|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Junior Member (Idle past 6028 days) Posts: 21 From: Brownsburg, Indiana, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Old Laws Still Valid? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5953 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
jar writes: just man, Do you mean 'just becoming man' was a sacrifice in itself..or 'becoming just a man' and not being God at all anymore, was a sacrifice?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5953 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
arach writes: you'll find that many christian faiths are subconciously scared of the bible. there is a lot of stuff in it that is just plain difficult to rectify, especially with their particular subset of beliefs. many people lose their faith entirely when faced with the realities of the text. This is an irony which I have mentioned elsewhere, one which if there is a devil probably really makes him laugh.
as an atheist, i was perfectly ok. i have never looked to religion to answer questions, or provide hope, etc, like mahy do. i think this might be another issue with religion in general. people use it like a crutch. I hope I do not! I admit I would despair without faith, but let's just say that all men would despair without hope of some kind, and what they are hoping for varies; from success, to world peace, to eternal life, to love, to gay marriage. I dont so much need religion to answer questions about the life-here-after, as to give joy to my present day. Maybe that is a crutch, but a crutch is an implement to achieve a goal, and my faith is the goal itself...I don't know. This is pretty off-topic, so if I reply to your other post I will try to gear back there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
For GOD to become man, just a man, not divine, not supernatural, is IMHO the great sacrifice.
Man will die. When GOD became man in the person of Jesus he was sure to die. The sacrifice was not Jesus death, after all, two others were crucified the same time as Jesus and the same place and literally hundreds of others were likely crucified at the same time all over the Roman Empire. BUT... for GOD to become man, just man, human, messing his diapers, needing potty training, having to learn to walk, to talk, simply to stand, to know hot and cold, hunger and pain, joys and sorrows, to do all that just to set and example, to teach us, to show by example that that death is not final, THAT is the supreme sacrifice. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5953 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Ok yes...this was what I meant to reply to; message 48
arachnophilia writes: get that a lot. even in my hebrew class. i'm not even remotely jewish in terms of ethnicity. in beliefs, however... It can be hard, being stereotyped or identifying with something you aren't. I was raised in the Byzantine tradition, and I haven't an ounce of czech, slovak or ukraine in me. Byzantine churches are primarily first and second generation immigrants and have either a Ukrainian or a Czech bent (at least around here).
well, this i think is something caused by losing sight. "faith" and "works" are not mutually exclusive. in judaism, one follows the law because of their faith. it's not the law that save, in fact it's not anything that saves at all. it's just something that the faithful do out of reverence for god. This whole subject confuses me when it comes to apologetics. I don't think the two should be mutually exclusive, I don't think they can be mutually exclusive. The closest I come to getting the whole issue is that protestants view catholic rituals like Eucharist as part of the old law that is no longer required of men. I'm still thinking on how Luther's doctrine of 'justification by faith' works, but only because it is a recurring sticking point when I talk to other christians.
but it doesn't exactly fit. what did his death do that his life did not? what's blowing up, exactly? I think there are a few answers to this floating around in other posts. The life of Jesus includes his death, He would not have been man if He had not died, and becoming man was the sacrifice IMO. The real impact of Jesus is not wrapped up by His life or His death, but by His resurrection. If Jesus was a minor prophet His life was effectual enough to tell us a message from God. If he were a martyr who died for a cause His death would add further emphasis to His message. If He rose from the dead, well, death would have a whole new meaning. It is only when looking at the resurrection that we can understand the sacrifice. I think the thread has focused on Jesus as a human a bit much, and therefore we wonder what His death did that His life did not. But...if Jesus is God, His death gives us hope; it becomes symbolic of sin and suffering, personal and world-wide, and the promise of delivery from it. A man's death doesn't do this. I know that is more like preaching, and nothing new to you. It is the fundemental though, of all christianity. Thinking of Jesus in terms of a prophet alone doesn't answer the question rightly.
did isaiah come in vain? or jeremiah? or ezekiel? did they need to die? jesus didn't come in vain, but what was the point of his death? the problem is that there is no need to uphold the law, at penalty of death like the epistles seem to indicate Well, the prophets didn't 'come' in the way Jesus did. They were born of men and used by God. They needed to die, yes, because all men do. Jesus as a man had to die also. It is only after the resurrection that His life and His death took on the symbolism they have to His followers. Again, there is nothing significant about a prophet dying. God, yes. I am not sure if you followed my point with the prophets and the law.I said that if the prophets had not come and stirred up faith every now and again, it may have withered away so much so that no one would have expected or sought a messiah; the Jewish laws of passover and such were so vital in preserving the remembrance of God's promise. I believe that without the law and the prophets Jesus would have come in vain because none would understand any longer His purpose in the context of salvation. Here I guess we draw the line, because we differ on our beliefs about the messiah. Nemesis is much more qualified to discuss that...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5953 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
jar writes: for GOD to become man, just man, human, messing his diapers, needing potty training, having to learn to walk, to talk, simply to stand, to know hot and cold, hunger and pain, joys and sorrows, to do all that just to set and example, to teach us, to show by example that that death is not final, THAT is the supreme sacrifice. Ok, good, I agree with all of that. But! (I know it's rough) in the Trinity, God is just a man, in all of the ways you mentioned, even in death. And He's still God. I know, I know. We are making the same point anyway about the sacrifice part, just with a different theology.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
IMHO the difference is one of time. Before the Annunciation, Jesus was likely God.
After his birth he was but Human, totally, completely. After his Ascension He was God. BUT, while he was alive here on earth, he might well have believed in the resurrection and ascension, but like any other human he could not KNOW. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5953 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
yes, I can not convince you that a doctrine is true just because it exists. I can convince you that it takes the issues into account and spits out an incomprehensible answer...but the closest we can get to comprehension is that the divinity part was latent in Jesus or, His humanity could not tap into it or utilize it.
Still sounds like blasphemy so I'll back off that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4059 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
But none of those are related in anyway to Jesus death but rather to his life, his teachings. Again, that's only true if you don't believe Rom 7.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4059 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
I'm still thinking on how Luther's doctrine of 'justification by faith' works, but only because it is a recurring sticking point when I talk to other christians. I can imagine it's an issue. Luther's doctrine of justification by faith was brand new. You'll find nothing like it in early church history. In order to defend it, he called James an epistle of straw with nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it and picked and chose what he agreed with in the New Testament. The result of his teaching was a church that really had no positive fruit in the way of changed lives. There's really nothing about Martin Luther to indicate that what he taught is Scriptural or blessed by God. Yet it's so widely accepted that in evangelical circles it is less heretical to disagree with the Bible than to disagree with Martin Luther. Martin Luther's version of justification by faith is nonsense with no foundation in church history. It's as ineffective at changing lives today, for the most part, as it was in Luther's day. Edited by truthlover, : correct spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I disagree.
I would say that regardless of what is in Roman 7, the things you mentioned:
What's blowing up is people & society. Christ has a better way for people to live: where conflict between teenagers and their parents is not the norm; where every third death among young people is not suicide; where people don't have to turn their hat sideways and drop to eye level with the dashboard in the driver's seat to feel good about themselves. are NOT related to Jesus death but rather his life. You said specifically "Christ has a better way for people to live:". Christ has a better way for people to live. The lessons were in how Jesus lived, what Jesus taught us, not get yourself crucified. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4059 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
If Christ's death is tied to our ability to live following Christ's example, then all the things I said completely hinge on his death.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If Christ's death is tied to our ability to live following Christ's example, then all the things I said completely hinge on his death. But what example do we follow? What is it about Christ's death that ties it to how we behave? Christianity is about living. But what type life should we live? Isn't it the life that Jesus lived? Why did he spend all those years as a teacher? If it is his death, then why not just get born, get crucified, job done and back to the BBQ? The reason I am belaboring this point is that IMHO all too often the lessons of Jesus Life get ignored by those proclaiming to be Christians. I believe that the message was that we, individually, are responsible for our behavior. We are expected to try to do what is right, to try NOT to do what is wrong and, when we fail, we are to honestly evaluate our lives, acknowledge those failings and try to do better in the future. We are not simply to try to live to some laws, but rather to what is moral, what is right. These are lessons from his life. Even if he had lived to old age and died smiling in bed, those lessons would still be the goal. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4059 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
The reason I am belaboring this point is that IMHO all too often the lessons of Jesus Life get ignored by those proclaiming to be Christians. I believe that the message was that we, individually, are responsible for our behavior. Well, we (here at Rose Creek Village) don't ignore the lessons of Jesus' life, and we believe that we are responsible for our behavior, even if many Christians don't. The reason I would belabor the point is that I think living up to the standard of Christ's life requires something more than good behavior. It requires grace, the power supplied by God's Spirit, and it allows the church to live supernaturally, not just morally. We believe the standard Jesus requires is a standard higher than that of the Pharisees. Obeying the Law of Christ requires a new wineskin, a real being born again. In whatever way, Jesus' death is the source of our deliverance from ourselves so that we, too, can walk in newness of life by his Spirit. It's a very large step beyond merely living morally or following his good examples. Edited by truthlover, : added parentheses and a little extra to distinguish "we" from Christians in general.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I'm not sure why we seem to be apart on this because I agree with so much of what you say. For example:
The reason I would belabor the point is that I think living up to the standard of Christ's life requires something more than good behavior. It requires grace, the power supplied by God's Spirit, and it allows the church to live supernaturally, not just morally. We believe the standard Jesus requires is a standard higher than that of the Pharisees. Obeying the Law of Christ requires a new wineskin, a real being born again. I agree totally with that.
In whatever way, Jesus' death is the source of our deliverance from ourselves so that we, too, can walk in newness of life by his Spirit. Okay, if that is YOUR source. I would say that Jesus' death was but another lesson, a inevitable consequence of being born and it is the totality of His life, teachings, death, resurrection and ascension that is what empowers me in my efforts. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2764 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
truthlover writes: Actually, Matt 5:17-19 pretty clearly states that Jesus came to change the law, even if he didn't come to abolish it. The part that says "I did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it," is literally to "bring it to fullness, expand it, or fill it up." ... There is another interpretation of the word "fulfil" having more to do with enforcement. And that, I think, would be in harmony with what you point out as being an even harsher interpretation of the law on Jesus' part. The ban on divorce, for example. As the American Heritage Dictionary has it, fulfill (AKA fulfil) may be defined in four ways:
quote:Most Christians seem to think the last is best in this case. Considering the breadth of possibility for alternative translation, it is surprising to note that most English versions word it like the old King James: "fulfill." According to the Blue Letter Bible, however, this word conveyed a variety of meanings which suggest a number of alternative English expressions including: "to execute;" (enforce?) Paul is often quoted in connection with this topic and I was rather surprised just yesterday upon discovering this tidbit from one of his speeches: quote: Additionally, I have noticed the following verses which use the word in the same sense I think Jesus does at Matthew 5:17. quote: And finally, this quote from Encarta: quote: Considering how the Christian community picks and chooses which parts of the law to embrace and which parts to deny, I think the subject deserves attention. But as to what Jesus meant by "fulfil," I can only see one realistic interpretation. Given that most believe he meant to "do away with" the law, then we should re-write the verse in question to read:
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to do away with." My personal opinion: that Jesus fully intended to be the best Jewish king ever. And Matthew chapter five reveals a forecast of Jewish law-and-order to come. Not a particularly attractive plank of his platform as far as I'm concerned but one which I think would appeal to a certain segment of any population.
The Letter to the Hebrews says that Jesus brought a new Law (7:12). Both Ezekiel and Jeremiah predict a time when the covenant with Israel would be changed. Here Paul opines that law should reflect the practices of government. He is arguing that the law should be changed to accomodate Jesus becoming a High Priest. This is not about Jesus bringing a "new law." This is about a proposed change of law to accommodate Jesus. BTW - Please give reference to the predictions you mentioned. Edited by doctrbill, : No reason given. Theology is the science of Dominion. - - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024