If Jesus accepted everyone's "punishment" for their sins, why wouldn't that punishment be eternal? If the "law of justice" requires eternal punishment for sins in this life, then it only stands to reason that the proxy taking ownership of those sins (i.e. Jesus via the atonement), would receive the same eternal punishment that was coming our way.

Now wouldn't that be a *true* sacrifice? The idea that the physical pain endured in the garden and on the cross would be sufficient is BS. How many non-saviors have been tortured to death or endured months/years of agony with a terminal illness? It seems like Jesus got off light with a brief but brutal beating, whereas countless millions have died much more terrible deaths from inquisitions, starvation, cancer, etc.

From the Biblical and Christian perspective Jesus's suffering was not just the physical. On the cross he became sin, the very opposite of his rightful place as holy God.

I am not sure what that means..."he became sin". Seems a bit metaphysical, and why should that action satisfy the eternal damnation requirements of the Law of Justice?

Eternal suffering isn't the consequence of the law of justice - death is.

Christ's death is the sacrifice to pay off sin. All one needs do is accept that sacrifice (along with the ?premisees? ?premises? ?premisii? - Christ *is* God; sin => death...that kind of thing).

It can kind of be assumed that Christ would accept his own death as the sacrifice that pays for sin.

The pain and suffering alone brought on by the infirmities of "old age" that will affect us all makes anything that jesus supposedly suffered pale in comparison.

Jesus opted out early. In fact the way it came down on him you could almost say he instigated his own suicide...which i was always told was looked down upon by the "gods".

If i could know that jesus suffered through all of what comes with old age i might be able find an infinitesimal bit of a warm spot in my heart for him. And even that might be too large.

Otherwise jesus just had a tough 3-day weekend. Too bad...so sad.

Hey jesus...here's a quarter to call someone who cares.

And that is if jesus even existed...not to start that ever on-going war here.

Or so it seems to me...

Ahhh, yes...definitely should include the infirmities of old age as an example.

Back off, people, none of this is Jesus' fault.

You might be interested in getting a different paradigm concerning Jesus. Read Deepok Chopra's book, "The Third Christ" and you will learn that some of the red letter sayings of Jesus are clearly not his style.

My opinion is that Jesus was an enlightened master who despised the establishment for their treatment of the poor. He especially criticized them for banning the poor from the temple because they didn't have money for buying a dove to sacrifice.

Hmmm - banning those who cannot pay from the temple. Who does that? YEP! THE MORMONS DO!

It is unfair to blame Jesus for what has been made of his message of kindness and love by those eager to make money or increase their power by leveraging his popularity.

Churchmen put words in his mouth exactly the same way the Mormons changed the words in the Book of Mormon and D&C to make Joseph Smith sound educated and to eliminate parts which make him sound like a paranoid idiot.


Anagrammy

Agreed...not his fault, but the fault of those who created Him.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2013 02:24PM by facsimile3.

Exactly!

That's a good argument for the Christian Universalist position which says that Christ paid the price for our sins in order that all suffering will have an end for everyone. Finite sins can only suffer a finite penalty so that eventually everyone is saved once the price is paid. Jesus paid it in full. His suffering ultimately destroys hell itself so there is no way that Jesus could wind up there.

facsimile3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If Jesus accepted everyone's "punishment" for
> their sins, why wouldn't that punishment be
> eternal? If the "law of justice" requires eternal
> punishment for sins in this life, then it only
> stands to reason that the proxy taking ownership
> of those sins (i.e. Jesus via the atonement),
> would receive the same eternal punishment that was
> coming our way.
>
> Now wouldn't that be a *true* sacrifice?

No. Christ, who was sinless, need only suffer and die a physical death to atone for mans' sin.


> The idea that the physical pain endured in the garden and
> on the cross would be sufficient is BS. How many
> non-saviors have been tortured to death or endured
> months/years of agony with a terminal illness?

They were not part of the GodHead.

> It seems like Jesus got off light with a brief but
> brutal beating, whereas countless millions have
> died much more terrible deaths from inquisitions,
> starvation, cancer, etc.

Romans 6:23

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2013 02:09PM by ldsmakesmewantlsd.

ldsmakesmewantlsd wrote: "No. Christ, who was sinless, need only suffer and die a physical death to atone for mans' sin."


Why? If the law requires eternal punishment for everyone else, why would the sinless proxy receive a different sentence?

Short answer: while there may well have been a Jesus,
there is no flaming hell -- end of story.

Long answer: according to Christian theologizing, the
Mandatory punishment function of hell ended, once the
"ultimate price" was paid, by "infinite atonement." That
price having been paid, all human beings need do, to
escape punishment, is to accept the atonement, and
use that acceptance as a free passport to eternity.

Being both god and man, Christ both issues and receives
the get-out-of-jail-free passport. Thus, at the time of
his descent into hell, Christ the god gave Christ the
man the first such passport. However, Christ the man,
having been himself sinless, uses the atonement to
absolve the sins taken upon himself, not any sin he
actually commuted while in human guise upon earth.

I prefer the short answer myself.

UD

UD,

I agree with your short answer. Your long answer, on the other hand, leaves me with the impression that God is an elitest who thinks that the rules do not apply to Him. It is like He wants to receive white-collar punishment for murder, whereas the rest of us would have received the death penalty for petty theft.

Let's personify the "Law of Justice" for a moment with an overly-simplistic analogy. A group of servants rape Lady Justice and then torture and murder her husband and five children before her eyes. The servants are caught and she demands justice. Before they can be executed, the master of the servants shows up and offers to stand in for their punishment. However, instead of being executed, the master receives 90-days in jail, 20 lashes, and is required to pay a $1M fine. Lady Justice is outraged, but is reassured that the master is exceptional, because he is rich and could afford the $1M fine, so she should be satisfied with the punishment.

What part of Omnipotent do you not understand?

LOL...I guess I am still stuck in Mormon thinking where God is bound by natural laws and the Law of Justice is an eternal principle which even God is bound to honor.

It sounds like you need to go back to the School of Prophets and get a lesson from ole Joe.

God is not god by right but god by popular consent. God's rules at the consent of the intelligences, who accepted god's plan to murder his son. The intelligences allow god to save Jesus, so god can save Jesus. Welcome to the world of Mormon Theology.

As far as Christians go, god made the rules, all of them, and then created the exceptions. The long and the short of it is, Jesus doesn't have to go to hell because god said so. That is the benefit of worshiping an all powerful god, something that Mormons do not have.

If Jesus actually sacrificed himself for sins, he should actually die. I mean cease to exist. But no, He "died" for a whole weekend and then went on being god. That was supposed to "pay for sins?" He loaned his suffering for a weekend for us!

There are people who suffered horrible torture for longer than a day on a cross. They actually died - often for a cause. They gave their life. They don't get to fly back in 3 days and play god. Jesus didn't give his life (according to the people who claim "He lives").

The whole concept of a god deciding his blood and temporary suffering is some kind of payment for sin smacks of something a bunch of bronze age tale-tellers would invent. It's right up there with fairy godmothers.

Because jesus is ever lasting water. U ever see water burn?
lol

And he is eternal fire too. u ever see fire burned with fire? it doesnt scream in pain.