Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 150 (138084)
08-30-2004 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Phat
08-30-2004 2:55 AM


Re: Buzz, let me ask you something:
Im not gonna judge you by typical Christian criteria, but let me ask you something, Buzz. How much of your theological influence has been because of association with Jehovahs Witnesses? Do you consider yourself a Witness? (In the sense of belonging to a Kingdom Hall body?) The reason that I ask is the type of responses that you give to theological questions are similar to those that I have heard from Jehovahs witnesses....
PB, I regularly attend a 7th Day Baptist church which worships on the Biblical sabbath rather than the first day. I believe my oft reference to the proper name of Jehovah which is stated over 600 times in the OT early manuscripts and my Biblical understanding of how the trinity functions according to the common NT references to God and his son you are arriving at the wrong conclusions. I have never been in a JW assembly meeting of any kind but do refute them when visited by them to to the point that they avoid confrontation with me.
I can understand how you might ask, but I suggest you focus on addressing my statements as you have been doing a good job of so far rather than reading into them what is not there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Phat, posted 08-30-2004 2:55 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Phat, posted 08-30-2004 12:41 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 107 of 150 (138109)
08-30-2004 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by Buzsaw
08-30-2004 11:38 AM


Allllrighteeee Then...
Sorry I prejudged you, Buzz. I will continue to discuss theology with you confidant, now, that you know more than I thought you did!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Buzsaw, posted 08-30-2004 11:38 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Buzsaw, posted 09-05-2004 11:00 AM Phat has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 108 of 150 (139152)
09-02-2004 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Buzsaw
08-27-2004 10:27 PM


quote:
How in the world can you identify Israel with the following in Isa. 53?
1. ....a MAN of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and a one from whom men hide their face.....
2. ......HE WAS WOUNDED FOR OUR TRANGRESSIONS {sins) HE WAS BRUISED FOR OUR INIQUITIES; ........WITH HIS STRIPES WE ARE HEALED
3. Jehovah has LAID ON HIM THE INIQUITY OF US ALL.....
4. When he was aflicted HE OPENED NOT HIS MOUTH as the lamb that iis led to the slaughter and as a sheep that before his shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth.....
5. He was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people.. ( one dies for the sins of the people -- hardly a nation dying for itself)
6. .....you shall make his soul as an offering for sin.....
5. HE BORE THE SIN OF MANY AND MADE INTERCESSION FOR THE TRANSGRESSORS (sinners)
Now, PD, please be honest and tell whether this more closely typlifies the suffering Jesus NT account or historical Israel?
I don't think it is reasonable to compare the Biblical account of Jesus with Historical accounts of Israel. To be fair you would need to compare the Biblical accounts concerning each.
Biblical Israel did see itself as a suffering servant. The suffering theme of Israel is throughout the OT. Their adversities were frequently compared to sickness.
So I would still say that Isaiah as a whole reflects how Israel saw itself and not how the life of Jesus was depicted, as a whole, in the NT.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Buzsaw, posted 08-27-2004 10:27 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 109 of 150 (139557)
09-03-2004 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Buzsaw
08-27-2004 10:27 PM


Come on now, it is very typical of the Jewish writing of the timeperiod to refer to Israel as a person, and a servent. Read it in context.
That is the trouble with Christians who claim Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus, they don't read the context.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Buzsaw, posted 08-27-2004 10:27 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 110 of 150 (139561)
09-03-2004 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Buzsaw
08-27-2004 11:02 PM


Of course, the famous mistranslation of Psalm 22.
"They pierced my hands and my feet" is an incorrect translation. The phrase "k'ari" is "like a lion" -- i.e. "a band of evildoers has surrounded me, like a lion, (at) my hands and feet," and indeed, lions are mentioned elsewhere in that Psalm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Buzsaw, posted 08-27-2004 11:02 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 111 of 150 (139562)
09-03-2004 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Buzsaw
08-27-2004 11:37 PM


No, none of the verse is 'Right' with jesus, unless you assume it is, and use the mistranslation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Buzsaw, posted 08-27-2004 11:37 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Phat, posted 09-04-2004 3:47 AM ramoss has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 112 of 150 (139821)
09-04-2004 3:47 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by ramoss
09-03-2004 11:59 AM


What Source?
Just out of curiousity, what great source has enlightened you with the "correct" translation? Are you saying that the NKJV, NIV, and other translations are incorrect? What source or what Bible are you thus claiming to be correctly translated? I have seen numerous commentaries that affirm the accuracy of NIV etc....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by ramoss, posted 09-03-2004 11:59 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by ramoss, posted 09-06-2004 1:08 AM Phat has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 113 of 150 (139868)
09-04-2004 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Aurelie
08-23-2004 5:59 PM


Re: God displeased with sacrifice?
quote:
In order to hold the belief that God didn't approve of sacrifices, you would also have to believe that the Bible contradicts itself.
The Bible did not write itself, therefore it cannot contradict itself. But I cannot say the same for its various authors, scribes, editors, etc.
IMO the OT is written by Hebrews, for Hebrews, about Hebrews. They recorded their past, present and possible future as seen through their eyes. We see the religous/political trials and tribulations of a culture, which changed through the ages as cultures tend to do. It is not a contradiction for a culture/society to change over time.
For example: In the early history of the United States, slavery was legal and acceptable to most. Over time that changed and today slavery is illegal in the US, which is a good change. Our history books record these events and how the changes came about. Now if our culture tries to go back and change the past records and say that slavery was never condoned and tries to explain away any texts that say otherwise, then we have problems and contradictions.
My theory is that Leviticus was not written in the desert, but is a sacrifical system that developed after the exile. Message 68 & Message 71 Unfortunately, it appears that the culture after the exile tried to upgrade their past stories and writings to reconcile with their present way of living, which can cause contradictions and anachronisms.
IMO this is when the rabbis started building the "fence" around the Torah so that they wouldn't accidently offend God again.
Hopefully this will give you an idea of how I view the Bible.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Aurelie, posted 08-23-2004 5:59 PM Aurelie has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 114 of 150 (140051)
09-05-2004 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Phat
08-30-2004 12:41 PM


Re: Allllrighteeee Then...
Thanks, brother PB. This oft acknowledgement of God's proper name which is supported by early manuscript but not common among mainstream fundamentalists, is just another case where buz does not walk in lockstep. This may sometimes provoke thought and influence people, but does not make one popular with the majority.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Phat, posted 08-30-2004 12:41 PM Phat has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 115 of 150 (140218)
09-06-2004 1:08 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by Phat
09-04-2004 3:47 AM


Re: What Source?
Why, the HEBREW is correct of course.
If you read the Jewish publication society, that would probably be the closest to the original hebrew.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Phat, posted 09-04-2004 3:47 AM Phat has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 116 of 150 (140623)
09-07-2004 9:39 AM


Bump
Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."
Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have made the enemies of the Lord show utter contempt, the son born to you will die."
David committed adultery and had the husband killed. He admitted his guilt, but didn't make a sacrifice for atonement. Nathan said he was forgiven.
Now for the above intentional sins, the penalty should have been instant death.
No death and no sin offering, but there was forgiveness.
Doesn't follow the laws in Leviticus.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by ramoss, posted 09-11-2004 11:37 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 121 by Buzsaw, posted 09-14-2004 12:38 AM purpledawn has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 117 of 150 (141695)
09-11-2004 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by purpledawn
09-07-2004 9:39 AM


Re: Bump
So, it astonishes you that a King can get away with things a normal person can't??
What would King Henry the 8th ever think of you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by purpledawn, posted 09-07-2004 9:39 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by purpledawn, posted 09-13-2004 9:18 AM ramoss has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 118 of 150 (141994)
09-13-2004 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by ramoss
09-11-2004 11:37 PM


Re: Bump
Not really, since they probably made the rules. But it does give a little more credence to my theory that Leviticus was written closer to the second temple period than at Mt. Sinai. Which would also mean that the detailed laws of sin sacrifice were not given at Mt. Sinai.
Deuteronomy 1:17
You are not to show favoritism when judging, but give equal attention to the small and to the great. No matter how a person presents himself, don't be afraid of him; because the decision is God's. The case that is too hard for you, bring to me and I will hear it.'
Deuteronomy 16:19
You are not to distort justice or show favoritism, and you are not to accept a bribe, for a gift blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of even the upright.
Romans 2:11
For God does not show favoritism.
James 2:9
But if you show favoritism, your actions constitute sin, since you are convicted under the Torah as transgressors.
So the possibility exists that 1) the laws of Leviticus (as we know them) were not in place at that time, or 2) God does show favoritism.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by ramoss, posted 09-11-2004 11:37 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by ramoss, posted 09-13-2004 1:02 PM purpledawn has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 119 of 150 (142054)
09-13-2004 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by purpledawn
09-13-2004 9:18 AM


Re: Bump
actually, I don't see any evidence that that exodus happened at all.
I suspect that you are right, that the leviticus was written around the time of 2 kings (when, these 'old scrolls' were found in the temple.. which amazingly enough gave the current set of priests power as the spokemen from god).
Many of the restrictions appear to be what the religous ceremonies were for competing religions in that area. Amazing.. god give the exact restrictions so that people can participate in other religions ceremonies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by purpledawn, posted 09-13-2004 9:18 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by purpledawn, posted 09-13-2004 10:42 PM ramoss has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 120 of 150 (142237)
09-13-2004 10:42 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by ramoss
09-13-2004 1:02 PM


Re: Bump
Really flys in the face of
Deuteronomy 12:4
You must not worship the Lord your God in their way.
Pickin and choosin apparently not a new theme.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by ramoss, posted 09-13-2004 1:02 PM ramoss has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024