Here is a question I recently received through my “Ask the Christian” page, and my answer:

Name: religionandatheism
Website: http://religionandatheism.wordpress.com

Hi

Here’s a theological question for you.

In order for the story of the New Testament to unfold according to God’s and Jesus’ plan Jesus submitted himself to the will of the Romans. He rode into Jerusalem in the full knowledge that he will get crucified. He therefore anticipated that a Roman or a number of Romans will nail him to a cross and kill him. He therefore was complicit in the act of murder, since by his own actions he facilitated it. This facilitated the Roman’s sin, murder.

And yet a loving Jesus did this?

Suggestions appreciated.

My Reply:

Hello!

Sorry for taking a little to get back to you — life has been weird, with work and all. I take it this is AT? Or AG, I suppose, since AT usually signs his/her posts?

I will be happy to answer your question so long as you remember that I can only speak for myself and what I understand of Christianity, not Christianity in general. I’m not a professional theologian or anything. =)

If you are asking on the playing field of Christianity (in that you are accepting that Jesus had foreknowledge of his death and God’s plan), you should accept the rest of it as well — Christianity is not something that works in bits and pieces. The rest of it being that Jesus died for the redemption of ALL sin. So with that in mind:

Here are some other things to consider:
When confronted with the reality of the consequence of sin in this world; ie pain, suffering, death, disease; there are basically three options.

a) Sin can be excused – as in saying that it doesn’t matter, ignoring it, and thus belittling our pain as a temporary issue. Religions that accept reality as an illusion usually go this direction, because there are no eternal ramifications for sin.
b) Revenge or Justice — making an individual person pay for their actions. They are getting exactly what they deserve. If we look back in history and realize the multiplying consequences of our actions over time, there is a LOT to pay for.
c) Someone else can pay in substitution for our consequences — they can pick up our tab, as it were. This is the nature of forgiveness – every time I forgive someone, it is not because what they did has no consequence. It is my way of saying that I am willing to pay the cost instead of forcing the other to pay, instead of taking revenge.

God chose not to belittle our pain but to endure it along with us. Pain in the world has a very real nature to it – it’s not simply an illusion. Jesus’ life was a demonstration of God’s willingness to pay for our consequences and forgive us. Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenant (or contract) that God made with Israel in the Old Testament — It was understood in those days that a covenant was A Serious Business — if you violated it, you died, since it was enforced by God. Israel didn’t keep the covenant — they could not be perfect, just like we are still incapable of being perfect. Jesus came to die instead of the Israelites — he was perfect (according to us), and therefore the only one who was even capable of being that sacrifice.

Jesus suffered along side the rest of humanity, he knows what it is like to be mocked, abandoned, beaten, hungry, thirsty, tired, alone, and grieving. He also knows what it is like to love, be happy, find joy, be full, have friends, etc. It leaves us with a decision to make – we can either choose Justice and fairness, in which we pay for all of our actions, or we can choose to accept Jesus’ offer of forgiveness.

So here’s the question: In fulfilling the big picture, did Jesus fudge over the little picture? If he hadn’t done what he did, there would be at least one thief with no hope, and one Roman who is still paying for his own sin.

1. The Romans weren’t going to stop crucifying and conquering and doing all the things that Romans did just because Jesus didn’t come to Jerusalem. There were two thieves scheduled to die the same day – if Jesus hadn’t come to Jerusalem, they still would have died, and the Romans still would have “murdered.”

2. To the Roman common soldiers who were crucifying Jesus, he wasn’t an innocent child or anything. He was a criminal, no better than the thieves on either side, and a political dissident. They were carrying out orders to execute enemies of the Empire — much like the poor guys who give lethal injections on Death Row.

3. Would it have been more loving to have one less person hanging on the cross that day (taking into consideration they wouldn’t have stopped choosing to follow orders even if Jesus hadn’t have come to Jerusalem) and allowed the rest of humanity no way to reach God (through payment for sins)? Or is it more loving to share in a person’s pain to achieve the redemption of ALL murders, ALL sins, for all time?

The term accomplice comes from our justice system, a human defined morality that insists that people must pay for their crimes in full. When dealing with the morality of God, it’s different — since he operates as the definition of morality. So yes, Jesus was loving, if you choose to accept him. At least one of the Romans who crucified him became a follower later on, ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2019:%2032-36;&version=31;) so that’s one lifetime of sin redeemed.

-Raeliyah