By What Logic Did Jesus Die For My Sins?

In this thread, I asked the following question:

The only answer I received was less than satisfying, some thing about a sin payment from Leviticus. If that is the best explanation that can be put forth, then I find the whole “Jesus died for your sins” argument for Christianity to be unpersuasive. Can any of the Christian scholars out there offer anything that to support the claim that the death of Jesus in any way is a quid pro quo for my sins?

It’s as “logical” as sacrificing a lamb for one’s sins was. In other words, it’s not “logic”, it’s merely “symbolic”.

If you’re going to be “logical” about redemption, then folks who get caught shoplifting shouldn’t have to do community service in order to be redeemed, they should simply be required to reimburse the merchant. But redemption isn’t “logical”, it’s “symbolic”.

Then the symbolism is lost on me. If he doesn’t pay the same penalty, then my sins are not payed for.

There are a number of methods you might use to reconcile this.

For example, suppose a millionaire convicted of shoplifting were sentenced to live a week on the streets, with no housing or access to his bank accounts and credit cards. That would rightfully be considered a serious sentence. On the other hand, a homeless person convicted of shoplifting receiving the same sentence would likely be relieved – after all, that’s exactly what he’s doing anyway. The same punishment applied to two different people can certainly be viewed differently.

For you to wither on a cross, thirst and be given vinegar, be stabbed in the side, writhe in agony, die, and spend three days in Hell is certainly a tough punishment. But what sort of punishment is it when applied to the Maker of All Things, the Lord, who had virtually limitless power? Surely you’ll concede that his undergoing such a fate, voluntarily, is of some note.

But your question misses the bigger picture. If viewed literally, it would seem there is some sort of cosmic ledger, by which Christ’s sacrifice is entered one one side and the sins of the rest of the world on the other. But such a system assumes that there is some superseding power. In fact, Christ died for your sins not to balance the budget, but to show His love for the world, his overwhelming affection for each person and the troubles they endure.

How does His suffering and death do that?

It provides a context for all out suffering. One of the most daunting hurdles to faith, I think, is the age-old lament of why God lets bad things happen to good people. Why must innocent babies die of disease, why must people hunger and thirst, why does Bonnie Hunt keep getting TV shows?

The sacrifice of Christ on the cross does not answer those questions, but it tells us that God is not unaware of what it means to be a human and to suffer. He knows what it means to be mocked, to be hungry, to be stabbed, to writhe in agony. (In fairness, He didn’t have to endure TV).

Part of the way to cope with tragedy in our lives is to recall the sacrifice that Christ made. This is how He made it “for us” - not so much as an accounting trick to wipe out human punishment for sin, but as a way to experience human punishment for sin, and so that we would know that His Passion was a reflection of what it means, sometimes, to be human.

One man’s view only.

  • Rick

So it’s about emulation?

I wouldn’t say it is “symbolism” so much as opening a door that was shut by Original Sin.

Some Christians believe that all those who were born before Jesus could not be saved because they did not know Him. This is best illustrated in Dante’s Inferno where the seventh ring of Hell (the least painful) is reserved for “virtuous pagans”. Here Dante meets Virgil, who is his guide throughout the inferno. Dante considered Virgil to be one of the greatest and most virtuous people to ever walk the Earth, yet he was still damned when he died.

The reason for Virgil’s damnation is the Original Sin commited by Adam and Eve. When God threw them out of Eden, He created death. Not the death of the body so much as the death of the soul, ie damnation. It was a “Get the fuck out and don’t come back!” kind of thing.

OK, it’s a few thousand years later and God is looking down on these miserable, doomed humans. He takes pity on them and decides to open up a door through which they can get to Heaven. So he sends his Son down to tell them how to do it. It works like this: Baptism (with water) will wash away sins. This doesn’t mean that the sins don’t exist any longer, just that they are forgiven. However, baptism will not wash away the Original Sin, which resides in the soul. So how can a sinner get rid of it?

That’s where the “only through Jesus shall you be saved” and “washed away our sins” parts come in. See, if you have Faith in God and Jesus in your heart when you die, you will pass through Jesus and His death and ressurection. In this you are baptized by the divine blood that was spilled on the cross, and that washes away the Original Sin. Afterwards, you can follow Jesus up to Heaven along the path laid out when He ascended, body and all, after he was ressurected on the Third day.

This is one explanation, but the subject has been debated among Christian scholars and denominations for centuries. For example, John Wesley (the founder of the Methodist Church), believed that all it took to wash away the Original Sin was simple baptism (with water). This is why in Methodist Churches newborn babies are baptised - to wash it off as soon as possible. You still needed faith in Jesus to be saved, but John Wesley didn’t believe it worked like I explained above.

As for me, I’m a non-denominational Christian, was raised Methodist, and am not sure if I believe in the concept of Original Sin to begin with.

It had its origins in the Jewish ritual of the Pascal lamb before the destruction of the temple. Every year at Passover, Jews had to sacrifice a pure, unblemished lamb to atone for their sins. Christians later asserted that Jesus was a sort of Uber lamb who made all other sacrifices unnecessary.

How does this work mechanically? Well how did animal sacrifice work mechanically? How did killing a lamb mean anything to God? Well, way back in the mists of time, when Yahweh was just one tribal god out of many, people actually thought that gods wanted food. They thought that if they did not appease the gods with good food, that bad stuff would happen. Gods weren’t so paternal back then, they were pissed all the time. People tried to cover their butts even more by giving only the best food. The first of the harvest, the “unblemished” animals, etc.

This stuff gradually acquired a more metaphorical spin, even in ancient times, but in the beginning people just thought they were literally feeding the gods, pure and simple.

So to answer the OP, Jesus was identified with the Pascal lamb. (possibly to explain to potential converts why the “Messiah” was dead) The pascal lamb was a remnant of extremely ancient, even prehistoric traditions of animal sacrifice. The metaphysical explanations of sacrificial soteriology came later, after the Pascal-surrogate symbology was already set.

Pascal is pretty much obsolete now, Diogenes. What about the Java lamb? Or even a C++ lamb?

Wow! My geek-o-meter just went crazy. Anyone know what happened?

Only a lamb without spot is appropriate – that would be Grade A, not C or even C++! :wink:

It’s actually more of a ransom principle.

Consider:

Rom. 5:12: “Through one man [Adam] sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (No matter how uprightly we may live, all of us are sinners from birth. [Ps. 51:5] There is no way that we can earn the right to live forever.)
Rom. 6:23: “The wages sin pays is death.”

Ps. 49:6-9: “Those who are trusting in their means of maintenance, and who keep boasting about the abundance of their riches, not one of them can by any means redeem even a brother, nor give to God a ransom for him; (and the redemption price of their soul is so precious that it has ceased to time indefinite) that he should still live forever and not see the pit.” (No imperfect human can provide the means to deliver someone else from sin and death. His money cannot buy eternal life, and his soul laid down in death, being the wages that are to come to him anyway because of sin, has no value toward delivering anyone.)

1 John 2:2: “He [Jesus Christ] is a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins, yet not for ours only but also for the whole world’s.”

1 John 4:9, 10: “By this the love of God was made manifest in our case, because God sent forth his only-begotten Son into the world that we might gain life through him. The love is in this respect, not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent forth his Son as a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins.”

2 Cor. 5:14, 15: “The love the Christ has compels us, because this is what we have judged, that one man died for all; so, then, all had died; and he died for all that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died for them and was raised up.”

Propitiatory and propitiation have reference back to the cherubs covering the Ark of the Covenant and literally means “mercy seat.” In the above quoted scriptures it appears to apply to God accepting Jesus’ death as a ransom for mankind’s “sin.”

That’s as close to a Biblical answer as I can provide. Whether someone believes the Bible is another discussion altogether.

I realize I’m opening myself up here to a load of criticism by quoting scripture, but the OP asked a Biblical question. And, yes, the Bible is open to a lot of different interpretations, this is mearly one of them.

Well, let me figure out if I can add any ideas to this. I’ll try anyway. Perhaps the reason that Jesus death is sufficient to pay for the sins of everyone in the world is because He was both man and God. Only something that is holy and pure, without spot or blemish or sin of it’s own can take the penalty for someone else’s sins. The only sinless Being there is is God Himself. So He was in Christ as He sacrificed Himself for us. Of course this conversation can lead us into discussions of the trinity and how that works. But suffice it to say, there are plenty of Scriptures that indicate the deity of Christ. Colossians 2:9 being the plainest one I can think of: For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the godhead bodily.

It doesn’t have to be logical to us. All we need do is, in faith, accept God’s provison for us. God found a way to reconcile His holiness and wrath against sin with His love for us. He did that perfectly in Christ paying our penalty. Those trusting in Him and His sacrifice have life.

And you know this – how?

Where is that rule written?

One disagreement first. Beeblebrox said
When God threw them out of Eden, He created death.

God very clearly tells Adam that by eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil he “will surely die.” Gen 2:17
My church teaches that sin separates man from God, and this results in death. I believe that interpretation to be consistent with the OT establishment of sacrifice for sin on through the NT and the final offering, Jesus.

In regard to the OP by Fear Itself
If the penalty for sin is the death of the soul, how can Jesus’
physical death be considered payment for anybody’s sin?

I’ve tried writing my response a couple times already, and I think I finally got the point you’re looking to address, ie, how can sin worthy of eternal damnation be redeemed through physical death?
But you see, beginning in the OT, God establishes and requires blood sacrifice for sin. NOT eternal damnation. Eternal damnation is reserved for those who reject God’s offer of the means of redemption of man.

In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. Heb 9:22

Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. Heb 5:1

No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God…
Heb 5:4

During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission…and was designated by God to be high priest…
Heb 5:7-10

When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are to come, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death…Heb 9:11-14

I know this is short and a bit sloppy, but I didn’t want to be too long-winded. Read the book of Hebrews for a fuller picture of the magnitude of Jesus’ sacrifice and the purpose for which he died.

Until Jesus, God tolerated blood sacrifice for payment of sin. Once Jesus died, that payment was made in full. All that is now required is acceptance of the offer of Jesus’ blood and repentance of sin. Rejection of that offer makes your life again subject to the penalty of sin which is death.

One disagreement first. Beeblebrox said
When God threw them out of Eden, He created death.

God very clearly tells Adam that by eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil he “will surely die.” Gen 2:17
My church teaches that sin separates man from God, and this results in death. I believe that interpretation to be consistent with the OT establishment of sacrifice for sin on through the NT and the final offering, Jesus.

In regard to the OP by Fear Itself
If the penalty for sin is the death of the soul, how can Jesus’
physical death be considered payment for anybody’s sin?

I’ve tried writing my response a couple times already, and I think I finally got the point you’re looking to address, ie, how can sin worthy of eternal damnation be redeemed through physical death?
But you see, beginning in the OT, God establishes and requires blood sacrifice for sin. NOT eternal damnation. Eternal damnation is reserved for those who reject God’s offer of the means of redemption of man.

In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. Heb 9:22

Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. Heb 5:1

No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God…
Heb 5:4

During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission…and was designated by God to be high priest…
Heb 5:7-10

When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are to come, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death…Heb 9:11-14

I know this is short and a bit sloppy, but I didn’t want to be too long-winded. Read the book of Hebrews for a fuller picture of the magnitude of Jesus’ sacrifice and the purpose for which he died.

Until Jesus, God tolerated blood sacrifice for payment of sin. Once Jesus died, that payment was made in full. All that is now required is acceptance of the offer of Jesus’ blood and repentance of sin. Rejection of that offer makes your life again subject to the penalty of sin which is death.

One disagreement first. Beeblebrox said
When God threw them out of Eden, He created death.

God very clearly tells Adam that by eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil he “will surely die.” Gen 2:17
My church teaches that sin separates man from God, and this results in death. I believe that interpretation to be consistent with the OT establishment of sacrifice for sin on through the NT and the final offering, Jesus.

In regard to the OP by Fear Itself
If the penalty for sin is the death of the soul, how can Jesus’
physical death be considered payment for anybody’s sin?

I’ve tried writing my response a couple times already, and I think I finally got the point you’re looking to address, ie, how can sin worthy of eternal damnation be redeemed through physical death?
But you see, beginning in the OT, God establishes and requires blood sacrifice for sin. NOT eternal damnation. Eternal damnation is reserved for those who reject God’s offer of the means of redemption of man.

In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. Heb 9:22

Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. Heb 5:1

No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God…
Heb 5:4

During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission…and was designated by God to be high priest…
Heb 5:7-10

When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are to come, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death…Heb 9:11-14

I know this is short and a bit sloppy, but I didn’t want to be too long-winded. Read the book of Hebrews for a fuller picture of the magnitude of Jesus’ sacrifice and the purpose for which he died.

Until Jesus, God tolerated blood sacrifice for payment of sin. Once Jesus died, that payment was made in full. All that is now required is acceptance of the offer of Jesus’ blood and repentance of sin. Rejection of that offer makes your life again subject to the penalty of sin which is death.

What’s even dumber is when people look at this from god’s perspective. “God gave his only son for our sins.”

No he didn’t, unless you’re prepared to tell me that jesus was condemned to hell for eternity “for all our sins.” If jesus is in heaven with god (as i’m sure all christians duly believe), god did not give his only son at all. In fact, he got him back in heaven to be right next to him.

Now, were christians to believe god sent his own son to hell for all eternity for our sins, it would still mean the christian god is a cruel sadist, but at least it could be said that god made a meaningful sacrifice.

In order to buy into that “original sin” stuff, don’t you have to believe in Adam and eve and the Garden and all that? Well, obviously that stuff never happened so if there was no original sin, then what do we have to be “redeemed” from?

She’s probably basing it on the rule in Leviticus:

or the rule

Or just generally that the animals to be sacrficied have to be without (physical) defect. By analogy, then, Jesus as sacrifice has to be morally without defect or blemish.

It’s the argument Paul makes in Hebrews, that NaSultaine has quoted.

Uh, Diogenes, I think that the Garden of Eden/Adam and Eve thing is…you know…somewhat of a metaphor.