Jesus Christ: A Necessary Personality That God Cannot Do Without

[Miles]

.


The common claim among Christians is that Jesus was necessarily put on/came down to Earth to save mankind from its sins so to allow the worthy to enter heaven. To do so it would be necessary to accept the divinity of Jesus and, to put it simply, either be saved by one's works (Catholic) or saved by one's faith (Protestant).

However, in as much as god is said to be omnipotent and can do anything logically possible could he not have dispensed with Jesus altogether and, knowing the heart of each individual, simply assign everyone to their proper destination, should there be more than one? That JC and all the attendant trappings of Christianity are wholly unnecessary, but likely concocted by power motivated autocrats who sought riches and despotic control over others?----my personal view of the motivating factors behind Christianity's success.


So, Jesus Christ: a truly necessary element that god could not do without so as to send people to heaven, OR a dispensable character in a religious fable?


.

[bjs1]

[Replying to Miles in post #1]

The second rule of logic is the principle of identity, which states that each thing is identical with itself. Put simply, a thing cannot be itself and not be itself at the same time.

In this context, it is logically impossible for God to be just and not just at the same time. A just God cannot ignore injustice – cannot provide mercy without a cost being paid – and still remain just. God had to accept the cost of mercy in order to be both just and merciful.

Why the coast had to be paid by way of the incarnation is a bigger topic than I can cover fully in an internet post. Thomas Aquinas devoted a lot of space to the topic in his Summa Theologiae if you really care about the issue. For now it is enough to say that something in the nature of God becoming a man and suffering death for our sins was required for God to pay the price of mercy and still remain just.

[Miles]

[Replying to Miles in post #1]

The second rule of logic is the principle of identity, which states that each thing is identical with itself. Put simply, a thing cannot be itself and not be itself at the same time.

In this context, it is logically impossible for God to be just and not just at the same time. A just God cannot ignore injustice – cannot provide mercy without a cost being paid – and still remain just. God had to accept the cost of mercy in order to be both just and merciful.

Why the coast had to be paid by way of the incarnation is a bigger topic than I can cover fully in an internet post. Thomas Aquinas devoted a lot of space to the topic in his Summa Theologiae if you really care about the issue. For now it is enough to say that something in the nature of God becoming a man and suffering death for our sins was required for God to pay the price of mercy and still remain just.

Taken from above
A just God cannot ignore injustice

Why not? I've never heard of any imperative that requires god to pay attention to injustice. And even if he does pay attention, considering all the injustices that continue to take place in the world, it's obvious he really doesn't care, because if he did care he'd put a stop to it all, BUT it doesn't stop. Does it? So I have no idea what you're talking about when you say, "god . . . cannot provide mercy without a cost being paid – and still remain just. " Exactly what mercy is being addressed and what cost is being paid----for disregarding all the injustice?

Taken from above
God had to accept the cost of mercy in order to be both just and merciful.

Why not? He doesn't seem to have any trouble ignoring all the injustice that goes on down on Earth. So let's forget about him having to pay any cost for all the mercy he hasn't shown.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Miles in post #7]

And isn't it interesting that god has waited thousands of years to save such people---letting millions die in the interm----until there were the tools and human expertise to accomplish such feats on their own.

Nah. It's part of the 'great plan' or some other excuse.

As the Big Kahuna he does seem to be vastly overrated; over-complicating jobs when truly it wasn't necessary.

This is where that 'great plan' excuse comes in again

[Tcg]

In this context, it is logically impossible for God to be just and not just at the same time.

But it is perfectly possible for those who manufacture a god of their liking to overlook the fact that the god they've created is both just and not just at the same time. And, if we pretend for a moment that god exists, it is perfectly possible for that god to be unjust.


Tcg

[Checkpoint]

In this context, it is logically impossible for God to be just and not just at the same time.

But it is perfectly possible for those who manufacture a god of their liking to overlook the fact that the god they've created is both just and not just at the same time. And, if we pretend for a moment that god exists, it is perfectly possible for that god to be unjust.


Tcg

Who are "those who manufacture god to their liking"?

Who too are those who "pretend for a moment that god exists"?

[JehovahsWitness]

So, Jesus Christ: a truly necessary element that god could not do without so as to send people to heaven, OR a dispensable character in a religious fable?


.

Since the God of the bible is presented as omnipotent, logically he needs nothing and no one to achieve his purposes. That said, omnipotence does not negate desire and scripture implies Jehovah (YHWH) desires to give eternal life only to those that exercise their free will to choose to obey His commands and to exercise faith in the ransom sacrifice of his Son.

JOHN 3:16

For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life

Does exercising faith in Jesus involve "sin and morality"?
viewtopic.php?p=893463#p893463

To learn more please go to other posts related to

SIN, SALVATION and ...REPENTANCE

[Miles]

So, Jesus Christ: a truly necessary element that god could not do without so as to send people to heaven, OR a dispensable character in a religious fable?


.

Since the God of the bible is presented as omnipotent, logically he needs nothing and no one to achieve his purposes. That said, omnipotence does not negate desire and scripture implies Jehovah (YHWH) desires to give eternal life only to those that exercise their free will to choose to obey His commands and to exercise faith in the ransom sacrifice of his Son.

JOHN 3:16

For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life

Does exercising faith in Jesus involve "sin and morality"?
viewtopic.php?p=893463#p893463

From your link explaining "exercising faith."

". . . while Christians cannot free themselves from Adamic (inherited) sin, this does not mean that humans are not able to make moral decisions and moderate their actions. Exercising faith in Jesus would involve learning about him, obeying his commandments and modeling our lives after him. Granted, no believer can do so "perfectly" but God does require Christian live a morally upright life by His standards and avoid practises that God deems abhorrent and harmful."

Curious as to where one finds god's standards. The Old Testament? The New Testament? Both? Elsewhere? AND, what are they (you only need cite a couple or so, with C&V if from the Bible)?


.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to Miles in post #17]

What would you say "exercizing faith in Jesus" would involve?

[Miles]

[Replying to Miles in post #17]

What would you say "exercizing faith in Jesus" would involve?

In as much as "exercising faith" is not my term, but one of Christianity's or at least that of Jehovah's Witness, I have to defer to the one given in the link in post 17, which is: It "would involve learning about him [Jesus], obeying his commandments and modeling our lives after him."

.

[Miles]

The common claim among Christians is that Jesus was necessarily put on/came down to Earth to save mankind from its sins so to allow the worthy to enter heaven.

It is a common claim of the New Testament.

To do so it would be necessary to accept the divinity of Jesus and, to put it simply, either be saved by one's works (Catholic) or saved by one's faith (Protestant).

Faith + works.

However, in as much as god is said to be omnipotent and can do anything logically possible could he not have dispensed with Jesus altogether and, knowing the heart of each individual, simply assign everyone to their proper destination, should there be more than one? That JC and all the attendant trappings of Christianity are wholly unnecessary, but likely concocted by power motivated autocrats who sought riches and despotic control over others?----my personal view of the motivating factors behind Christianity's success. So, Jesus Christ: a truly necessary element that god could not do without so as to send people to heaven, OR a dispensable character in a religious fable?

Genetic fallacy.

Questions cannot constitute a genetic fallacy.

Besides, if there was a better way to do it, it would have been done.

Really! How do you know? Personal communication?

Lets not fool ourselves into thinking that skeptics living thousands of years later, on internet debating forums, have come up with these brilliant/spectacular alternatives to plans that God had from eternity past.

Of course not. No doubt they've been brought up for thousands of years.


,