Did Jesus ever claim he had to die for our sins?

Cagefighter

So for those that have been keeping up: I have recently become fascinated with the lost gospels as well as the history of the four cannon gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and as some may say the "historical Jesus".

I am fascinated by the variations in who Jesus was and what he did according to different traditions and texts. One thing that provoked me the other day is that the Coptics/Gnostics do not believe Jesus "died for our sins". Which explains why an I have never been accosted infront of my favorite drinking hole my a glassy eyed 20 year old with a pamphlet in their hand asking if I am "saved".

So this got me thinking..... I don't recall Jesus ever claiming to have to die for our sins in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John either? I know he claimed to be "the way" and so on and so on... But can anyone point to his words in the four gospels claiming that he actually had to die for our sins?

NeonMadman

Mat 26:27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you,

Mat 26:28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

designs

So weird isn't it- Jesus a supposed Jew telling Jews who already had a pretty complete belief system on repetence, restitution, and paradise in place they had to believe in Him.

Satanus

A search turned up these. Some are somebody elses words.

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son” (Jn. 3:16).

“And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again” (Mk. 8:31; cf. Lk. 9:22; 24:7).

“But first, He must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation” (Lk. 17:25).

“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up” (Jn. 3:14; cf. Jn. 12:34; 20:9).

“Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn. 1:29)

“the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and give His life a ransom for many” (Mt. 20:28; cf. Mk. 10:45).

“This cup is the new covenant in My blood which is shed for you” (Lk. 22:19,20).

“What shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Mt. 17:26)

“You shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins” (Mt. 1:21).

S

Bobcat

Here is a section from Isaiah 53 referencing Jesus:

(Isaiah 53:10-12) . . .But Jehovah himself took delight in crushing him; he made him sick. If you will set his soul as a guilt offering, he will see his offspring, he will prolong [his] days, and in his hand what is the delight of Jehovah will succeed. 11 Because of the trouble of his soul he will see, he will be satisfied. By means of his knowledge the righteous one, my servant, will bring a righteous standing to many people; and their errors he himself will bear. 12 For that reason I shall deal him a portion among the many, and it will be with the mighty ones that he will apportion the spoil, due to the fact that he poured out his soul to the very death, and it was with the transgressors that he was counted in; and he himself carried the very sin of many people, and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.

And here is words from Jesus himself concerning his then future death:

(Matthew 20:28) . . .Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many."

I'm not sure if this is what you had in mind. If Jesus understood that he was the suffering servant from Isaiah 53, then this would have been one of numerous verses that would have let him know that he had to die. The verse from Matthew shows Jesus knew he was going to die and what purpose it was to serve. Some others could have been cited, and were above.

Take Care

designs

BC- You need to ask a Rabbi if Jews interpret Isaiah to mean the Jesus of the 4 Gospels (Not). Also the moral and ethical issue of human sacrifice was dealt with centuries before in Jewish philosophy (against).

Chariklo

The thing was, Jesus was consciously breaking the mould. Even though the issue of human sacrifice had been dealt with, as you say, designs, he was making it clear that he knew the path that lay before him.

Even though ingesting blood was taboo for the Jews, he very deliberately referred to the cup of the new covenant as his blood. So what had gone before was explicitly superseded by Jesus. He established a new way that things were to be, just as he showed the truth of God's nature to be other than the punitive vengeful God featured so frequently in the Old Testament.

designs

Chariklo- Superceded is something charlatans do all the time with bravdo. Here you have a Jewish system of belief in place ostensibly by God which includes the saving of the human race and Jesus comes along claiming to be God and says 'no I was wrong before and now I've got it right, new plan!'., that doesn't seem a little weird to you. Don't kill yourself it has no meritorious effect, don't drink blood and then here drink my literal blood and believe my human sacrifice has the only benefit to the human race. You see this is why Jews over the past 2000 years have pointed out the huge problems in christian theology and their complete waste of time and effort.

The Jewish Age of Enlightenment happened 400 years before Jesus, the Christian Age of Enlightenment is still waiting to happen in so many circles.

mind blown

question? What is the actual story? I think I may have forgotten.....

Wasn't the seed already spoken about in Gen (plan aleardy layed out), then god gave the Abraham the gift of having the seed appear through his bloodline (being faithful)? Didn't they need to do all that mumbo jumbo (scrafices) until the seed arrived.......?

If this is the case.....they didn't have a perfect set up until the historical Christ came?

designs

mind- Visit your local Synagogue and ask the Rabbi, you are filtering Judaism through a Christian prism.

Did Jesus ever claim he had to die for our sins?

Share this