What if Jesus hadn't died?

[Sultan_Of_Swing]

I’ve always been a fan of penal substitution and so my answer for this question would have been that we would be doomed to hell. Recently, however, after considering Catholicism I have also discovered that the Church’s view on the matter is Aquinas or Anselm’s satisfaction doctrine.

So, what if Jesus hadn’t died, according to the Church’s view? St Thomas Aquinas tells us that the issue is not personal sin, which can be atoned for, but the stain of our sinful nature from original sin that was needed to be taken away by the atonement of Christ. So if one lived like one of the many great prophets of old, and lived a good life and atoned for their sin, we can say that the personal sin is pretty much accounted for. Now, what remains and is not atoned for is the original sin, which separates us from the perfect union with God.

So then, after we died, would we be in a similar state to how Abraham and the other righteous were before Christ came to earth? Would we be in a sort of ‘Abraham’s bosom’, and we would be happy but we would ultimately still be in Sheol and not able to have that perfect union with God?

And secondly; why can we satisfy God and atone for our personal sin all on our own but we cannot atone for the stain of original sin? What’s the difference? Why was Christ necessary to remove original sin?

 

[meltzerboy]

I’ve always been a fan of penal substitution and so my answer for this question would have been that we would be doomed to hell. Recently, however, after considering Catholicism I have also discovered that the Church’s view on the matter is Aquinas or Anselm’s satisfaction doctrine.

So, what if Jesus hadn’t died, according to the Church’s view? St Thomas Aquinas tells us that the issue is not personal sin, which can be atoned for, but the stain of our sinful nature from original sin that was needed to be taken away by the atonement of Christ. So if one lived like one of the many great prophets of old, and lived a good life and atoned for their sin, we can say that the personal sin is pretty much accounted for. Now, what remains and is not atoned for is the original sin, which separates us from the perfect union with God.

So then, after we died, would we be in a similar state to how Abraham and the other righteous were before Christ came to earth? Would we be in a sort of ‘Abraham’s bosom’, and we would be happy but we would ultimately still be in Sheol and not able to have that perfect union with God?

And secondly; why can we satisfy God and atone for our personal sin all on our own but we cannot atone for the stain of original sin? What’s the difference? Why was Christ necessary to remove original sin?

I’m in no position to answer this question from a Catholic or Christian perspective. However, from the Jewish viewpoint, we don’t even have original sin to begin with; that is, we are born innocent. Therefore, there is no need for atonement except with regard to personal sin.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You need to start from the beginning. I think people focus too much on the Crucifixion and Death of Christ as the point of our salvation and completely disregard the Incarnation. Salvation came to us in these three acts of God, the Incarnation, the Crucifixion (death) and the Resurrection. Each one is as important as the other. Salvation is not complete without one of them.

Read St. Athanasius’ the Great, “On the Incarnation” to have an understanding of why Christ had to become man in the first place. Then after that, the Crucifixion will make more sense. In fact, St. Athanasius touches on that issue a bit as well.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’m in no position to answer this question from a Catholic or Christian perspective. However, from the Jewish viewpoint, we don’t even have original sin to begin with; that is, we are born innocent. Therefore, there is no need for atonement except with regard to personal sin.

From the Orthodox as well. Original Sin is a Western concept, not all Christians subscribe to it.

 

[ActingCatholic]

I’m in no position to answer this question from a Catholic or Christian perspective. However, from the Jewish viewpoint, we don’t even have original sin to begin with; that is, we are born innocent. Therefore, there is no need for atonement except with regard to personal sin.

From the Orthodox as well. Original Sin is a Western concept, not all Christians subscribe to it.

mind. blown.

 

[ConstantineTG]

mind. blown.

The Augustinian teaching on Original Sin never took root in the East as it did in the West.

 

[JerryZ]

From the Orthodox as well. Original Sin is a Western concept, not all Christians subscribe to it.

So are you saying that the Orthodox Church rejects “original sin” ?

I hear or actually “read” the Orthodox Church calls it “Ancestral Sin”.

However it is based on the same theology stemming from:
Romans 5:12-21 and
1 Corinthians 15:22

Your assertion however seems to be that the whole concept is rejected.

Maybe you want to clarify that for us?

 

[Sultan_Of_Swing]

Could anyone actually answer my question? Lol

 

[ConstantineTG]

So are you saying that the Orthodox Church rejects “original sin” ?

I hear or actually “read” the Orthodox Church calls it “Ancestral Sin”.

However it is based on the same theology stemming from:
Romans 5:12-21 and
1 Corinthians 15:22

Your assertion however seems to be that the whole concept is rejected.

Maybe you want to clarify that for us?

We can’t reject something we never accepted. Ancestral sin is not the same thing. Read here: preachersinstitute.com/2010/04/27/ancestral-sin-versus-original-sin-by-fr-anthony-hughes/

 

[ConstantineTG]

Could anyone actually answer my question? Lol

The answer lies in my first post here. Read “On the Incarnation”. A lot of people get caught up with the crucifixion as the moment of salvation, but that is just 1/3 of the answer. As I said, we are saved by the Incarnation, Crucifixion, and Resurrection. If you understand the necessity of Christ’s incarnation, you will understand why the death and resurrection are absolutely necessary.

On the Incarnation is free on CCEL.

Or are you asking what is the afterlife state before Jesus died on the cross? As in, Old Testament times.

 

[Sultan_Of_Swing]

The answer lies in my first post here. Read “On the Incarnation”. A lot of people get caught up with the crucifixion as the moment of salvation, but that is just 1/3 of the answer. As I said, we are saved by the Incarnation, Crucifixion, and Resurrection. If you understand the necessity of Christ’s incarnation, you will understand why the death and resurrection are absolutely necessary.

On the Incarnation is free on CCEL.

Or are you asking what is the afterlife state before Jesus died on the cross? As in, Old Testament times.

I’m asking that according to the satisfaction theory, if Jesus hadn’t died on the cross, would the righteous go to a place in Sheol like Abraham’s bosom and experience happiness but not be able to experience the fullness of union of God, or perhaps would we all be consigned to eternal torment?

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’m asking that according to the satisfaction theory, if Jesus hadn’t died on the cross, would the righteous go to a place in Sheol like Abraham’s bosom and experience happiness but not be able to experience the fullness of union of God, or perhaps would we all be consigned to eternal torment?

As Orthodox I do not subscribe to the satisfaction theory. But if Jesus did not become incarnate, died, and was resurrected, then those who died simple would be dead. They will be in the abode of the dead or Hades, or as Jesus called it (from a Jewish perspective, Hades was a Greek concept), Abraham’s Bossom. I don’t think there is joy or sadness there, Christ brought life to all and thus before Christ people would simply be dead.

 

[Sultan_Of_Swing]

As Orthodox I do not subscribe to the satisfaction theory. But if Jesus did not become incarnate, died, and was resurrected, then those who died simple would be dead. They will be in the abode of the dead or Hades, or as Jesus called it (from a Jewish perspective, Hades was a Greek concept), Abraham’s Bossom. I don’t think there is joy or sadness there, Christ brought life to all and thus before Christ people would simply be dead.

Simply dead? So not conscious? Isn’t the soul immortal?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Simply dead? So not conscious? Isn’t the soul immortal?

We are not sure if the dead are unconscious or not. Remember the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is a parable, not a theological discourse.

No, in Orthodoxy we do not believe that the soul is immortal by nature. Only God is eternal and thus immortality is dependent by God’s grace. We can’t find any Church Father teaching that says the soul is immortal. In fact St. Athanasius the Great said in this writing that corruption is consuming man into nothingness. He said that man was disappearing. Although that could simply mean that man is “devolving” into something that is less than man because of sin and corruption. But even so, that means, if we apply evolution to this, that man goes back to just being an animal. And animals do not have the same rational soul that man has.

 

[meltzerboy]

We are not sure if the dead are unconscious or not. Remember the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is a parable, not a theological discourse.

No, in Orthodoxy we do not believe that the soul is immortal by nature. Only God is eternal and thus immortality is dependent by God’s grace. We can’t find any Church Father teaching that says the soul is immortal. In fact St. Athanasius the Great said in this writing that corruption is consuming man into nothingness. He said that man was disappearing. Although that could simply mean that man is “devolving” into something that is less than man because of sin and corruption. But even so, that means, if we apply evolution to this, that man goes back to just being an animal. And animals do not have the same rational soul that man has.

Frankly, I had no idea Orthodox Christians differed so greatly from Catholics regarding the nature of the soul. This is, in a sense, more in line with Jewish teaching.

 

[fhansen]

**

I’ve always been a fan of penal substitution and so my answer for this question would have been that we would be doomed to hell. Recently, however, after considering Catholicism I have also discovered that the Church’s view on the matter is Aquinas or Anselm’s satisfaction doctrine.

So, what if Jesus hadn’t died, according to the Church’s view? St Thomas Aquinas tells us that the issue is not personal sin, which can be atoned for, but the stain of our sinful nature from original sin that was needed to be taken away by the atonement of Christ. So if one lived like one of the many great prophets of old, and lived a good life and atoned for their sin, we can say that the personal sin is pretty much accounted for. Now, what remains and is not atoned for is the original sin, which separates us from the perfect union with God.

So then, after we died, would we be in a similar state to how Abraham and the other righteous were before Christ came to earth? Would we be in a sort of ‘Abraham’s bosom’, and we would be happy but we would ultimately still be in Sheol and not able to have that perfect union with God?

And secondly; why can we satisfy God and atone for our personal sin all on our own but we cannot atone for the stain of original sin? What’s the difference? Why was Christ necessary to remove original sin?

Original sin is separation from God. Man is lost with no way of finding home on his own. Jesus came to show us the true face of the Father-and the way back home to Him. He reconciles us with God; “atonement” derives literally from three words: at-one-ment. By His incarnation-His life, teachings, miracles, passion, death, and resurrection-Jesus demonstrates what man was only then barely beginning to be able to comprehend: God’s existence, His incomparable trustworthiness, His mercy, His humility, even, His inexhaustible, unconditional love for man in spite of man’s mistrust, which the Catechism attests to, and even hatred, which scripture attests to. In this way man can come to know what true godhood is, and be convicted of the sins that result from man playing that role for himself, attempting to be like God but apart from God and not in accordance with Him, as the Catechism puts it. Now we can turn back towards home, to the true God, now we’re drawn, without force, to faith which can can ultimately lead to man’s full justice, to love God with his whole heart, soul, mind and strength and his neighbor as himself.

 

[p9f2bpmpbpqw]

“I wasn’t able to save my son, because he was murdered. He was ambushed alongside his fiancé, and I’m here to say enough is enough,” Fields said previously in a gun-control debate in the House.Sain was arrested by Denver Police on Friday at his Colorado Springs home, but he was brought back into town to face the accusations.“I wasn’t able to save my son,christian louboutin pas cher, because he was murdered. He was ambushed alongside his fiancé, and I’m here to say enough is enough,” Fields said previously in a gun-control debate in the House.Sain was arrested by Denver Police on Friday at his Colorado Springs home, but he was brought back into town to face the accusations.
Photo:Message in a bottle: It is not known where Mary is from, or how she knew Jonathan(Facebook:Matea Medak Rezic)Map:Croatia"Mary,[chaussure christian louboutin](http://www.marineazur.fr/Loubout(name removed by moderator)asCher.html), you really are a great person. I hope we can keep in correspondence.And I would like to know that something is being done while I’m alive," said Michael White Sr., whose son Michael White Jr. was injured.This robbery was horrific,[louboutin paris](http://www.marineazur.fr/Loubout(name removed by moderator)aris.html), these individuals need to be caught, one officer said.Investigators said very few people in the city are shot during a robbery at a store and these are the kind of cases they want to solve.If they are going to shoot innocent victims in a robbery, whether it be in a bank or business premises,chaussures christian louboutin, they are going to shoot other people.
Related articles:

theamericanbastard.com/content/genius-child-langston-hughes#comment-423777

t-box.me/blog/staff/2010/12/5.html#comments

aicn.org.cn/forum/boke.asp?fds7dd8y3g.showtopic.18905.html

ronringgreen.com/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=435720

theinfiniteinsanity.com/wiki/index.php?title=User%3AFd8qf0gfp#and_is_the_most_sac