The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Why did Jesus have to die

You can never enter a conversation like that with just an argument. You need to ‘know’ what you believe. That it is written on the fleshy tables of your heart. Universal salvation is not a theoretical exercise. It is the plan and purpose of God. It isn’t something to be unsure about.

Thankyou Watchman, wise words indeed.

On reflection, the simple answer to why she asked was probably: 1.) she thought you were saying there was no such thing as sin (therefore no reason for Jesus to die to save sinners); or 2.) she thought you were saying God would simply pardon even unrepentant sinners (therefore no reason for Jesus to die to save sinners).

Yes Jason I think it’s easy for us all to jump to conclusions, and it’s easy to misunderstand. It’s quite possible i wasn’t clear enough, and I think I should be careful with where I share, what I share, and how etc. Inwardly I’m jumping out of my skin to share what I am discovering, but I have to check what may be motivating me.

Thanks for your thoughts :slight_smile:

I’m kind of at a weak point because of this concept.

What would Jesus have saved us from, if it is not eternal hell?

I am NOT advocating eternal hell, NO way. LOL.

Some may say from death. But we all die anyway. So then what?

Hi Lady,

If Jesus did not save us, then Hell would be eternal.

Sonia

We are all going to be saved because Jesus died. That’s the point.

This is why I consider the “Harrowing of Hell” in 1 Peter 3 to be significant. PSA to my mind is a completely blind alley, it explains nothing. However if the death of Jesus means that he broke hell open from the inside, and as a result it can no longer hold anyone, that would imply universal salvation.

Jesus had to die because he was a man.

The real question is, “Why did God have to become a man?”

I suspect that once Western Christians, particularly those who have been formed by a version of penal substitution, embrace an understanding of universal salvation, they find themselves at a loss to explain the atoning work of Christ. If God is perfect love and his justice is restorative, why did Jesus have to die? The problem, I think, is that the theory of penal substitution developed out of a theological framework that needed to explain why some were saved and some were not. Once one embraces the universalist position, with its rejection of the wrathful God who needs to be propitiated, the cross cries out for a new interpretation. Of course, one can still hold onto the old substitutionary view and be a universalist, yet I suspect that we intuitively understand that it just doesn’t make sense.

At this point what is needed is to return to the Eastern Fathers. A good place to begin is On the Incarnation by St Athanasius. What is needed is the regeneration and transformation of human nature. What is needed is the defeat of death and deliverance from the powers of sin and death. And it is precisely this that is accomplished in the Incarnation and the outpouring of the Spirit.

In a sense, Jesus does say us from “Hell”; Paul says that Jesus saves us from “this present evil age” (Gal. 1:4) “IF” a person was not ultimately saved from “this present evil age” and God sustained them so that they continued to exist in “this present evil age” forever, then that would be “Hell”.

I don’t like using the word “Hell” though, because it is not “Biblical”. None of the words that reference human penalty for sin mean “Hell”, not Sheol (grave, realm of the dead), not Hades (grave, realm of the dead), and especially not Gehenna (Hinnom Valley, a literal valley/ravine SSW of Mt. Zion, Jerusalem).

According to scripture this “present evil age” ultimately comes to an end. Jesus ultimately reconciles all of creation to Himself, to God. And all of creation, every tongue worships Jesus. And concerning death, Jesus overcomes death and hades, raising us all to life from death. He takes our calcified hearts and gives us new ones after His own heart, new hearts.

The purpose of the traditional doctrine of hell is to instill fear in people and control the masses. But God does not give us a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and “SELF-control”, not being controled by others. Frankly, infernalism is a doctrine of demons.

Since we are called to share the death of Jesus in some real way (being baptized into His death so we can rise again with Him, and a few other things along this line from the epistles), the real question shouldn’t be “Why did Jesus have to die to save us from X” (which ought to be primarily “…save us from our sins”, not “…save us from hell” or punishment or whatever, although that happens, too, as a consequence), but rather “Why do we have to die to be saved from our sins?”

The scope wouldn’t matter in principle either way: “Why did Jesus have to die to save all?” is no more a challenge in principle than “Why did Jesus have to die to save some?” But everyone who is saved from sin (however many that is) must share in the death of Christ eventually. And one way or another everyone does die: mortality is 100% total, even if there’s an instantaneous rapture coming for some people. Those people still wouldn’t escape dying (only the more annoying aspects of it), because they still must die to and in and with Christ.

That’s another main reason why I don’t accept the popular penal substitutionary theory, by the way: if Jesus merely substitutes Himself for our punishment of death, then there is less than no reason why we’re supposed to share Christ’s death with Him! It also breaks on the undisputed fact that those with whom Christ has already shared eonian life still end up dying, often very painfully and messily, after all.

I’ve written at length elsewhere why I accept a special variety of PSA (though not exclusive to some other atonement notions): Christ as the seed of Abraham acts in commitment to the covenant made by God with Abraham (which Paul regards as being actually a covenant between the Father and the Son since only God actually participated in the covenant, the Son on behalf of Abraham as Abraham’s seed) on behalf of all the children of Abraham who have failed to keep the covenant (which because Christ creates all creatures and incarnates as a descendant of Abraham means all rational creatures are through Christ reckoned as also being descendants of Abraham!) That covenant was to bring all the children of Abraham into the inheritance blessing, which Paul regards (rightly) as salvation from sin where through sin we have forfeited our rights as heirs. (This utterly destroys the whole notion of a Calvinistic elect, by the way, although Calvs are just as likely to try appealing to those scriptures for their position without realizing the implications of it. :wink: )

That in itself would be sufficient for why Jesus has to die, although innocent of sin Himself: He’s keeping His word to uphold the covenant to bring all rational creatures to salvation. But rebels against God must willingly join with Christ (sooner or later) in dying for the sake of the covenant: we cannot die on our own to keep the covenant because it is only by Christ that we would live at all afterward, so doing so would never be of benefit to us on our own. But more to the point, we cannot escape from rebellion by refusing to cooperate with God, which can only be more rebellion! – so if the Son dies we can either die in cooperation with Him, or refuse to do so (one way or another).

So what does it mean to die with Christ? :slight_smile: That ought to be easier to work out.

(I talk about death from the perspective of the 2nd Person of God, in relation to God’s self-existence, the creation of not-God reality, sin, repentance, reconciliation, and the Incarnation and Passion, several times in SttH from Section Three onward. I don’t start in chapter 41, but I start pulling it all together there through the following chapters. I don’t talk about the Abrahamic covenant, partly because I didn’t know about it back in 2000 when I originally wrote it, or even a few years ago when I edited the 3rd Draft, but also I wouldn’t add it now because it requires a lot of scriptural discussion which that book isn’t really about. Even without the Abrahamic covenant aspect I still would expect the Son to voluntarily die at the hands of sinners in order to show us several things including how we ought to be cooperating with the Son.)

The angel who announced Jesus birth had the answer, “He will save His people from their sins.”(Matthew 1:21)

Jesus died to deliver us from wrongdoing right here on earth. Sin is our problem. Unfortunately many people fear hell more than they fear sin. If hell is the only means to deliver us from sin, then let the fires of hell rage until we are purified. Salvation from sin here on earth is a process. When that process is complete, we will be ready to be eternally with God.

I repeat these scriptures which tell us why Jesus died:

Can we accept these reasons given by Paul and Peter and the writer to the Hebrews? Or do we want to cling to the fundamentalist notion that the purpose of Jesus’ death was to provide a fire-escape from Hell?

^^ To which could be added Colossians 1:19-20, too: in Christ the entire fullness delights to dwell, and through Him to reconcile the all into Him, making peace through the blood of His cross, whether the things on the earth or the things in the heavens.

(Not to reconcile the Father and/or the Son to sinners!)

When Mary conceives, all humanity becomes God’s kin. God accepts the responsibility of human kinship. He becomes our Champion. Like David of old, He will fight the Giant on our behalf.

To save his family from a great enemy (sin), Christ invades his enemy’s house (death), overcomes him, and plunders all his treasure (universal salvation.)

I used to be Atheist before. But recently something happened and has changed my whole perspective about life. Now I believe in God. This forum is very good as it is dedicated to conversation about God. I get to learn so much from here. Sorry that I have to post my thread in the introductory category but I posted it here. :neutral_face:

Concerning “Why did Jesus have to die?” The first thought I had today when I saw this question again was what Ben Hur said after he encountered Jesus hanging on the tree. He said, “I felt Him take the sword out of my hand.” I find that to be so profound and so true. Why did He die? To reveal the forgiveness, love, grace, and mercy of God, and to take the sword out of my hand.

Jesus was born to restore the relationship between man and God.
Jesus lived to show us how to live as children of God.
Jesus died to embrace humanity fully in the love of God.
Jesus rose from the dead to conquer death in and for us.

Excellent, Sherman

So much good stuff in here. Had to post to bookmark it.

I really liked your signature. What if whatever we are taught about God is wrong? I think we should not rely on bookish knowledge or things that our elders tell us about God. We can experience God by ourselves. By meditation!

Jesus died in order to destroy sin, death and hell, for the sake of rescuing/delivering/salvaging humanity from (not condemning most [or even some] of humanity to) these three things, which in effect are actually one and the same thing, which all humans experience.

Disclaimer:
I’d be going off on a bit of a tangent if I elaborated into fine points what I mean by the above but I hope to acquire the opportunity to perform such elaboration maybe elsewhere on the forum some other time. It might, however, be important to note that my use of the word hell is more of an [Old] English translation of the Hebrew sheol, the Greek hades and the Latin inferus/infernum, none of which originally meant the cosmic fiery torture chamber that most English speakers have been taught to envision when they hear the syllable “Hell.”

Summary of the Following:
Jesus died as part [the most important part, I would say] of the process of the completion of creation, which culminates in the resurrection/renewal of heaven, earth and, indeed, all things (to which watchman1706 alluded), as promised by the oracle of the prophet Isaiah and reemphasised in Revelation (see also 2 Peter 3:13). By way of simple analogy, the Potter is creating the universe like a clay pot which He shall demolish and put back together after immersing it in fire, as with the house of Israel in Jeremiah 18-19. (Everything will be salted with fire [Mark 9:49] by the One Who comes to plunge us into Holy Wind and Fire [Luke 3:16].) The Potter Himself is actively involved in this process, inadvertently (because the universe is contained within God) dragging the cosmos with Him into [His own] death and bringing it back up again in His return therefrom. The question essentially overlooks the significance and the magnitude of what Jesus does after He dies, even though it is through the death that He becomes the victor.

Longer Version of Response>>
As a matter of fact Jesus did not have to die, just as much as He-Who-Exists [YHWH] did not have to create the universe or to make the sky the colour that it is. But He-Who-Exists did create the universe and did make the sky blue (rather than some other colour, or at least by typical human vision the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum displayed by it has been made to appear the way that it does to human eyes). And Jesus did die, in His own choice and not by some compulsion, according to His own words in John 10:18.

As to what the point of Jesus’ death is, whether for a handful of people or for all of humankind, there are many ways in which to answer this question, but for me the most compelling perspective is that which takes into account that it actually goes beyond mere humanity or it being a band-aid on a project which the Creator completed a long, long time ago only to witness the entire thing botched shortly afterwards by a couple of his tiny, recently finished-off and apparently perfect creatures. The majority of individuals who would subscribe to the idea of “believing in Jesus” have been taught that this is how it happened “in the beginning.” The Maker made us (perfect, some might say) and we, weak (in comparison to him) and finite as we are, messed it up and somehow managed to become less than perfect. Jesus is thus his Plan “B” to perform a patch job on the mess we’re [still] making of things.

According to the witness of the writings which we call the New Testament, however, especially the letters of Paul, Jesus’ death is an act of creation: The Creation of the Cosmos, and, according to Revelation 13:8, it even happens outside of time so that the sacrifice made by the Creator has been, and is, and is yet to be. It is my understanding that without the slaying of the Lamb, the universe does not exist; at least, not this universe, and not because there could’ve been no other way for it to exist but because this is how the Creator chose to bring it into being. It was always His Plan “A,” which He has neither doubled back on nor reconsidered.

Christ’s death is the beginning and the completion of Creation, and the means by which He acquired the Keys of Death and the Underworld [Hell/ Hades] (Revelation 1:17-18).

It is the means by which Adam [Humanity] truly becomes the Son of God, made in His image and similitude, now true, complete and perfect (cf. Luke 3:38 & James 3:9).

Jesus destroyed, defeated and abolished death by Himself dying, not for the sins only of those of us who presently have taken on this paradigm but for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2). This abolition is something that Paul promises the Corinthians will happen at some point in future (1 Cor. 15:26) but at the same time which he tells Timothy (in 2 Timothy 1:9-10) has already occurred before the aeons of time (often rendered as “before time began”) so that through the Good News of His appearance He has brought to light the Life and Deathlessness [Immortality] which were already in existence.

And He did this not just for humankind but for the sake of reconciling the entire created order to its Maker, and making peace among and between all things, through His cross’s blood, including even the things in the depths of the Abyss beneath the Earth, whether they creep and crawl or if they can soar in the heavens (Colossians 1:20, Romans 10:7, cf. Genesis 1:20-28; Exodus 20:4, 11; Deuteronomy 4:15-18, 5:8; & Rev. 5:13). According to 2 Cor. 5:19 the Word of this peace treaty, which has been entrusted to us, is that God is not keeping an inventory of the world’s offences.

Jesus died so that Adam could finally rest from his labours and toil, from turning over the dirt and the dust in search of his Bread (Genesis 3:15, 17-19 & John 6:35, 48); so that when he awoke again, he would be not only immortal death-less] but also the Source of Life Itself (1 Cor. 15:22, 45; cf. Gen. 3:20); the old him would be gone, the new would be all that was left, and that new Adam would fill everything, and everything would be contained within him: Christ [complete] in Adam, and Adam [complete] in Christ.

Under the feet of this new Humanity, in an even deeper and wider sense than in Genesis 1:28, Adam’s Father the Creator would place all things; and His new Body, composed of the Out-Called *, which is also His Bride, with whom He becomes (in the past, present and future) one Flesh (Genesis 2:24 & Ephesians 5:29-32) and one Spirit (1 Cor. 6:17, Eph. 2:18, 4:4), would be (in the past, present and future) the completed rendition of Him Who makes whole all in all (Ephesians 1:22-23). It is by this authority which the Eskhatos [Final] Adam has acquired over the entire universe, via His subjugation unto death, that we have been given the mandate to announce this Good Message euangelion, gospel] to every created thing (Philippians 2:8-11 & Matthew 28:18-19).

by St Athanasius.
Agreed. From my perspective, the two questions or reasons are connected in purpose in what I call human divinisation by divine humanisation, or (to get a bit Greeker about it :wink: ) man’s theosis via God’s enanthropism. Those ancient Alexandrian dudes Athanasius (“[He Who] Belongs to the Immortal/Deathless” :slight_smile: ) and Clement had some kool things to say about this. In Against the Arians Athanasius says of Jesus that

In Peri Enanthropiseos “On the Incarnation” {literally, “On Becoming Human/ On Humanisation”] he says that

In his Exhortation to the Greeks, Clement says that “The Word of God became man so that you may learn from man how man may become God.”*

I’ll run with Gustaf Aulen’s Christus Victor.