Christ's dead

[dark_knight]

What is the official view of the ACC on the death of Jesus? I've found only clues about it on the website, so I thought I ask here.

My view is conservative - I assert that he died as a ransom (lutron-anti) for the sins of mankind.

[Jason]

Does Arianism insist that the death of Jesus atoned for the sins of mankind?

[Jesus John]

Dear Brothers,

If it will gave you a information about Jesus death (May be peace upon him) in the Holy Quran God says in the An-Nisaa (Women) Sura verses 157-158:

157. That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God (Allah)*.";- But they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
158. Nay, God (Allah)* raised him up unto Himself; and God (Allah)* is Exalted in Power, Wise;-

*Allah is a special name which he gaves to his self in the Quran

With Love,

Oguzhan

[dark_knight]

Dear Oguzhan,

I respect your belief in Quran, but my faith lies in the Holy Scriptures of Torah and the New Testament. Their authenticity can be proven many ways, and they clearly show that Jesus died.

Jesus himself said that he was very unique Son of God (John 10:36; Matt. 16:15-17), the Messiah of Old Testament prophesies (Mark 14:61, 62), that he had a prehuman existence in heaven (John 6:38; 8:23, 58), that he would be executed and then would be raised to life on the
third day and would ascend back to the heavens.

I have reasoned with Moslems, who say God cannot have a Son. I believe that this is about misunderstanding. By saying that He has a Son, Moslems do not see the metaphor but see a blaspehemy, because they usually see connection between sexual intercourse and sonship. But the Holy Bible clearly says that God's servants are his Sons - NOT because of sex, but through creation and seeking to do His Will!

John 26:63, 64 So the high priest said to him: “By the living God I put you under oath to tell us whether you are the Christ the Son of God!” Jesus said to him: “You yourself said it. Yet I say to YOU men, From henceforth you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

Job 38:7When the morning stars joyfully cried out together, And all the sons of God began shouting in applause

Sacrifice of Isaac in the Mount Moria by Abraham was an antetype of Jesus' death. God was willing to sacrifice His own Son for our sins.
Also the animal sacrifices of the children of Israel (who were called God's sons in the Torah) all pointed in to one perfect and universal sacrifice, the atoning death of Jesus Christ.
Jesus was New Adam who became our Prince of Salvation. If Jesus didn't die, any of us cannot come to God. Jesus himself said:

The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand. He that exercises faith in the Son has everlasting life; he that disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him. -John 3:35,36

in order that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He that does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him -John 5:23


Doing good things is important. It may show that we have true faith in God. Striving to do God's will is following Jesus and showing we love God. But if any other reason that Love is our motive serving God, we do them for nothing. We are justified trough faith in the Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth. He was the only one who could keep the law and never fall into sin. That is why John the Baptist said: "Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world!".

By the name of Jesus Christ, I call you all in the glorious freedom of his saints, those who believe in him, that he is the true Messiah of God and mediator between God and man, for no sinner (us all) can see the face of God and live.

And I saw, and I heard a voice of many angels around the throne and the living creatures and the elders, and the number of them was myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice: “The Lamb that was slaughtered is worthy to receive the power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing.”
And every creature that is in heaven and on earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and all the things in them, I heard saying: “To the One sitting on the throne and to the Lamb be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.” And the four living creatures went saying: “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped. - Revelation 5:11-14

With love,

Henrik

[Danage]

In Roman records, dating to Tuesday 6th April 32 C.E. (either Julian or Gergorian calender), a man called Jesus/Yeshuah was crucified but this is not concrete proff, not strong verification.

No, the date is not quoted from a book in front of me, I just remember dates very well.

[David Kone]

Jesus, the son of man, that wonderful body composed of the basic elements of the physical world, occupied by the great teacher, esthetic, and holy man did indeed die either on the cross or at some time thereafter. Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God, that angelic entity that spoke to his disciples the living Word of God, defeated death and rose as first born of many.

It us written in Matthew -

Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I say to you that in Heaven their angels always behold the face of My Father in Heaven. Mat 18:10

This verse infers two very important concepts. First is that there is a personal relationship that each of us have with our own special angel. The second is that as adults sadly our angels no longer have an intimate relationship with our Father in Heaven. When we were little children or when we become as little children our angels behold our Father's face. When Jesus walked among his disciples his angel looked perfectly upon the face of the Father, the full wisdom and grace of the Father filled him and he shared that wisdom and grace with his disciples. His angel grew close to the bosom of God. He nurtured the gifts which God gave him an as a steward and caused them to not only remain intact but to multiply with such abundance that in death he was rewarded with a place at the right hand of God as a good steward over all creation. He did this by entirely ignoring the importance of the things of this world; even the value of his own wonderful body composed of the basic elements of the physical world. He set the example for all who would have eternal life that they must give up their old self and be born again into full responsibility for the spiritual gifts that God left in their charge. Jesus did give his life so that God would see that men were capable of total obedience to His Holy Word even in the face of death. Not in routine sacrifice but in living proof. We were spared because of the righteousness of one man. Even beyond this wonderful gift of that one momentous event of salvation he also gave us the chance for eternal life through his teachings and living example which shows us the way to be perfect children whose angels look upon the face of the Father.

[dark_knight]

I'll submit a link to an interesing article from non-trinitarian Bible Students, which discusses the Ransom of Christ's death.

http://www.biblestudents.com/jesusdeath.cfm

[Postulare42]

Yes, that's pretty much the way it was taught to me, and as Paul described it as being, which gives us the repentant-Hellenised-educated-lawyer-Pharisee-lacky-of-the-Sadducees-who-never-actually-met-Jesus perspective (truly an upper-crust man of his times). As such, he is very valuable toward converting other Hellenised/Romanised Pharisee of the synagogues around the Mediterranean, and funnelling donations back to the little commune in Jerusalem. Further, much of what is attributed to his authorship as the "Letter to the Hebrews" agrees on many points with both perspectives found in Matthew and John, and is presented in a style consonant with early Talmudic exposition of the time. But is his message understood as well by those not steeped in the Jewish mindset of that era? I seriously doubt it ! Neither do I believe that the soteriologic and christologic pitch of his slant is all that accurate, in fact.

My caution in this is encouraged by:

"...Beware the leaven of the Pharisees..." ;)

The dual role of Jesus as "sacrificed lamb of Yom Kippur" and "high priest of the blood offering and reconsecration" as promulgated in John, is mixed by Paul with the role of the "scapegoat" that bears the people's guilt out into the wilderness, and the lamb of Pesach. Jesus himself, at the last supper, alludes to himself as the sacrificial bullocks of covenant-sealing, when he refers to the Pesach wine as a new covenant sealed in his blood. Paul, without saying so, also places Jesus in the position of the ram supplied for Abraham in lieu of Isaac. Very much a return to the pre-Mosaic, Patriarchal relationships, while still fulfilling the confused mess the "Law and the Prophets" had become in the cultural milieau.

These are all veeeery Jewish issues and symbols, steeped in Hebrew/Israelite/Judean history.

One remarkable contribution of Paul was the assertion that one did not have to become a circumcised Judean neurotic to be a Christian, though he obviously struggled with that himself for the remainder of his life. A "recovering Jew", as it were.

I am deeply convinced that Jesus came primarily to heal the lameness of human relationships . . .with the self, with our fellow humans, and with God.

"...I came to bear witness to the truth.."

"...the truth shall set you free..."

"What is that 'truth' " is a fruitful topic for contemplation, don't you think ?

:innocent:

[Stephen_Webb]

@Jason "Does Arianism insist that the death of Jesus atoned for the sins of mankind?"
************************************************** *************************************
I have held to the belief that Y'shua was executed on trumpted up charges of sorcery and causing "uprisings" in the land - his very presence threatened the state of the established religious hierarchy, not to mention that many concidered him a prophet of G-d <EVEN himself? ?beside him called often friends Y?shuas>which infuriated the priestood [even his closest friends said that Y'shua was beside himself]- so he was put to death on a symble of life - the worst possible [symbolical] form of execution [prescribed to those who cause uprisings and disorder] - now it is true that only G-d can quicken the dead, and G-d would NEVER raise up an evil sorcerer, so the quickening of Y'shua was to serve as a sign to those who put him to death - that they were wrong and that he is a prophet of G-d and NOT a sorcerer, and as such his words need to be heeded and he is to be followed [not worshiped]. The entire story of our sins being taken to hell, and forgiven in the shedding of Christs holy blood is an invention - as this leads to a type of automatic and irrevocable salvation that may lead to license [to act as one will, without regard to any moral or ethical conventions], this invention is essential to the early trinitarians, because it is a poweful tool used to draw all sorts of followers [the idea is that the more people in their church, the more power and money they have.]- ones that don't want to do anything to be worthy of salvation other than make a confession, take baptismal, and give money - the simple Roman way! What an easy way to get into heaven! Who wouldn't do it? I wouldn't, and it seems that neither would any other G-d loving individual. SRW

[Postulare42]

Stephen, have you read in "patristics" ? ;-)

[Stephen_Webb]

Stephen, have you read in "patristics" ? ;-)

No, I have not, guide me there then?

[Matt2817]

Does Arianism insist that the death of Jesus atoned for the sins of mankind?

Grace and peace all! Welcome to Stephen!! May your stay here be filled with all good things.

It intrigues me that Jason really did not have his question answered after nearly one year. dark_knight perhaps came the closest with his link to the Bible Students link. I write "closest" because semi-Arian groups such as the Bible Students, Christadelphians, and Jehovah's Witnesses, maintain a Ransom or classic view of the atonement. Although each puts their particular spin on it.

This classic view, which held sway for the first 1000 years of Christianity should not be confused with the more popular Substitutionary view of atonement. Neither should it be confused with the ultra-modern "Word of Faith" doctrine that uses the same name.

Gordon C. Olson (http://www.biblical-theology.com/moralgov/hisatone.htm), in his book The Truth Shall Make You Free, © 1980 Bible Research Fellowship, Inc. equates the term "Ethical Example Theory" to the sacrifice of Christ with these words relating to Arians:

[...]ETHICAL EXAMPLE THEORY:- Sinful man has been misguided and needed a noble virtuous example to challenge him to a new way of living.
If man is going to realize his potential and be reconciled to God, he must repent and reform his ways. For this purpose Jesus Christ was miraculously brought into our world and thus was more than a mere man (Socinianism, 1600's), or was natural born and as a religious genius identified himself with God in special devotion to achieve a unique ministry to mankind (Unitarianism, 1700's). His virtuous and loving conduct in life and in death as a noble martyr showed us how we ought to love God and each other, or become converted and reconciled to God: Laelius Socinus (1525-1562) and his nephew Faustus Socinus (1539-1604), in Poland; Unitarians, who trace their views back through Arius (256-336); and others of humanistic opinion (Christ a mere man).[...]

Our Arian family tree can be traced back through these men who dared to oppose the opinions and dogmas of those in authority. It may be useful to do a bit of research about them to get a bigger picture of what they believed and why they believed it.

In short, Arians and semi-Arians subscribe to a Classical Ransom interpretation of the atonement, peppered as it were, with the Ethical Example of Jesus. As such, it doesn't subscribe to the theory that Christ's death made an atonement or payment for sins, per se. Rather, it asserts that Christ's death (and life) provided us an example to follow along our moral path. Jesus could not provide a substitution for sin. Else, those who came after him would not die! Somehow people fail to understand the logic of this, or they make it into a metaphor about eternal life in heaven after death. Both do violence to the underlying message of redemption. Namely, if we want to truly live, we all must learn to die to our selves. We must put the good of others before our own concerns.

Jason, if you are still looking into this topic, please let me suggest these resources:

Theopedia: Atonement of Christ (http://www.theopedia.com/Atonement_of_Christ)
Wiki: Atonement (ransom view) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement_(Ransom_view))

Robert Roberts (Christadelphian) The Blood of Christ (http://www.west.net/~antipas/books/blood_of_christ/blood.html) - this is the best explanation of the classical view that I have ever read.
________________

In blessing, bless
Wayne Matthew Mari

[Matt2817]

Stephen, grace and peace!

Not to pre-empt Postulare42 but ...

The Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html) is the online source for patrology/patristics. Thirty-eight volumes all for your personal picking.

In blessing, bless
Wayne Matthew Mari

[Stephen_Webb]

Ah, I see that the link there is to the Calvin colleges database, I will peruse the information there, but have traditionally stayed away from anything Calvanist in nature because I strongly disagree with their take on Pre-destination [both Infralapsarianism, and supralapsarianism] and pre-elect status doctrine. I find that I am more of a supernatural Libertarianist, but I do not agree with Hard Supernatural Libertarianism either...I have written pieces about The free will of man in a determined cosmos that you may find interesting, but I feel as though that is beyond the scope of this particualr post.

[Matt2817]

Stephen, grace and peace!

Yes, the CCEL is hosted by Calvin Colleges but the information goes back way BEFORE the sixteenth century!

All the same, if you wish to purchase a hardcopy of the same material that you can download for free please click HERE (http://www.amazon.com/Early-Church-Fathers-Alexander-Roberts/dp/1565630815)

I am not an affiliate of amazon, so no portion of a purchase will benefit me or my apostolate. I am only making it available to you as an alternate resource.

In blessing, bless,
Wayne Matthew Mari

[Postulare42]

I'm on a patrology jag at the moment. I like to get to the root of the later, derived doctrines and movements, and strive for an unvarnished take on the context. I have found it very fruitful.

You can always rely on "Matt" for excellent links. :D

[Matt2817]

Grace and peace all!

Many thanks Postulare42 for the kindness. I hope that our new found friend, Stephen, will take advantage of the linkies & thingies offered. You did well in pointing him to studies in Patrology. It is from those resources that we determine the closest allegiances shared with our Ante-Nicene brothers and sisters along with those down through history such as the Polish Unitarians for example. Albeit most often in the negative, these branches of the Arian family tree all have their roots firmly planted in the age of the early Fathers. It is for us to determine their relevence and applications for the times in which we live.

In blessing, bless
Wayne Matthew Mari

[Matt2817]

Ah, I see that the link there is to the Calvin colleges database, I will peruse the information there, but have traditionally stayed away from anything Calvanist in nature because I strongly disagree with their take on Pre-destination [both Infralapsarianism, and supralapsarianism] and pre-elect status doctrine. I find that I am more of a supernatural Libertarianist, but I do not agree with Hard Supernatural Libertarianism either...I have written pieces about The free will of man in a determined cosmos that you may find interesting, but I feel as though that is beyond the scope of this particualr post.

Stephen, grace and peace!

I would be most interested in reading your articles. You may wish to post them here (http://forum.arian-catholic.org/forumdisplay.php?f=12)in the off-topic discussions list of the forum.

I concur with you. Calvin was a tricky nut to crack. As were many of the Reformers. They were bold enough to go just "so-far" in their opposition to Rome but fell short in a multitude of areas.

My most beloved cousin is a staunch 5 point Calvinist. When I dared offer her my other opposing view, she was silent for a moment, and then proceeded to regail me with "no way" "that cannot be true" etc.

The whole idea of pre-destination and double pre-destination along with John Calvin's own participation in the burning at the stake of those who disagreed with him was enough to put me off Reformed Theology. All your fancy terms not withstanding o:)

Just the same, I hope that you will take a look at the CCEL link. It is far and away the best resource for Patristics on the net. And please do submit your articles to the off-topic section of the forum. I am sure they will be well received.

In blessing, bless
Wayne Matthew Mari

[Postulare42]

I was thinking much the same, "Matt", about Stephen's writing. With a bit more familiarity with our particular skid to things, such might help to get the "E-Zine" up and running.

Whaddya think, Stephen? Wanna try submitting some of your stuff to "Archbishop"'s editorial knives? ;)

[Matt2817]

Grace and peace all!

Postulare42 you crack me up with this:


"Archbishop"'s editorial knives?


The last time Archbishop posted it was not to any thread. He created his own "95 theses" so to speak.

I like his "hands off approach" but do wish that more input would be forthcoming from the powers that be.

That stated, Stephen, please do throw your hat into the ring! Or at least post an article or two. I promise to be less critical of your posts than I am of my own.

In blessing, bless
Wayne Matthew Mari

[Stephen_Webb]

I would absolutely love to submit my personal writings - This is a bit of a rush, as I have not yet met anyone who is honestly interested in what I have to say on the matter - I am often times under attack by my fathers "northeastern fundamental baptist" brethren so I have learned to defend myself from these spiritual invaders, and the things that I present to them when they come around trying to convert me over; even their more learned members can not answer...