Was Jesus a "Human Sacrifice"

[teresaq]

In reading some of the pioneer writings last night, and the points they were making, a question came up for me.

We know that Christ died on the cross, but that "Deity did not sink and die". That being so, was Jesus a "human sacrifice"?

What are the various understandings in adventism and how do we fit this in?

[Bravus]

Sorry, don't even click it, you will hate it and it will scare you. It's just my mental association.

[Bravus]

Lyrics here:

Diety's blood, spilled for you

For indeed Christ was our passover

Hanging on a bloodied cross

A bloodied cross

Human sacrifice

Human sacrifice

Father forgive them for they know not what they do

Peter denied three times

They draw near to me with their mouth but their hearts

Are far from me

Human sacrifice

Human sacrifice

Do not be afraid for He is risen

All authority has been given to Him

Worship Him, and only Him

Jesus Christ, the Almighty

He was your human sacrifice

Jesus said, this is the blood of the new covenant

Shed for the remission of sins

That it might be fulfilled

Which was spoken by the prophets

[Bravus]

The original question is a very interesting one. The quote seems to suggest that only the human part of Jesus died. That seems odd and almost heretical in the light of general Christian theology.

Will be interested in the views of others.

[teresaq]

Did divinity/deity need to die for the sacrifice to be of effect?

[Bravus]

I don't know, it's complex, isn't it? If Jesus is of one person with the Father and the Spirit, presumably all of God would die if any member of the Trinity died, so it seems as though that didn't happen. On the other hand, the notion that Jesus was 'fully human and fully divine'...

As I mentioned in another thread this morning, the mystery of the incarnation will be our study in eternity, so I doubt we'll solve it now. Still worth thinking and talking about, though.

[skyblue888]

That thought crossed my mind before.

As quoted, on the cross, divinity did not sink and die and yet the sacrifice was complete and God the Father bowed in acceptance of the sacrifice. On the cross the Father was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself and yet He did not die.

"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous." Rom.5:19.

Mrs. White seems to have had the same question on her mind:

"The Deity did not sink and die under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that 'God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him, should not perish but have everlasting life." E.G. White, Bible Commentary, Vol.5, p.1130.

Let us not forget that Christ, before He could take the form of a man, had to first relinquished the form of God. That alone was a divine sacrifice and after He took the form of man he humbled himself as a man even unto death upon the cross.

But yes, the redeemed will have an eternity to study this.

In MS 153 or 7 B.C.907 we read, "Men need to understand that Deity suffered and sank under the agonies of Calvary."

Notice how it does not say that Deity sank and died but only that it sank! Interesting, isn't it?

But if His divinity had sunk and died, what about

His own words that He had power to lay down His

life and power to take it again. John 10:18.

So this shows that on Calvary the Deity did not have to die and did not die.

sky

[Dr. Rich]

NO! Jesus was both the Son of God and the son of man. He was God in the Human form. But that isn't the real question is it? Jesus, as part of the Family of God, agreed to take Adam's place/penalty in order for the offspring of Adam to live and make a choice of their own to obey God or not. It did not necessarly take a full DNA human to pay this penalty.

What most have mistakenly believed is that it was the Father's choice, but Jesus said that NO ONE other than Jesus alone had the power to lay down His life and take it back up again. In fact, it was Paul's words saying that Jesus was just a human from the flesh line of David and only after he was raised by God did He become the Son of God, that caused this mistaken and false idea about Jesus Christ.

John 3:16 does NOT say that the Father sent His Son to die for anyone. It says that the Father sent His Son to testify to the truth in order for those who believe in this truth and obey for the ONLY to become members of God's family by being born by the Holy Spirit (God the Mother), NOT being adopted as Paul mistakenly taught.

[cardw]

The reason these Christian doctrines are so difficult is they have their origin in pagan religions.

Christianity basically presents the following primitive idea.

God has to sacrifice himself to himself for rules he made himself to prevent himself from killing everyone.

There is an obsession with blood which the ancients considered to have the power of life. Hence rituals involved with the eating of the heart and/or the body of one's enemy to gain their power.

We have this parallel in Christianity with the communion ritual which is the drinking the blood and eating of the body of one's god.

These are all ancient pagan rituals that were absorbed during the formation of Christianity as a separate religion to give it legitimacy within the milieu of 1st and 2nd century religions.

So of course it doesn't make sense to the modern mind.

[hch]

The original question is a very interesting one. The quote seems to suggest that only the human part of Jesus died. That seems odd and almost heretical in the light of general Christian theology.

Will be interested in the views of others.

As I recall in the Desire of Ages it explains that had Christ's sacrifice not been excepted, his divinity would have remained dormant for ever.

But the topic is one that will lead to mere speculation from the finite about the Infinite. I'll not say more on it now. I'll Ask Jesus someday and use my time for better things in the meantime.

[karl]

Christianity basically presents the following primitive idea.

God has to sacrifice himself to himself for rules he made himself to prevent himself from killing everyone.

There is an obsession with blood which the ancients considered to have the power of life.

God did not "have to" sacrifice Himself. In His foreknowledge, He ascertained that the only way to ensure rebellion against His government would never arise again would be if He demonstrated beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt that He is not selfish, arbitrary or capricious - that He always considers the best good of His creatures - that He is not self-protective. He gives us Himself in an act of self-abnegation so unthinkable that even those creatures closest to Him were, and continue to be, astounded.

His sacrifice is not about legalities. It is not a cooking of the books. It is not a whitewash of sin.

It's about transforming rebels into loyal sons and daughters of God.

[Dr. Rich]

karl--Huh? What in the world are you talking about? Hasn't anyone here ever read Revelation 5:1-10? I am really amazed at all of you who can't, or better yet, refuse to study Revelation and understand it! Believing that you will never know and can't know is against what Jesus said, but then I suppose you all have never even read those words either!

Ok, I suppose I should feel sorry for those of you who have been dumbed down by our (SDA) schools and churches. But IF you truely WANT to know the truth regarding your questions, they can be found in Jesus' words. Just don't be fooled by the words of others who many take to be inspired, but clearly are not.

[John317]

Did divinity/deity need to die for the sacrifice to be of effect?

Absolutely not. All that needed to die was the humanity of Christ, and that is what did die, not Deity. Deity can't possibly die.

This is one of the reasons that some people claim Christ on earth was not God.

[John317]

In fact, it was Paul's words saying that Jesus was just a human from the flesh line of David and only after he was raised by God did He become the Son of God, that caused this mistaken and false idea about Jesus Christ.

Here is more evidence that you don't understand what Paul taught in the first few lines of Romans 1.

I've already quoted many verses written by Paul which prove that Paul understood Christ to have been deity the whole time He was on earth.

In Romasn 1: 4, Paul is saying Christ's resurrection "declared" or demonstrated that Christ was the Son of God. He doesn't say that is when Christ "became the Son of God." You are misquoting Paul.

In fact, what you say contradicts what Paul says in verse 3, where he says clearly that the Son of God our Lord was born of the seed of David. That makes it obvious that Paul is saying Christ was the Son of God before He was born as a baby in Bethlehem.

Here are some of Paul's direct statements:

Romans 9:5

To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

Philip. 2:5-7

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, [6] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, [7] but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form,

NOTE: Paul is saying that Christ was God and equal to God in heaven before He came here. This God was born in the likeness of men, in the flesh, just as John 1: 14, 18 say.

Titus 2:13

waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,

Col. 1:15-17

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. [16] For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. [17] And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Col. 2:9

For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,

NOTE: These verses written by Paul show that Christ has always been God. The words are in present continuous tense, and mean that there was never a time when Christ was not God, nor was there ever a time when the Godhead dwelling in Christ was not holding all things together.

Two natures were/ are in Christ: the human and the divine. But the divine nature-- God-- was hidden under the humanity of Christ. Yet His deity did show on occasion in the Gospels: once at the Mt. of Transfiguration, and the second time when He was being arrested. See John 18: 6. (Those who believe Ellen White to be a true prophet of God may compare DA comments on this verse.)

This has been explained before in response to your statements about Paul, yet you keep posting your claims and misquotes as if no one said anything.

Please address the points I've brought up here instead of merely restating your claim that Paul says Christ "became" the Son of God at the resurrection.

[John317]

.... Hasn't anyone here ever read Revelation 5:1-10? I am really amazed at all of you who can't, or better yet, refuse to study Revelation and understand it! .

Just because people have a different understanding of a text doesn't mean they haven't read it or studied it.

You have a different view of the texts than many other readers, but we wouldn't be right to tell you that you haven't read or studied them.

Understanding them is a different matter.

Take, for instance, your recent post about Romans 1: 4, where you say Paul teaches that Christ "became" the Son of God at the resurrection. Reading that text hasn't helped you to understand it correctly, but you definitely have read it.

I think we can say the same thing about Rev. 5: 1-10.

I'd like to read your explanation of those verses and to see your reasoning in the scriptures so as to understand how you reached your conclusion. If you've already done this, please point to the post where you did this. :-)

[teresaq]

The reason these Christian doctrines are so difficult is they have their origin in pagan religions.

[John317]

John 3:16 does NOT say that the Father sent His Son to die for anyone. It says that the Father sent His Son to testify to the truth in order for those who believe in this truth and obey for the ONLY to become members of God's family by being born by the Holy Spirit (God the Mother), NOT being adopted as Paul mistakenly taught.

John 3:14-17

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, [15] that whoever believes in him may have eternal life."

[16] "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

NOTE: Verses 14, 15 explicitly teach that God's "giving" Jesus Chrsit included His being "lifted up," i.e., dying.

He was to be "lifted up" in the same way that Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness so that when people looked in faith at the bronze serpent on a pole, they were healed.

Do you believe this "lifting up" is a direct refernce to Christ's death on the cross?

If not, John 8: 28 & 12: 32 should convince you if anything will:

John 8:28

So Jesus said to them, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me."

John 12:32

And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself."

It seems self-evident that these are clear references of Christ's death, don't you agree?

Therefore, when we put John 3: 16 in context, it is definitely speaking of Christ's having been given for the purpose of dying for the salvation of all who put their faith in Him. I don't know how anyone can arrive at any other conclusion in the light of the above.

If you do, please explain.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: cardw

Christianity basically presents the following primitive idea.

God has to sacrifice himself to himself for rules he made himself to prevent himself from killing everyone.

There is an obsession with blood which the ancients considered to have the power of life.

God did not "have to" sacrifice Himself. In His foreknowledge, He ascertained that the only way to ensure rebellion against His government would never arise again would be if He demonstrated beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt that He is not selfish, arbitrary or capricious - that He always considers the best good of His creatures - that He is not self-protective. He gives us Himself in an act of self-abnegation so unthinkable that even those creatures closest to Him were, and continue to be, astounded.

His sacrifice is not about legalities. It is not a cooking of the books. It is not a whitewash of sin.

It's about transforming rebels into loyal sons and daughters of God.

Soooo, perhaps we need to be clear what the "sacrifice" was about, in order to ascertain whether it required deity or humanity to die?

[phkrause]

karl--Huh? What in the world are you talking about? Hasn't anyone here ever read Revelation 5:1-10? I am really amazed at all of you who can't, or better yet, refuse to study Revelation and understand it! Believing that you will never know and can't know is against what Jesus said, but then I suppose you all have never even read those words either!

Ok, I suppose I should feel sorry for those of you who have been dumbed down by our (SDA) schools and churches. But IF you truely WANT to know the truth regarding your questions, they can be found in Jesus' words. Just don't be fooled by the words of others who many take to be inspired, but clearly are not.

Am I to take it that only you have the right understanding of the Bible. I would say that almost, if not, all here have read this passage and probably the whole Bible. I think there are certain passage's that are more difficult than others to understand. But for the most part I personally find the Bible not that difficult, that's not to say that maybe I see certain passage's a little different than you or others. It also seems that if anyone differs in there reading of any parts of the Bible than you, there completely wrong!!!!!!! I guess you have a gift that the rest of us just don't seem to have!

[Dr. Rich]

John, I will not argue with you my friend, for I could argue both sides IF I wanted to--since he gave us both sides. It is no wonder there is so much division among people who call themselves christians.

[Dr. Rich]

John, the snake on the stick did NOTHING! It was just like the tree of Knowledge--it did NOTHING. And, just as the Passover Lamb did NOTHING, so to was the death of Jesus.

One had to OBEY what God said to do--LOOK at the snake. One had to NOT do something-eat from the tree. This too was all about obediance. The Passover Lamb's blood had to be placed just as what God Commanded them to do. It was what they did with the blood that saved the first born Males.

Now, as for Jesus' death, He WAS and was just like the Passover Lamb--His death will NOT mean anything for anyone UNLESS they DO something--and that means that they MUST obey what God said to do. Period! Jesus died, and was the ONLY one that could do this, for the penalty of Adam's disobediance.

Yes, it is the TESTIMONY of Jesus that MUST be lifted up, for He alone could do what had to be done as we see in Rev. 5.

Read ALL of John 3 and you will find that one must practice the truth to come to the light (verse 21), not the other way around. So, how does one practice truth? By obeying the words of Jesus.

As for what Paul said about Jesus in Romans 1:4, "....who was DECLARED the Son of God with power BY the resurrection...." I rest my case!

[John317]

John, I will not argue with you my friend, for I could argue both sides IF I wanted to--since he gave us both sides. It is no wonder there is so much division among people who call themselves christians.

OK. But I don't do what some people do, which is to say it's because the BIble is not clear. Nor, obviously, do I agree with you-- that God allowed Satan to add many of his books to the NT.

The Bible is clear, but God allows for freedom and individuality and for growth, for increased spiritual perception. I don't believe that God necessarily wants everyone to see all the details of doctrine in precisely the same way. If we did see everything alike, no one would change their views because it would appear that all truth was fully known.

As a matter of fact, I beleive that even in heaven we will continue to learn, which means that not everyone is going to see everything in exactly the same way. That must be true because not everyone will be at the same stage of development or knowledge. We will still be individuals with individual personalities and experiences.

The difference is, I believe, that those differences won't cause people to be angry with each other. Rather we will learn from each other.

Of course, though, the differences won't be due to the influence of the devil-- which, according to the Bible, is often (though not always) the reason for the differences and conflicts now.

[John317]

John, the snake on the stick did NOTHING! It was just like the tree of Knowledge--it did NOTHING. And, just as the Passover Lamb did NOTHING, so to was the death of Jesus.

One had to OBEY what God said to do--LOOK at the snake. One had to NOT do something-eat from the tree. This too was all about obediance. The Passover Lamb's blood had to be placed just as what God Commanded them to do. It was what they did with the blood that saved the first born Males.

You're right that the snake on the stick did nothing, and yes, the same with the tree in the middle of the Garden. Neither of them did anything.

What did something was the look of people in faith when they turned their gaze on the uplifted snake. They were healed in their look of faith. "Healing" by the way is the same as salvation. In the NT, it is the same word.

Similarly, if we don't apply the blood of Christ to ourselves personally and individually by trusting in Christ's work and in God's promises, His death won't bring us salvation or spiritual healing.

The whole world and even the animals have benefited from Christ's death, but eternal salvation is only for those who appropriate the blood to their individual lives through genuine faith in Christ.

This is the plain teaching of John 1: 12,13:

But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, [13] who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

[Overaged]

And your purpose for posting that mumbo-jumbo was what?

[Overaged]

Did divinity/deity need to die for the sacrifice to be of effect?

That's a good question. Certainly worth looking into.

I have always believed that whether or not "the human Jesus" died or not was not the question. All that mattered/s to me is that He had the resurrection power which He also imparts to us.

Do you know of any Bible texts that would support one way or the other?