Christ's crucifction

He wasn't sacrificed, though.
We can't even be sure if he actually felt any real pain, the whole thing could very well have been staged so Jesus could "die" at the right time, at the right place, under the right tear jerker circumstances, etc.

Could have gotten polio, letahl dysentery/cholera or stepped on a nail or gotten a heart attack from all the torture.

How anticlimactic would that have been?
Anyway, no reason why he wasn't just fortified by god to not feel any pain but still react as if he did, with screams and grunts, like an old man sitting down on a chair, "arggghhhhh".

It's just too convenient, reeks of the jewish mindset in storytelling.
Also I think Zig Forums is eating my post.

I mean he's taking on the sins of the world.

And?

Jesus was obviously terrified of what was about to happen when He prayed in Gethsemane. Jesus is fully human in addition to being fully God. Pain and death are just as real to Him as to any other man. His sacrifice was a death as brutal to Him as death is to any man, and a great deal worse than many deaths. He knew that He had the hope of the Resurrection to see Him through, but so does any believing Christian.

We admire Jesus not only as God, but also as the perfect human. His human aspect underwent the same difficulties we all do, the same temptations, and yet he gave into none. To have your flesh scourged off your bones and to be crucified even though you lived your while life without sin and in the service of others, that is the sacrifice of the Christ and it is matchless in history. Read the gospels and you will understand.

You're thinking to simply.

He symbolically became the paschal lamb and his death redeemed the sins of literally everyone. Then he went to hell and BTFO satan and released everyone from the bosom of abraham. Then he resurrected to establish his church and show us how he would return from the heavens.

Because he literally died for us willingly.
And no, being immortal doesn't invalidate this.

I mean his flesh is mortal but his soul is immortal just like the rest of us. On the 3rd day his flesh was resurrected with his soul inside it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles'_Creed

the incarnation itself was the sacrifice since the infinite God humbled himself and took up a human nature and all its limitations.
the crucifixion was simply accounted for and harmonized into the grand scheme of things, it wasn't something "necessary", there are no necessities for God since he is absolutely free and absolutely BASED

Blood and water poured out of his side when he was stabbed. Only after physical death does this happen, when the blood in pericardium around the heart separate into blood cells and plasma.
And you can't fake being dead for three full days and be capable of walking.
The Roman soldiers were asleep, which was punishable by death. There is no way they were paid off.
But he didn't. These are absolutely pointless what-ifs. The Romans were well versed in death-by-torture, they knew how to make it last.
Sweating blood with fear before it happens doesn't make it sound like he couldn't feel pain.
What does this even mean? To this day the Orthodox Jews and atheist Jews hate Jesus. Many Orthodox Jews have stated that they hate Christ more than they hate Adolf.
And you seem to have missed the part of the Crucifixion where God the Father turns his face away from Christ. The suffering from this would be infinitely worse than any physical pain.

Attached: Roman_flagrum.jpg (326x420, 21.32K)

What has this got to do with the OP question? It's a nice verse but I don't see the connection…

Someone once explained to me that based on the premise that Hell is complete separation from God, the fact that God sent his Son to be completely separated from his presence is extremely impactful. Especially when you think of Christ having spent his entire mortal life being one with God; to be separated from that and thrown into sin, how that must have felt is impossible for me to fathom.

While the physical death and torute itself is bad, His separation from His Son, part of Himself, in Hell is the true sacrifice.

He could've just killed himself but he didn't
He had a brutal death enduring many hours of pain

On the contrary, The Apostle says (Ephesians 5:2): "He delivered Himself up for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God for an odor of sweetness."

I answer that, A sacrifice properly so called is something done for that honor which is properly due to God, in order to appease Him: and hence it is that Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x): "A true sacrifice is every good work done in order that we may cling to God in holy fellowship, yet referred to that consummation of happiness wherein we can be truly blessed."
But, as is added in the same place, "Christ offered Himself up for us in the Passion": and this voluntary enduring of the Passion was most acceptable to God, as coming from charity. Therefore it is manifest that Christ's Passion was a true sacrifice.
Moreover, as Augustine says farther on in the same book, "the primitive sacrifices of the holy Fathers were many and various signs of this true sacrifice, one being prefigured by many, in the same way as a single concept of thought is expressed in many words, in order to commend it without tediousness": and, as Augustine observes, (De Trin. iv), "since there are four things to be noted in every sacrifice—to wit, to whom it is offered, by whom it is offered, what is offered, and for whom it is offered—that the same one true Mediator reconciling us with God through the peace-sacrifice might continue to be one with Him to whom He offered it, might be one with them for whom He offered it, and might Himself be the offerer and what He offered."

I couldn't understand this for a long time, still don't really, but the symbolic world is not like the world of secular reason. You can say that it wasn't a sacrifice because sacrifices require the permanent death and destruction of the thing sacrificed. You can also say that God is irrational and stupid for sacrificing himself to himself (this is the stronger argument btw).

But both of those criticisms miss the importance that life is suffering and death, but that the resurrection is there to say that it is not meaningless suffering despite all the reasons you might think it meaningless. I suppose that's why, having been an atheist, I used to find the fixation of religious people with art depicting the suffering on the cross very weird, but now I find it moving (although I still wouldn't keep such an icon in my house, that shit still gets a tad creepy if looking at it doesn't come with a sense of its importance).

How it is not? It is clear to me that you are terrified of death.

Did you read that before writing it? Or did you try to come up with retarded theories, no matter how much stupid and nonsensical they are? Because it is the most pathetic, cringe inducing set of mental gymnastics I have seen from somone in complete denial.

He didn't go to Hell, he went to Hades. In any case, Christ is a member of the Godhead, so he can't be "completely separate" from the Father in any real sense.

He was sacrificed to himself so it's his call.

...

I get what you're saying here, but isn't that he was separated during the part of some denom's understanding?

absolutely retarded post

Found the secret Muslim.

Because the doctrine of satisfaction is profane. Christ isn't a blood sacrifice, his whole life was a sacrifice that culminated in the even greater sacrifice of the crucifixion. Its only when we separate the life and death of Christ that we start to have confusion about the nature of his sacrifice.

Attached: 81a843e679e6e0459518fcdb35ffba84e41d05cce6cdf49826b66ac85c05d21e.jpg (853x696, 116.71K)