A question for Christians about the "crucifixion"?

Question

For full disclosure, I am a recovered christian who walked into the light of atheism several years ago...

One question that always bugged me when I was a christian was the concept of jesus' "suffering" for sins on the cross first developed by Paul.

There are other forms of crucifixion that are much worse including breaking the legs of the victim so they suffocated sooner; being crucified upside down, etc.

There were also much worse ways to be executed in the ancient world (Stoning for one)

Why do you think his crucifixion was so bad that he "took on all the sins of the world"?

I will admit to being impressed. Some of the responses here have been well thought out. In the past, a lot of posters just dismiss questions like this by condemning me to hell

Earlier in life I was quite the fundamentalist... until I actually began to read the text of the New Testament.

My atheism is based on several years of study in history, philosophy, theology, and psychology.

I do have some comments for some posters:

A.C. – Up until the NT era, the jewish messiah was never depicted as suffering. He was depicted as a great warrior king similar to David. There are references to a “suffering” man of righteousness but this man was never referred to as the messiah

Sirius – The concept of the sacrificial lamb is attributed to John. He changed the date of the crucifixion from the day of Passover to the day of preparation of Passover when the temple preist would be slaughtering the lambs for Passover. This is an example of making the story fit your theory.

Morning Gloria – The Pauline letters were written BEFORE the gospels. Most biblical scholars believe the first book of the NT written was 1 Thessalonians

Godlyteengirl – So far you are the one of the few to “judge”. Since you didn’t know how serious I was about it, I’ll completely ignore your answer.

Cloud FF7 #1 – No that is not the only reason for being an atheist, see my comments above.

Answer 1

Jersey, sounds like a load of denial to me. We do not know this was "developed" by Paul, who never even met Jesus. The passion takes place in the Gospels, not down the road. The ascension takes place in Acts.

Jesus was whipped, scrounged, had a thorn crown bushed down into his head. His legs WERE broken on the cross. Given the choice, I would take stoning over having my hands and feet nailed to a cross. But maybe that is just me.

I am glad you found the light. MG

Answer 2

Actually crucifixion where the legs are broken is KINDER than crucifxion where they legs remain unbroken. Death is faster. Remaining alive while crucified was sheer torment, so the faster death came, the more humane. Romans used to break the legs of crucifixion victims to make the sentence not as heinous. Also, stoning was largely a Jewish punishment, reserved mostly for adulterers, etc. The Romans usual method of execution for non-Romans, if not the sword, was crucifixion. If you were Roman, like Paul, you were beheaded. All foreigners got crucifixion if sentenced to death and not killed on the spot by a soldier.

I don't think stoning was a worse death. It certainly was faster, particularly if you were hit in the head.

No one death, in my opinion, could erase the bad deeds of the entire human race. And why could death do it anyway? To whom is it a payment? Even a very painful death of a deity. It just doesn't make sense. Wouldn't attempting to right the bad deeds be more important?

I too was once Christian, but I'm not anymore. Nor am I atheist. I just try to live and let live and enjoy the real spirituality of the world where I can find it.

Plus, anything developed by Paul--DON'T trust it. Man, did he have an agenda. And man, did it work. Remember, Paul never even met Jesus. He just capitalized on him. He changed entire meanings of scripture. Added his own 2 cents everywhere. Whereas Jesus said nothing to berate women, Paul said something misogynist every time he took up a pen.

Answer 3

The suffering was just a necessary component of the work of salvation.

It wasn't the quantity or even the quality.

It was WHO did the suffering and WHY he did it.

Jesus came to destroy Satan's evil dominion over mankind, which effectively served to separate man from God's goodness and grace.

No naturally born man was sinless or perfect enough to accomplish the atonement necessary due to Adam's sin.

Jesus became man, and in the fullness of time, he permitted Satan and his minions to unjustly take his life.

As no one (not even the devil) had the right to take the life of a sinless man, let alone the only begotten son of the living God, the crucifixion became Satan's Waterloo.

The corrupt Jews wouldn't last much longer either (70 AD).

The Romans would eventually be destroyed, too, but only after God arranged for their emperor (Constantine) and then, the entire empire to first be converted to Christianity.

The Roman empire is no more, yet the original Christian Church ... the Roman Catholic Church ... remains ... the pillar and ground of the truth.

And don't trust all you read today when it comes to revisionist church history and bible scholarship.

Most of what today's finest "scholars" promote today would have been easily identified as heresy and nonsense just 50 short years ago.

There's no new revelation, just the new and ill advised opinions of the blind leading the blind.

You know ... people who think just like you do.

Answer 4

Jesus did not commit any sins at all. He took on sin, you know the part when darkness came over, the sins of you and me and those of the past. In Isaiah, It was prophesied that He would not have a broken bone, so Jesus came to fulfill that which was spoken, every Word. Jesus suffered because He was beaten with ropes that had knives on the tips, He was wounded for our sins, bruised for our sin. Do you get the point that He did it for us and not because of what He did. God wanted to show how much He loved us and there was no one else that was perfect nor would go through it. What if you had a son that was perfect but accused of killing and he was about to get beat down, whipped, stabbed and hung. Would that be a good enough punishment or should we also break his legs to let you know we mean business.

Answer 5

First of all, you were never a true christian to begin with if you walked into the "light" of athiesm, but at any rate, Jesus suffered a MUCH worse crucifixion then the types you described! He was whipped to the point of death in the back, arms, legs, and chest by whips that had fish hooks, needles, spikes, broken glass, and anything else that is sharp!! Can you imagines needles and fish hooks slicing and cutting through your bear flesh and skin...and at a rapid pace?! How about in the SAME spots? Then can you imagine having to carry your heavy cross a full mile after you're practically bloodied to death by those vicious whips? How about getting punched, kicked, and scrathed if you don't move FAST ENOUGH? This is what Jesus had to suffer in addition to the crucifixion! Isaiah 53 describes him as being "unrecognizable"! He was so thoroughly beaten and smitten that he didn't even look like a human being! NOTHING gets crueler then when you are mutilated to the point of not looking like a human, and thats what Jesus had to go through!

Answer 6

Really cool question and good thoughts. Just to play "devils advocate," so to speak...

I think you may be missing the point of the crucifixion. The amount of pain didn't determine whether Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. Rather, Christians maintain that there was both a spiritual and physical burden placed on Christ. Because Jesus was without sin, he was able to become the blameless sacrifice for sin, mirroring back to the Israeli tradition of offering unblemished lambs for sacrifice. The amount of physical pain was not the determining factor of the spiritual impact of the crucifixion.

You may also be overstating your claim that there are "much worse ways" to die. It would not take long for a person being stoned to be rendered unconscious. And even if being crucified upside down was more painful, it couldn't be "much" worse than being crucified. I think it's pretty nit picky.

Answer 7

The idea that Jesus took on the sins of all humanity doesn't mean that he suffered the absolutely worst human suffering ever. That's not what the doctrine's about.

The point is: in Jesus, God became a human being voluntarily. When he became man, he created a new relationship between man (the creature) and God (the creator). He willingly made himself finite and vulnerable to suffering and death as an act of solidarity with us. Now that Jesus has connected himself with us by becoming man, he makes it possible for us to also share in His resurrection, his victory over death.

Hope this helps clarify things.

Answer 8

I am suprised you miss out entirely on his suffering the night before his crucifixion in the Garden of Gethsemane...
"as Jesus was in agony, he prayed even more earnestly and great drops of blood formed like sweat and fell to the ground" (Lk.22:44). Have you ever asked yourself how much pain and agony it takes to sweat great drops of blood?

He prayed three times before this that he would not have to go through this, pay for our sins, but he submitted himself to the will of the Father. Christ only had the right to pay for sins because he lived a sinless life and only he had the power to overcome death (no man takes his life from him but he lays it down so he can take it up again). Being the Son of God he inherited the power to take up his life and being the son of a mortal he could lay it down.

The next day on the cross, all the agony of the previous night returned and even at one point he exclaimed why God had forsaken him. It was so he could completely understand what it means for someone such as a sinner to be separated from God and his spirit, something he had probably never experienced before. He descended below all things and rises above all things.

Answer 9

You need to walk back into the light son, the Crucifixion was not and was never meant to be the end of the story. The point is not that Christ Died but that He ROSE. Jesus could have taken on the sins of the world in any manner of suffering from Crucifixion to cancer to hanging to heart failure, to old age. The fact that He was crucified is a testament against the foolish people of that age (and sadly we would be no wiser) who killed Him.

In whatever manner of death He would have died He would have taken our sins upon Himself and in His Resurrection He would and did redeem us.

Answer 10

There is no doubt that the Crucifixion of Jesus was painful. He was humiliated, whipped, spat on, forced to carry the cross, crown of thorns, nails through his hands and feet. That was nothing though compared to having endure the sins of the world when He was sinless. He suffered for us all. Do not let it be in vain.

May God Bless you.