other than inspiring the spreading of Christianity, of course.

This is why its confusing...I didn't mean that Jesus being God meant he personally didn't care about the crucifixion or didn't consciously choose to make the sacrifice that is described....I mostly meant specifically in regards to the belief that "God is good and generous because his only son was sacrificed to atone for the sins of humanity"...how does that make sense if God IS Jesus (aka Jesus dying didn't end anything---he was still God and vice versa) and if God knew all along that this was Jesus' lot in life.

Sounds more like Jesus' corporeal form was sacrificed for humanities sins, if you believe in that. And what value does that hold if you are Christian? Its all about Heaven, right? Especially if Jesus was God.

Its confusing as hell and I think I'm muddling up my own questions, but I just don't see the sacrifice, or I don't see it being something that should make Christians talk about how their God is a generous God because of it.

[DRSmith]

If God is omniscient, then he knew Jesus' role and always did. That would seem to indicate that that was his "purpose", don't you think? Other than inspiring the spreading of Christianity, of course.

This is why its confusing...I didn't mean that Jesus being God meant he personally didn't care about the crucifixion or didn't consciously choose to make the sacrifice that is described....I mostly meant specifically in regards to the belief that "God is good and generous because his only son was sacrificed to atone for the sins of humanity"...how does that make sense if God IS Jesus (aka Jesus dying didn't end anything---he was still God and vice versa) and if God knew all along that this was Jesus' lot in life.

Sounds more like Jesus' corporeal form was sacrificed for humanities sins, if you believe in that. And what value does that hold if you are Christian? Its all about Heaven, right? Especially if Jesus was God.

Its confusing as hell and I think I'm muddling up my own questions, but I just don't see the sacrifice, or I don't see it being something that should make Christians talk about how their God is a generous God because of it.

God showed us what the sacrifice would mean to him when he hasked Abraham to sacrifice Issac

[Conn]

I'm not going to speak for all denominations but I grew up in the Church of Christ (Discples of Christ) and I am now Catholic' date=' and in both faiths I was taught that God and Jesus are the same. When I was Protestant, every Sunday we sang "God in Three Persons - blessed Trinity." The line in the Nicean Creed about Jesus being "consubstantial" with the Father was a response to the Arian heresy that God essentially begat Jesus. So, this has been a settled Catholic matter since 376. And no Protestant faith that I've been involved with has differed from this belief.

This is incredibly difficult to wrap one's brain around. I had a priest give a pretty good way of understanding it as God is the Father, Jesus is the Son, and the love they share is the Holy Spirit. But even that doesn't quite work.

And it gets really complicated when you then get into Jesus being divine and mortal simultaneously.

I tend to skip over that just focus on Jesus' humanity. He was human. He could feel pain. And he did not necessarily want to die. Even if dying for him was some kind of three-day nap, it certainly was not a "nothing" event.

In reading the Bible, I often wonder sometimes if Jesus' humanity kept him from completely understanding the details of God's plan. That's probably heretical, but as you read the Gospels, you do get a sense of a Jesus growing in knowledge and power. Why else would the Transfiguration occur? Why else would he be dreading what's coming in Gethsemane? Why else would he be worried about Mary's future care while hanging on the cross?

(They loved me in RCIA because I grew up in a Bible-reading church while most Catholics acknowledge that reading the Bible has not always been the core of the church. That seems to be changing a lot though, which is another thing that attracted me. There was a moment in one class where a nun who was teaching told a story how a priest once told her, "Don't read so much of the Bible. It will only confuse you.")

It's a fascinating question.[/quote']

Thank you. While this doesn't clear it up much, it being nearly impossible to wrap your head around as you said, it does shine some light on it a bit.

Its the sacrifice of Jesus' mortal body (while also being the divine God, who cannot die and who seemingly values eternity in Heaven over life on Earth) that twists it all up for me. How large of a sacrifice is it really if God always knew what Jesus' fate would be (or his own fate, whatever), since the creation of the universe, etc.? He knows all things at all times if he's omniscient. Not to mention that life on earth is such a trivial matter in the grand scope of things, if you believe in an eternity in Heaven. So how much of a sacrifice was it really? Certainly not large enough, in this context, to justify the "our God is generous" stuff I've heard.

This is all just my incomplete and very confused thought process, by the way. I'm not meaning any offense in regards to what the sacrifice meant/means to people of faith. Just spitballing as I go here, because like you said, its fascinating in a way and tough to comprehend.

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 05:44 PM ----------

God showed us what the sacrifice would mean to him when he asked Abraham to sacrifice Issac

But Abraham was not Isaac (as God is Jesus), and neither were divine. If God is Jesus, then they must be two separate parts of the same entity that did not/do not share knowledge, which technically WOULD make them two separate entities entirely. Neither knew what their fate was the moment the universe was created, either (in regards to Abraham and Isaac). God did, and if Jesus didn't, then he cannot be God, right?

This is why its confusing. Jesus IS God, yet is also mortal and isn't omnipotent/omniscient? It seems like Jesus being God muddles the entire thing up.

[DRSmith]

Thank you. While this doesn't clear it up much, it being nearly impossible to wrap your head around as you said, it does shine some light on it a bit.

Its the sacrifice of Jesus' mortal body (while also being the divine God, who cannot die and who seemingly values eternity in Heaven over life on Earth) that twists it all up for me. How large of a sacrifice is it really if God always knew what Jesus' fate would be (or his own fate, whatever), since the creation of the universe, etc.? He knows all things at all times if he's omniscient. Not to mention that life on earth is such a trivial matter in the grand scope of things, if you believe in an eternity in Heaven. So how much of a sacrifice was it really? Certainly not large enough, in this context, to justify the "our God is generous" stuff I've heard.

This is all just my incomplete and very confused thought process, by the way. I'm not meaning any offense in regards to what the sacrifice meant/means to people of faith. Just spitballing as I go here, because like you said, its fascinating in a way and tough to comprehend.

Of course if Jesus was fully human (son of man) then the idea of a painful death would be very frightening to him. Heck even with faith knowing God can raise the dead yet many are still afraid of dying of natural causes.

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 05:49 PM ----------

But Abraham was not Isaac (as God is Jesus), and neither were divine. If God is Jesus, then they must be two separate parts of the same entity that did not/do not share knowledge, which technically WOULD make them two separate entities entirely. Neither knew what their fate was the moment the universe was created, either (in regards to Abraham and Isaac). God did, and if Jesus didn't, then he cannot be God, right?

This is why its confusing. Jesus IS God, yet is also mortal and isn't omnipotent/omniscient? It seems like Jesus being God muddles the entire thing up.

I do not believe Jesus is God

And in order for his sacrifice to be equal to Adam's then he had to be the same as Adam.

Next problem you run into if you believe Jesus is God then why would the devil bother tempting him since the bible say with evil God can niether try a person nor be tried.

[Conn]

Of course if Jesus was fully human (son of man) then the idea of a painful death would be very frightening to him. Heck even with faith knowing God can raise the dead yet many are still afraid of dying of natural causes.

So are you saying that not being fully human (being both the son of God, and being God himself), Jesus was NOT afraid? And if so, how much of a sacrifice WAS it, if you aren't afraid and you know eternal life in Heaven awaits? Not the type of sacrifice that would justify God being called a generous God because of the sacrifice of his son/himself, right? That's what I've been curious about all along. Hearing Christians call God "generous" because of Jesus' sacrifice.

And if he was afraid, then how can he be God? Again, if he isn't omniscient, then he has to be a separate entity from God, right?

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 05:52 PM ----------

I'm not attempting to be argumentative, I'm seriously curious how this all fits together. Its a majorly grey area for me as a non-believer.

[DRSmith]

So are you saying that not being fully human (being both the son of God, and being God himself), Jesus was NOT afraid? And if so, how much of a sacrifice WAS it, if you aren't afraid and you know eternal life in Heaven awaits? Not the type of sacrifice that would justify God being called a generous God because of the sacrifice of his son/himself, right? That's what I've been curious about all along. Hearing Christians call God "generous" because of Jesus' sacrifice.

And if he was afraid, then how can he be God? Again, if he isn't omniscient, then he has to be a separate entity from God, right?

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 05:52 PM ----------

I'm not attempting to be argumentative, I'm seriously curious how this all fits together. Its a majorly grey area for me as a non-believer.

No I am saying being fully human and not God his fear was real.

Like I stated the Abraham Issace demonstration allowed us to see what God was going to do.

As for God we see the sacrifice or pain on his part would be just like that as Abraham had when it came to his child

Looking for logic in something does not strike me as argumentative

[Conn]

No I am saying being fully human and not God his fear was real.

Like I stated the Abraham Issace demonstration allowed us to see what God was going to do.

As for God we see the sacrifice or pain on his part would be just like that as Abraham had when it came to his child

Looking for logic in something does not strike me as argumentative

Wait...so is Jesus God, or not? On the last page, LKB told me that it was generally viewed this way, right? I thought that might be the hangup in my entire point, but it seemed like it was as confusing as I thought.

Now you're saying that Jesus was not God?

[DRSmith]

Wait...so is Jesus God, or not? On the last page, LKB told me that it was generally viewed this way, right? I thought that might be the hangup in my entire point, but it seemed like it was as confusing as I thought.

Now you're saying that Jesus was not God?

I have always said no.

If Jesus is God you have the problem with him being seen by man and the bible says no one has seen God at anytime. Also Jesus is called an apostle (one who is sent) a prophet who God raised up. Then if Jesus is God then really how big a deal was it that He did not sin?

And how do you kill that which is immortal

And if Jesus was God who raised up Jesus

[Hitman21ST]

Wait...so is Jesus God, or not? On the last page, LKB told me that it was generally viewed this way, right? I thought that might be the hangup in my entire point, but it seemed like it was as confusing as I thought.

Now you're saying that Jesus was not God?

Yes and no. The trinity consists of three distinct entities (the Father - "God", the Son - "Jesus", and the Holy Spirit) but they all have the same nature. The Holy trinity consists of these three persons, but they are all God.

One of the major flaws in the way most people (me included for the longest time) see the trinity is they use the additive property. Father + Son + Holy Spirit: 1+1+1 = 3. 3 does not equal 1. I was at church a few months ago and a good friend (who has a doctorate in mathematics) explained that the proper way of seeing the trinity was using the multiplicative property: 1*1*1 = 1. I can't remember the explanation of that, mainly because it uses a lot of mathematical terms that confused me , but that explanation made a lot of sense and cleared it up for me somewhat.

When Jesus came down to Earth he was 100% man - he had all the temptations of man and was able to sin, but he still had the nature of God with him. The sin nature of man is passed through fathers, therefore Jesus still had His God nature (as he was not conceived by man), but his human side was still able to sin and experience everything that we experience.

[Conn]

That clears it up much more, I think.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

If Jesus is God you have the problem with him being seen by man and the bible says no one has seen God at anytime.

No one has seen God in his true nature.

The Holy Spirit is also God and it was seen on the Day of Pentecost in the form of a dove.

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 05:49 PM ----------

Wait...so is Jesus God, or not? On the last page, LKB told me that it was generally viewed this way, right? I thought that might be the hangup in my entire point, but it seemed like it was as confusing as I thought.

According to every major Christian denomination (that I'm aware of) God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit all share the same spirit and all have been present at all times. No one ever said this was simple, but it's really no more complicated than any other religion.

Now you're saying that Jesus was not God?

He's saying that, but that's an opinion and not the theology of any church.

Do we have a Mormon here? I know nothing about Mormonism and there view of the Trinity, but I feel like I read once that they have a slightly different view of the relationship between God and Jesus. I may be wrong.

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 05:50 PM ----------

And if Jesus was God who raised up Jesus

This is just a chicken/egg question.

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 05:52 PM ----------

One of the major flaws in the way most people (me included for the longest time) see the trinity is they use the additive property. Father + Son + Holy Spirit: 1+1+1 = 3. 3 does not equal 1. I was at church a few months ago and a good friend (who has a doctorate in mathematics) explained that the proper way of seeing the trinity was using the multiplicative property: 1*1*1 = 1. I can't remember the explanation of that, mainly because it uses a lot of mathematical terms that confused me , but that explanation made a lot of sense and cleared it up for me somewhat.

I like that.

I had a priest last year try to explain it as God is the Father, Jesus is the Son, and the love between them is the Holy Spirit. I didn't entirely buy that.

The Trinity is endlessly confusing.

And we are also way way way way far away from the original question.

[grego]

I have always said no.

If Jesus is God you have the problem with him being seen by man and the bible says no one has seen God at anytime. Also Jesus is called an apostle (one who is sent) a prophet who God raised up. Then if Jesus is God then really how big a deal was it that He did not sin?

And how do you kill that which is immortal

And if Jesus was God who raised up Jesus

ya, he was God. check out what a 'theophany' is.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophany also, re-read the book of John with this in mind. lots of hints as well as some direct statements.

i struggled with this myself, but when you re read the bible with this in mind, things seems to make alot more sense.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

By the way, all this premised on the belief that God exists and that Jesus was crucified and resurrected.

If you don't buy that initial premise, none of this applies.

[Conn]

By the way' date=' all this premised on the belief that God exists and that Jesus was crucified and resurrected.

If you don't buy that initial premise, none of this applies.[/quote']

This is true. I have an academic interest in what is believed, though, because I was never quite clear on that point.

[Jumbo]

By the way' date=' all this premised on the belief that God exists and that Jesus was crucified and resurrected.

If you don't buy that initial premise, none of this applies.[/quote']

Yeah, among other things. Like reading "came down to earth" referring to Jesus' appearance. To a non-sold mind, the convolutions and pretzel-twists of some of the thought processes framed as "making sense" in regards to all the attributes and characteristics of composition being assigned to the deity is a rather surreal thing beyond the actual point of discussion.

And then to have the "evidence" or an "assumption" of some inherent validity to any given formula for "how this magic works" (including "it's a mystery beyond man's ken"---no pun intended ) just automatically attached to the comments as "and so it is so" is almost disorienting to me.

It leaves me to marvel that when minds can so comfortably do such things and often do (I have done similar when arguing pro-Redskins positions at times) that we can still reason with one another about much of anything, but we can. In saying this or anything else in these posts, I am not declaring that any of these assertions are definitely absolutely false. I do not find them credible enough to accept at their intended level, but so what.

For me, past or current reading of such discussions can be informative but at some points in the dialogue it will seem akin to me not really believing in vampires, but still asking a believer that if Holy Water is such an anathema to them, why can't priests just go around an bless every village's water supply daily and when the vamps appear ya just douse them, and the believer replying, "well, the water is just painfully annoying to them, not deadly, and if you really want to kill them, only a stake of wood through their heart actually works, don't try anything metal, or totally exposing them to direct sunlight for a sufficient time."

But here's some related queries in the spirit of the OP and what's followed:

If Jesus was a very distinguishable form of the Trinity (God) with specific separately identifiable components, and that specific form was tied to Jesus actually being the entity that was manifest on earth, then was there a Trinity before he "came down to earth" as "Jesus?" Was it just God & The HS before? Or was Jesus was "always there" as an un-Jesus part, like Adam's rib was just a rib until removed to be something else?

And when he "went back up", did it go back to the way it was or does he remain "Jesus" more as we "know" Him sort of like how Obi-Wan was still himself after "ascending" into a "higher plane?" At any point, was the Trinity just a duo? Or a solo? What are the details?

More precisely, what do you people think are the answers to those questions? What have you been taught?

[twa]

Always existed(Lamb slain before the foundation of the world ect)

Form doesn't matter, your puny mind couldn't grasp it anyway

[Jumbo]

Always existed(Lamb slain before the foundation of the world ect)

Form doesn't matter, your puny mind couldn't grasp it anyway

1. That's what I was taught as a little catholic.

2. i'm not surprised. I still have a hard time figuring out redheads.

[Enter Apotheosis]

The only comfort is that there is no sin so great that God cannot forgive it.

Some thoughts are too stupid not to post.

[Prosperity]

According to every major Christian denomination (that I'm aware of) God' date=' Jesus, and the Holy Spirit all share the same spirit and all have been present at all times. No one ever said this was simple, but it's really no more complicated than any other religion.

He's saying that, but that's an opinion and not the theology of any church.

Do we have a Mormon here? I know nothing about Mormonism and there view of the Trinity, but I feel like I read once that they have a slightly different view of the relationship between God and Jesus. I may be wrong.

I am going to be baptized in the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS next Saturday FWIW. The Church doctrine is that Jesus the Son, the Holy Father, and the Holy Spirit are all distinct entities w/ one purpose.

If Jesus was a very distinguishable form of the Trinity (God) with specific separately identifiable components, and that specific form was tied to Jesus actually being the entity that was manifest on earth, then was there a Trinity before he "came down to earth" as "Jesus?" Was it just God & The HS before? Or was Jesus was "always there" as an un-Jesus part, like Adam's rib was just a rib until removed to be something else?

And when he "went back up", did it go back to the way it was or does he remain "Jesus" more as we "know" Him sort of like how Obi-Wan was still himself after "ascending" into a "higher plane?" At any point, was the Trinity just a duo? Or a solo? What are the details?

More precisely, what do you people think are the answers to those questions? What have you been taught?

Along the same lines... LDS doctrine goes something like this:

Jesus existed as a distinct spiritual entity before he was born into the material world. Actually, everyone's soul existed before they were born into this world, and everyone's soul will continue to exist after they exit. The difference between Jesus' soul and other folks' is that his purpose/direction/characteristics were in parallel to the Heavenly Father's.

FWIW I find it's not worth it to spend too much time trying to think about categories and semantics. More important to get the larger frame work and follow the path that genuinely feels good and true.

[twa]

Redheads are the devil incarnate....ya just have to live with their little quirks(or let them eat your soul) for a happy relationship

[Hitman21ST]

But here's some related queries in the spirit of the OP and what's followed:

If Jesus was a very distinguishable form of the Trinity (God) with specific separately identifiable components, and that specific form was tied to Jesus actually being the entity that was manifest on earth, then was there a Trinity before he "came down to earth" as "Jesus?" Was it just God & The HS before? Or was Jesus was "always there" as an un-Jesus part, like Adam's rib was just a rib until removed to be something else?

The trinity has always been three beings, and they have always had the same nature (look up at my previous post for a very simple explanation of that). In Genesis, the account of creation has God (the Father) saying "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." Clearly he is speaking to someone. The gospel of John begins "In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word was with God (the Father), and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."

For the creation reference, I look at it this way: God (the Father) was the designer, Jesus (the Son) was the builder. The Holy Spirit has always been with them, but does not take a prominent role until the New Testament, because it was not needed until after Jesus' resurrection.

And when he "went back up", did it go back to the way it was or does he remain "Jesus" more as we "know" Him sort of like how Obi-Wan was still himself after "ascending" into a "higher plane?" At any point, was the Trinity just a duo? Or a solo? What are the details?

From my understanding, after Jesus ascended into Heaven post-resurrection, he retained his physical human body. The gospel of Mark and the book of Revelation state that Jesus is "sitting at the right hand of the Father", so there are two distinct entities of the trinity. The Holy Spirit is now down on Earth, but does not have a physical form as we recognize. Many (including myself) believe that the spiritual gifts (healing, prophecy, speaking in tongues, etc) are manifested through the Holy Spirit.

More precisely, what do you people think are the answers to those questions? What have you been taught?

I hope that answers your questions to a small extent at least.

---------- Post added April-19th-2012 at 08:32 PM ----------

Challenge accepted.

Wrong, but I laughed.

[twa]

Some thoughts are too stupid not to post.

Words to live by.

there is one sin that is unforgivable...or so it is said

[grego]

I am going to be baptized in the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS next Saturday FWIW.

what did you consider yourself before?

[Hitman21ST]

there is one sin that is unforgivable...or so it is said

I've heard that too, and honestly, I don't know where I stand on that. I think they're referencing Lucifer's act of rebellion that ended with his banishment to the pit, and that he can never be redeemed. For those who didn't know, Satan was not always in existence (as Satan). Before he rebelled against God, he was known as Lucifer, and he was said to be the "brightest angel." Roughly translated, Lucifer means "light." He was God's #1 angel. He got too proud of himself and led a rebellion and took fully a third of Heaven's angels with him into the pit (Hell).

[twa]

Where I come from it references this

http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/unpardonablesin.html