Another poll for christians.

[Gaius Octavius]

The original question is a bit misleading... Jesus could have been killed some other way than crucifixion, with salvation still being accomplished. That's just the way it was actually done. The key is not the crucifixion (as a method of execution), but the atonement and resurrection in general as a payment for sins. However, we can't get into "what might be" very easily since we have only "what is."

But to answer your question, if Jesus had not been crucified (and therefore not raised from the dead), then everybody would go to hell. That's the whole point of Jesus' ministry and the Gospels. Or to put it in Paul's words, "If Christ be not risen, then our preaching is in vain and so is your faith, and we are of all men most miserable... and you are still in your sins."

 

[warpus]

Not a fair comparison considering what else would not have happened if not for the crucifixion in Christian views. Like existance.

How do you figure?

I get that everyone would have ended up in hell, but I do not follow your other conclusion.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

I think Nylan might be saying that God would not have created us if it were not for a "prior"--I put quotes around this because God is not limited by time--decision to go ahead with the crucifixion, etc.

There is a debate among theologians as to how this worked. I think this view is called "supralapsarianism." It basically states that God decided to create the world knowing sin would arise only after He essentially said "all right, I'll allow it, but I'm going to do something about it."

EDIT: Upon looking it up, I see that supralapsarianism is not quite what I was driving at, but it does reflect these ideas.

 

[Nylan]

If it was part of God's plan, then it would mean that either A) God's plan doesn't exist and so the entire history of the world, if it existed at all, would be vastly different, or B) God is not omnipotent

 

[puglover]

I think Nylan might be saying that God would not have created us if it were not for a "prior"--I put quotes around this because God is not limited by time--decision to go ahead with the crucifixion, etc.

There is a debate among theologians as to how this worked. I think this view is called "supralapsarianism." It basically states that God decided to create the world knowing sin would arise only after He essentially said "all right, I'll allow it, but I'm going to do something about it."

EDIT: Upon looking it up, I see that supralapsarianism is not quite what I was driving at, but it does reflect these ideas.

Alternatively, supralapsarianism could also be the belief that God allowed sin as a means of refining his creation to his image through fall and redemption.

If it was part of God's plan, then it would mean that either A) God's plan doesn't exist and so the entire history of the world, if it existed at all, would be vastly different, or B) God is not omnipotent

Why?

 

[LightFang]

The question of "if" is meaningless, because it happened.

But anyway...

The circumstances leading to His death was that mankind had become corrupt.

So, we can look at it like this:

Jesus Christ didn't get crucified because mankind never turned evil. Then, there is no Christianity, only Judaism. And then, all the nonbelievers go to hell.

I can't think of another reason why He wouldn't get crucified. So there.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

But you might argue that there would be no Judaism if there were no Christianity. Why bring your people out in an Exodus, give them commandments, and prophesy about a coming Messiah if you don't fulfill it?

From a Christian standpoint, if there is no crucifixion, there is no Judaism, no Moses, no Law, etc... "and we are of all men most miserable."

 

[Bill3000]

Jesus Christ didn't get crucified because mankind never turned evil. Then, there is no Christianity, only Judaism. And then, all the nonbelievers go to hell.

Judaism has nothing even remotely like the Christian form of hell. It has Gehenna, which is more of akin to a purgatory, and is temporary. It has nothing to do with being wicked or not. Judaism is also not even remotely a religion of "believe this or go to hell" - it's always been a matter of a people with a purpose. Gentiles only need to follow the Noahide laws, IIRC. As well, Judaism does not believe in the doctrine of original sin; that's a purely christian one.

Then again, would jewish theology be irrelevant in this matter?

Why bring your people out in an Exodus, give them commandments, and prophesy about a coming Messiah if you don't fulfill it?

I dunno. For the same reason that the second coming was originally advertized as being imminent?

 

[Nylan]

Judaism has nothing even remotely like the Christian form of hell. It has Gehenna, which is more of akin to a purgatory, and is temporary. It has nothing to do with being wicked or not. Judaism is also not even remotely a religion of "believe this or go to hell" - it's always been a matter of a people with a purpose. Gentiles only need to follow the Noahide laws, IIRC. As well, Judaism does not believe in the doctrine of original sin; that's a purely christian one.

Then again, would jewish theology be irrelevant in this matter?

Considering he said "from a Christian viewpoint", in which Judaism was the predecessor to Christianity, at one point being the true and proper religion before becoming twisted and distorted to apostasy, yes modern Jewish theology would be irrelevant by this viewpoint.

I dunno. For the same reason that the second coming was originally advertized as being imminent?

"No man knoweth". Imminent is a relative term. No one knows when Christ will come again, and so a sense of "imminence" has been prevelant for years although it may not be for yet some time. I see no problem here.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Yet the Atonement doesn't suffice for other pre-Christ nonbelievers.

Why shouldn't it?

Why do pre-Atonement Jews get special treatment in admission to heaven when pre-Atonement Hindus or Mithraians or Zoroastrians don't?

I don't know, you'd have to ask someone who believes that they do.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I think Nylan might be saying that God would not have created us if it were not for a "prior"--I put quotes around this because God is not limited by time--decision to go ahead with the crucifixion, etc.

Pretty much. Assuming Nylan represents the orthodox LDS view, the entire plan - including the Fall, the Crucifixion (although I suppose any form of execution would have sufficed), and the Resurrection - was worked out long before we showed up on earth.

There is a debate among theologians as to how this worked. I think this view is called "supralapsarianism." It basically states that God decided to create the world knowing sin would arise only after He essentially said "all right, I'll allow it, but I'm going to do something about it."

Yeah, sin is an inevtiable result of giving imperfect beings free will, so fortunatley a way around that was also made.

 

[Bill3000]

Considering he said "from a Christian viewpoint", in which Judaism was the predecessor to Christianity, at one point being the true and proper religion before becoming twisted and distorted to apostasy, yes modern Jewish theology would be irrelevant by this viewpoint.

Apostasy, eh? Like you commited apostasy by becoming Mormon, Mr. Nontrinitarian?

Apostasy would imply that they had the belief to begin with. Judaism never believed in a Christian hell, and that can be backed up with texual criticism.

"No man knoweth". Imminent is a relative term. No one knows when Christ will come again, and so a sense of "imminence" has been prevelant for years although it may not be for yet some time. I see no problem here.

Doesn't change the fact that it was historically considered to be imminent; look at the The Great Revolt, for example.

 

[puglover]

Judaism has nothing even remotely like the Christian form of hell. It has Gehenna, which is more of akin to a purgatory, and is temporary. It has nothing to do with being wicked or not. Judaism is also not even remotely a religion of "believe this or go to hell" - it's always been a matter of a people with a purpose.

No offense meant to Jews, but is modern Judaism's absense of doctrine about Hell because they don't believe in one, or because ancient Israelites didn't actually concern themselves about where the Philistines went after death?

I suppose this is a matter for another thread, but I thought Jews have historically believed in the afterlife. After all, that was what the division between Pharisees and Sadducees during the Roman occupation was all about.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Apostasy, eh? Like you commited apostasy by becoming Mormon, Mr. Nontrinitarian?

Good one.

Apostasy would imply that they had the belief to begin with. Judaism never believed in a Christian hell, and that can be backed up with texual criticism.


Doesn't change the fact that it was historically considered to be imminent; look at the The Great Revolt, for example

I don't see what this has to do with the overall argument. It seems to me we have several options.

If Judaism (alone) is true, then it really does not matter about Christian hell, i.e. whether it existed in original Jewish thought or not. Christ's death is totally unrelated to it either way following this line of thought, because Jesus is not the Messiah. Yeah, I guess you could argue that the stories of a coming Messiah might be purely invented for the reasons you mentioned, but it has no bearing on Jesus insofar as this topic is concerned.

If neither Christianity nor Judaism is true, then it obviously makes no difference.

Re: the question of imminence, yes, it has been considered truly "imminent" many times throughout history, even today (just look at all the televangelists running around), but it does not affect the problem here. However, I am reminded of Augustine's words, where he said 400, or 500, or possibly 1,000 years or more may pass between the first and second advents. That's not immediate.

 

[Bill3000]

No offense meant to Jews, but is modern Judaism's absense of doctrine about Hell because they don't believe in one, or because ancient Israelites didn't actually concern themselves about where the Philistines went after death?

I suppose this is a matter for another thread, but I thought Jews have historically believed in the afterlife. After all, that was what the division between Pharisees and Sadducees during the Roman occupation was all about.

They do. It's [wiki]Gehenna[/wiki], akin to purgatory, and [wiki]Sheol[/wiki], which is more akin to Hades in Hellenism. Neither of these are eternal damnation.

Regardless, Judaism has always been a religion focused on an earthly future as opposed to the world to come.

 

[puglover]

Regardless, Judaism has always been a religion focused on an earthly future as opposed to the world to come.

I think that's key. If Jesus truly is the same God as YHWH, then I wouldn't be surprised if God simply decided to make known more details about the afterlfie after the covenant became open to both Jews and Gentiles and conversion became a concern. The early Jews would perhaps have been more focused on setting up the holy, earthly kingdom of Israel.

 

[Quasar1011]

They do. It's Gehenna, akin to purgatory, and Sheol, which is more akin to Hades in Hellenism. Neither of these are eternal damnation.

Ya might wanna rip this verse out of the Hebrew Bible then.

Daniel 12:2
Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

Regardless, Judaism has always been a religion focused on an earthly future as opposed to the world to come.

Those are not mutually exclusive, so are not necessarily opposing concepts.

Judaism was focused on Jehovah, by the way.

Judaism has nothing even remotely like the Christian form of hell.

In 2002, I dated a Jewish lady. I asked her where she thought she would go when she dies. She said, "to Hell."

 

[Maimonides]

The circumstances leading to His death was that mankind had become corrupt.

The circumstances leading to his death were that he was a Jew under Roman rule who was pissing everyone off. Mankind has probably always been corrupt.

So, we can look at it like this:

Jesus Christ didn't get crucified because mankind never turned evil. Then, there is no Christianity, only Judaism. And then, all the nonbelievers go to hell.

I can't think of another reason why He wouldn't get crucified. So there.

Think of this. Nonbelievers going to Hell is a Christian concept. If there's only Judaism, nobody goes to Hell.

Judaism & Christianity are not the only religions in the world. Step outside & take a look around sometime.

But you might argue that there would be no Judaism if there were no Christianity. Why bring your people out in an Exodus, give them commandments, and prophesy about a coming Messiah if you don't fulfill it?

As for Exodus, surely you don't need to be told why freedom is better than slavery. As for the Commandments (Mitzvot), I have no idea, but I like that one about not stealing. As for messianic prophecy, Jesus wasn't the only Jew to proclaim himself the messiah. There have been many. We're still waiting.

From a Christian standpoint, if there is no crucifixion, there is no Judaism, no Moses, no Law, etc... "and we are of all men most miserable."

From a Jewish standpoint, there's no reason for anyone who's not Jewish to worry about Judaism or Moses or to be miserable about not being Jewish.

Then again, would jewish theology be irrelevant in this matter?

Definitely. This topic doesn't have anything to do with Judaism or any religion other than Christianity.

Considering he said "from a Christian viewpoint", in which Judaism was the predecessor to Christianity, at one point being the true and proper religion before becoming twisted and distorted to apostasy, yes modern Jewish theology would be irrelevant by this viewpoint.

The "true & proper religion" for Jews. The rest of you don't need to lose sleep over it.

Surely you have more constructive things to do than calling other religions "twisted & distorted" on an internet forum. That's so insulting.

No offense meant to Jews, but is modern Judaism's absense of doctrine about Hell because they don't believe in one, or because ancient Israelites didn't actually concern themselves about where the Philistines went after death?

No offense taken. Asking an honest question shouldn't be seen as offensive.

We don't believe in Hell. It's a Christian concept borrowed from pagan Greek mythology. The New Testament mentions "Hades" who was the Greek god of the underworld.

The ancient Israelites probably didn't concern themselves with the souls of the Phillistines, but nobody can say for sure.

I suppose this is a matter for another thread, but I thought Jews have historically believed in the afterlife.

It is off topic & the answer is really complicated. I'll just say for now that we do pray to G-d to look after the souls of deceased loved ones &, in Jewish messianic prophesy, one of the signs of the arrival of the Messiah is that the dead are resurrected. Jesus & the 1st Christians were Jews & would have been familiar with this. One reason that Jews reject Christianity is that Jesus was the only person resurrected in the New Testament. (Or maybe there were two. Still doesn't fulfill the prophecy.)

After all, that was what the division between Pharisees and Sadducees during the Roman occupation was all about.

Sorry, I couldn't say for sure at the moment. I remember that one of them was very isolationist, but that's about it.

They do. It's [wiki]Gehenna[/wiki], akin to purgatory, and [wiki]Sheol[/wiki], which is more akin to Hades in Hellenism. Neither of these are eternal damnation.

Bill3000, I find you to be one of the most honest, mature & knowledgable posters in OT. I enjoy reading your posts. Often, I learn something from them.

Having said that, the Wiki page on Gehenna is totally screwed up. I'll get into detail if you want, but I don't feel like it at the moment & it's off topic for this thread, anyway. That Wiki Sheol page has a big warning at the top that it's facts are in dispute, but it's far more accurate than the Gehenna page.

Regardless, Judaism has always been a religion focused on an earthly future as opposed to the world to come.

Correct. Currently, the issues Judaism focuses most on are:

How will I pay for my kids' college education?

Enough already! What's the cure for cancer?!?!

I think that's key. If Jesus truly is the same God as YHWH, then I wouldn't be surprised if God simply decided to make known more details about the afterlfie after the covenant became open to both Jews and Gentiles and conversion became a concern. The early Jews would perhaps have been more focused on setting up the holy, earthly kingdom of Israel.

Spelling that as "YHWH" shows you might have a little knowledge of Hebrew.

The early Jews were probably focused on feeding thimselves & not getting raped & pillaged by their neighbors just like everyone else at the time. Israel is the name of the collective Jewish tribes, not a kingdom.

 

[JoeM]

How many people would go to hell when they die if Jesus had never been crucified and resurected.

As others have mentioned, it was God's plan for Jesus to live and die in this way, perhaps the earthly part could have played out in other ways, but spiritually no. God sent Jesus to save us, and he did, he could not fail.

He would have still existed to spread christianity but would have never have "paid for our sins on the cross."

The phrase itself it not near as important as the fact of the Passion and what it represents.

I'm going to say nobody because I don't actully believe hell is a place anybody goes to. It's simply satan's home that exists in another dimension.

Seeing as you don't have faith, isn't it interesting that you ask this question at all?