Christ's death was unjust if physical death wasn't the penalty for sin (Talk.Origins)

Claim CA652:

"[I]f physical human death was not really an important part of the penalty for sin, then the agonizingly cruel physical death of Christ on the cross was not necessary to pay that penalty, and thus would be gross miscarriage of justice on God's part."

Source:
 * Morris, Henry M. 2000. vital importance of believing in recent creation. Back to Genesis 138 (June): a-c

CreationWiki response:

Talk Origins is taking this out of context. It is not an argument against Evolution theory itself but attempts to reconcile the Biological account to Evolution theory.

There are several problems with this response.
 * 1) Once sin (evil) entered in to God's creation it had to be dealt with.
 * 2) Allowing evil into heaven would ruin it like it has done to Earth.
 * 3) Redeeming those who do not want to be redeemed would be violating their free will. This eliminated the possibility of a general redemption.
 * 4) God’s sense of justice would not allow having those not wanting to be redeemed to pay the price while simply pardoning those who would choose to be redeemed.
 * 5) To satisfy justice God had to provide a substitute for those who would choose to be redeemed. This made Jesus’ life and death a necessary part of God’s plan for redemption.

While Talk Origins is correct in saying: “It is not for us to say what is necessary for God to do.” We do not have to, God told us in the Bible.

Christ’s death on the cross was about redemption, not the immediate removal of the affects of sin.

Not relevant since this claim is an issue of Biblical interpretation, and its incompatibility with Evolution, and not which view is actually correct.