Jesus' crucifixion was worthy

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. -- John 3:16 (KJV)

Some people reason that only a divine Saviour can save mankind from their sin for various of reasons. Therefore, it is a big deal when people claim that Jesus was not God because according to them, it means the person is then not saved.

Was a worthy price required?

Some belief that a single human being is not worthy enough to pay the price that Jesus did. This is based on all sorts of reasoning like:

Did God bargain with the devil?

Some believe that the devil owns everyone who sin (Hebrews 2:14) and that Jesus had to buy his disciples back by paying with his life.

This Satanic view implies the devil is more powerful than God and has the authority to set the price. Therefore, to make the transaction "fair" to Satan, only 1 human can only save 1 other human (or perhaps a few more if it was an important soul), but not the entire mankind. That is why many people believe that if Jesus was only 1 ordinary human being, he would not have been able to pay for the sin of the entire mankind. For these people it is extremely important to belief that Jesus had to be God Himself, Who is worth more than mankind, to be able to pay such a huge price.

Quantity versus quality

The devil works with quantity, but God's work with quality (1 Samuel 16:7). God is not impressed with numbers. The bible is filled with examples where God did huge miracles with 1 obedient individual, for example:

  • Noah saved the entire mankind and animals by his obedience.
  • Abraham gave birth to the Israelites by his obedience.
  • Josef saved many nations by his obedience.
  • There are also many other heroes like Moses, Joshua, Gideon, David, Ester and my other judges, who had each saved the entire nation of Israelites by their obedience, each one in different circumstances during their lifetimes.

So, the question should rather be, what would be acceptable to God to cancel this penalty?

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned — for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass.

For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.

And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification.

For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.

For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.

--Romans 5:12-19 (ESV)

In other words, if 1 man's sin condemned the entire human race, then the 1 man's sacrifice is sufficient to save the entire human race.

This is not Paul's idea, but it was prophesied many years ago by Isaiah (Isaiah 53) where he prophesied about a single "servant" who was worthy enough to "the LORD to lay on him the iniquity of us all", then are we to judge God's decision that this payment was not enough?

The requirement for a sacrifice had never been a quantity, but quality (Exodus 12:5; 29:1; Leviticus 1:3,10; 3:1,6; 4:3,23,28,32; 21:17-23; 22:19-25; Numbers 6:14; 19:2; 28:3-29:36; Deuteronomy 15:21; 17:1; Ezekiel 43:22-25; 46:4-13; Malachi 1:14).

God had always been the owner

For God to buy back humans, there had to be a prior transaction that entitled the devil to own humans. There are no such recording of such an event in the bible.

The earth is the LORD’s, and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein.
For He has founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the waters.

-- Psalms 24:1-2 (NKJV)

It is written "all its fullness" including "the world" belongs to the LORD. Therefore, if you "dwell" on the earth, you already belong to the LORD regardless of what you did or currently belief. This mean there were no transfer of ownership between God and anybody.

(This does not mean God will save everyone. In the contrary, it actually gives God the right to judge everyone.)

Therefore, we can conclude that there was no transaction with anyone to transfer ownership. However, this does not answer the question:

A high penalty was required for breaking the old covenant?

Some reason that because the Israelites broke the Mosaic covenant (also known as the "Old Covenant" or "Old Testament"), that one of their descendants had to pay the penalty. While there are many scriptures that states that Jesus died for their sin, there is none that specifically said that Jesus had to die because they broke their covenant.

Instead, we read that the Assyrian (2 Kings 17:7-23) and Babylonian (2 Kings 24:1-4; Jeremiah 25:8-11; Ezekiel 39:23-24; Daniel 9:11-14; Amos 5:25-27) exiles were the results for breaking the Old Covenant.

Was special authority required?

Did Jesus cancel the Old covenants?

Actually there is more than one "Old Covenant":

  1. The Abrahamic Covenant: Abraham will have many descendants who would live in Israel.
  2. The Mosaic Covenant: God will bless Israel when they obey the commandments and curse them when they disobey the commandments.
  3. The Levitical covenant (also known as "the Covenant of Peace"):

Unlike modern contracts which terminate when a party is in breach, God's blood covenants remain in place forever (Genesis 13:15, 17:7; Psalm 89:34; Jeremiah 31:5).

Jesus never cancelled or deprecated these "old" covenants.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law (Pentateugh/Torah), or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. -- Matthew 5:17 (ESV)

In those days, the books of Moses which contained the first and second covenants were called "The Law" which contained all these covenants.

The apostle John wrote:

Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard. -- 1 John 2:7 (ESV)

Some argue that God also made a covenant with Adam. Whether God's command to Adam could be considered a covenant or not does matter because the effect of Adam's disobedience still applies today.

Some argue that the Abrahamic Covenant is still in place through the Christians that consider themselves "spiritual" descendants of Abraham. Whether this is a valid reason or not, the physical Jewish descendants still exist today in Israel.

However, when Paul denounced the concept that circumcision is required for salvation. People tend to confuse the Covenant of Circumcision with the Abrahamic Covenant. These were two different covenants with two different purposes and conditions. The former was to provide offspring to Abraham and land to his offspring and the latter was to establish a unique identity in Abraham's offspring by sanctification of their bodies for a special seed who would become the Christ (Acts 3:25-4:2).

The Mosaic Covenant was still affective after the Babylonian Exile (Nehemiah 10:28-29) which happened after the Israelites broke their covenant (Jeremiah 11:9-13; Ezekiel 16:59; Hosea 6:7-10) with God. Although this covenant was considered "broken", it was not terminated. To "break a covenant" means that a party failed to keep their part of the covenant which allows the other party to act accordingly. In the case of Israel, God had temporarily withdrawn His protection, support and blessings and remove them from their promised land by allowing other nations like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Crusaders and Muslims to capture or rule over them. Each time they repented and a remnant would return and to be blessed again. Even around 1930, against all odds, some of the Jews managed to immigrate back to Israel despite the resistance from the Arabs in the region. In 1948, Israel was officially declared and established as an independent state again.

However, Paul also made it clear that the laws of Moses do not bring salvation. Again, the Mosaic Covenant should not be confused with these Mosaic laws that Paul referred to. The former was to establish a framework of blessings (protection) and curses (result of rebellion) to make it possible for the Israelites to poses the "Promised land", while the latter were practical laws to bring order and governance in Moses' nation. Jesus condemned the pharisees who would rather serve this system than ministering to the people.

The Levitical covenant is specifically called an "everlasting covenant" (Numbers 25:10-13) which cannot be broken (Jeremiah 33:17-22; Isaiah 54:5-10).

Usually when people mention a Levite they consider a Priest with a special attire, perform the rituals, offerings, sacrifices on some holy site. However, many of those Levitical laws were not part of this covenant. Instead, the description of the priest were:

So shall you know that I have sent this command to you, that My covenant with Levi may stand, says the LORD of hosts.

  • My covenant with him was one of life and peace, and I gave them to him.

It was a covenant of:

  1. fear, and he feared Me. He stood in awe of My name.
  2. True instruction was in his mouth, and no wrong was found on his lips.
  3. He walked with Me in peace and uprightness, and
  4. he turned many from iniquity.
  5. For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and
  6. people should seek instruction from his mouth,
  7. for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

Malachi 2:4-7 (ESV)

This is also what modern day "missionaries", "clergy", "apostles", "reverends" or "pastors" aim to be. Although these instructions were given specifically to the Levite priests, that in principle God blesses anyone that respect Him, teaches the truth, "walks with Him", reach out to people such that they may repent, guard and teach God's instructions and who acts as a messengers of the LORD of hosts.

So if the calling of Jesus was not to cancel any old covenants, what was his purpose?

Did Jesus offer a blood sacrifice as a high priest?

Only the Levites was allowed to perform these sacrifices. Jesus was not a Levite.

And you shall appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall guard their priesthood. But if any outsider comes near, he shall be put to death. -- Numbers 3:10 (ESV)

Jesus did not wear the proper priestly attire at the crucifixion.

And you shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother, for glory and for beauty...

You shall make for them linen undergarments to cover their naked flesh. They shall reach from the hips to the thighs; and they shall be on Aaron and on his sons when they go into the tent of meeting or when they come near the altar to minister in the Holy Place, lest they bear guilt and die. This shall be a statute forever for him and for his offspring after him.

-- Exodus 28:2-43 (ESV)

Jesus was physically dirty. Jesus did not wash himself before his crucifixion. Instead, we read that he had to carry a wooden "cross", they spit on him, he was covered in blood and so forth.

The LORD said to Moses,

“You shall also make a basin of bronze, with its stand of bronze, for washing. You shall put it between the tent of meeting and the altar, and you shall put water in it, with which Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet.

When they go into the tent of meeting, or when they come near the altar to minister, to burn a food offering to the LORD, they shall wash with water, so that they may not die. They shall wash their hands and their feet, so that they may not die. It shall be a statute forever to them, even to him and to his offspring throughout their generations.”

-- Exodus 30:17-21 (ESV)

Note that the author of Hebrews (Hebrews 7:27, 10:11-14) is the only bible author that wrote that Jesus was a high priest who offered (served) a sacrifice.

Did God have to proof Himself?

Did God have to proof that He loves us?

For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person (though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die) but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. -- Romans 5:6-8 (ESV)

The argument assume that unless God sacrificed Himself, he cannot proof his love to us.

God also proves his love:

  • by providing a way for us to be saved
  • by His ministering Spirit
  • by His gifts
  • by the body of Christ
  • by His creation
  • by His blessing
  • by testimonies:
    • from Moses (Exodus 34:6-7)
    • from Solomon (1 Kings 8:23)
    • from David (Psalm 86:5; 103:8-17)
    • from Isaiah (Isaiah 54:10)
    • from Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:3)
    • from Nehemiah (Nehemiah 9:17)
    • from Jesus' (especially John 14-17)
    • from John (1 John 4:7-8)
    • from Paul (Romans 5:8)
    • and so forth...

Often God and Jesus gets confused with each other and people would quote John 3:16 and Romans 5:6-8 to proof that Jesus loved the world so much that he was willing to gave himself up (sacrifice himself) to save us.

While it is true that Jesus did gave himself up as a hero to save those whom he loves,

Did God have to proof that He can defeat the devil as a human?

Some belief that the purpose of the crucifixion was that God had to prove that He could limit Himself as a human and still be able to conquer the devil without falling for the temptation to use any of His god-powers to defeat the devil.

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death (that is, the devil) and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. -- Hebrews 2:14-15 (NIV)

Note that only the unknown author of the book of Hebrews support this view. No other bible authors made any such claims.

The questions that arise are:

  1. Why would God have to proof Himself?
  2. How did the invincible God got killed?
  3. How did God got separated from Himself?

Did God establish a new covenant?

God the Father established a new covenant, with the blood of His son, to restore righteousness to us. Reconciliation would not have been possible without removing the division (cleansing of sin) between God and us. Therefore, the Son of God voluntarily offered himself as hero to provide the way to eternal life with the Father Who loves to adopt us as His children so that we can inherit as fellow heirs with His Son, Jesus Christ, whom He had resurrected like He would also resurrect us one day.