Why did Jesus die?

It's that time of the year again..actually, it's that time of this year when Gibson's Passion comes out. Due to the news media's obsession with this film, I've been "forced" to watch countless debates on this subject between various people. The line of the month is, "No one person killed Jesus, we all killed Jesus". Of course, this is never defended and is merely accepted as a matter of fact on these programs.So I'm going to put forth a straight forward question that has never been answered to my satisfaction by any Christian before: What is the correlation between the man being portrayed in Gibson's film being brutally and unmercilessly tortured to death and someone's sins? If anyone is willing to take up this question, I would advise them to define sin because this is usually a point of contention in these discussions.To put it in a more personal way, my little brother is being raised in a Christian household. How can anybody say to him with a straight face that he is responsible for the torture and murder of Jesus because he dishonored his parents by talking back to them?

Thanks for the replies.I've heard all of this before, and I find it very unsatisfactory as a logical reason why Jesus died, but it is an historical persepctive as to why people thought he had to die.It comes down to animal sacrifice. Again, I must ask my question in another form: What is the correlation between killing another living being and one's personal sins? In what kind of world would I be atoned for murdering my brother by going outside and murdering a couple cows? Or another human being, as in Jesus?If somebody wrongs me in any way, it seems I can do one of two things: 1. Forgive them, or 2. Don't forgive them. I'm not going to tell them to go unmercilessly torture and destroy another living being in order for my forgiveness to be bestowed upon them.So, if I may borrow from my chemistry background, the reaction would be: (sin) + (destruction of a living being)= (atonement). But what is the mechanism by which this correlation is brought about?

quote:

---

Please correct me if I misunderstand what you are asking. As I see it, according to judeo-christian theology, which I personally no longer hold to, the destruction of a living being IS the mechanism that God uses (or used) in order to atone for sins.

---

Very bad idea on my part to introduce the mechanism/reaction analogy, it's kind of a vague concept outside of chemistry (and probably in chemistry). I probably confused you and I know your response is confusing me.

quote:

---

But perhaps you are asking what it is exactly that makes an animal or human sacrifice acceptable to God as a mechanism for atonement for sin. According to my previous belief it was my own faith in the sacrifice(of Jesus) that was the mechanism.

---

This is what I am getting at. Maybe you can explain that last sentence without using the word mechanism, since I introduced it without thinking of the confusion it might cause.Are you telling me that God only forgives sins if the destruction of life occurs? If so, is this just an arbitrary price or is there some reason for it. Based on what you just said, it seems the story of Jesus is:The Father needs to have a sinner destroy a life in order to forgive the sinner. Different lives have different values with regard to how much sin they atone for. Before Jesus, sins were paid for by the blood of animals. God wanted a sacrifice that would end all these animal sacrifices and atone for all the sins of humanity. So he sent The Son to earth in order to be tortured and destroyed so the He would be able to forgive all of humanity.Is that about correct?Also, did Jesus have to be tortured or could he of just been killed painlessly in order for God to forgive humanity? And, if we are going by the animal sacrifice analogy, why didn't the sinners have to kill Jesus for atonement? For instance, could anybody sacrifice an animal and atone for my sins back in the day, or did I have to do it myself?

double[This message has been edited by JustinCy, 02-29-2004]

quote:

---

Jesus was most likely executed for insurgency against Rome. The concept of Jesus as a "once and for all" vicarious sacrifice for humanity was soley the invention of Paul who was influenced by his Hellenistic demographics.

​

The "Christians" in Jerusalem (including the original disciples) continued to adhere to Mosaic Law which included animal sacrifices for the remission of sins. Hence, they (the disciples) could not have believed Jesus' crucifixion was a vicarious sacrifice.

---

I agree with this completely. But I'm just trying to get to the bottom of the "Jesus died for all of us" stance.