Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,783 Year: 4,040/9,624 Month: 911/974 Week: 238/286 Day: 45/109 Hour: 2/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Whole Jesus Thing
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 109 of 286 (157170)
11-08-2004 7:02 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Angel
11-08-2004 6:45 AM


Where?
quote:
Yaro,"Couldn't god just make everyone 'saved', why does he need to kill himself for it?"
Reply According to the Old Law, no He couldn't. There had to be a sacrifice (Jesus), so that His words would not be hipocritical. God isn't a liar, so thus to keep with the Old Law, (it is written so it shall be done) it had to be done.
Where in the OT is this stated?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Angel, posted 11-08-2004 6:45 AM Angel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by Angel, posted 11-09-2004 7:55 AM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 128 of 286 (157567)
11-09-2004 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by Yaro
11-08-2004 6:39 PM


Re: I proposed it before
Have you checked out the topic I started?
Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Yaro, posted 11-08-2004 6:39 PM Yaro has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 131 of 286 (157579)
11-09-2004 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by Angel
11-09-2004 7:55 AM


No Mention of Sacrifice
Hey Angel,
quote:
Yaro,"Couldn't god just make everyone 'saved', why does he need to kill himself for it?"
Reply According to the Old Law, no He couldn't. There had to be a sacrifice (Jesus), so that His words would not be hipocritical. God isn't a liar, so thus to keep with the Old Law, (it is written so it shall be done) it had to be done.
None of the verses you quoted in Message 129 mentions sacrifice.
The "Old Law" doesn't inlcude human sacrifice.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Angel, posted 11-09-2004 7:55 AM Angel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Angel, posted 11-09-2004 9:11 AM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 133 of 286 (157792)
11-09-2004 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Angel
11-09-2004 9:11 AM


Re: No Mention of Sacrifice
quote:
No, you are right, it doesn't. It doesn't say those words exactly. But it does say it. It explains, in detail, what is to happen.
Unfortunately the verses you quoted don't even allude to the idea of a sacrifice as described in the old law.
Isaiah 50:6 is past tense.
Isaiah 52:13-15 ...Just as there were many who were appalled at him; his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness... Also in past tense, plus anything marred is not suitable for sacrifice.
Isaiah 53 is past tense.
Zechariah 12 & 13 Getting rid of the imposed breaks 12 & 13 stay together.
12:3 On that day, when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will....
12:4 On that day I will strike every horse with panic...
12:6 On that day I will make the leaders of Judah like a firepot...
12:8 On that day the Lord will shield those who live in Jerusalem...
12:9 On that day I will set out to destroy all the nations that attack Jerusalem.
12:11 On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be great...
13:1 On that day a fountain will be opened to the house of David...
13:2 On that day, I will banish the names of the idols from the land...
13:4 On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his prophetic vision. He will not put on a prophet's garment of hair in order to deceive. He will say, "I am not a prophet. I am a farmer; the land has been my livelihood since my youth." If someone asks him, "What are these wounds on your body?" he will answer, "The wounds I was given at the house of my friends."
There is a lot more going on "On that day" than happened to Jesus. None of which is descriptive of a final sacrifice to atone for sin as done in the Law.
As far as the Psalms go, they are songs.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Angel, posted 11-09-2004 9:11 AM Angel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Angel, posted 11-10-2004 1:32 AM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 137 of 286 (157875)
11-10-2004 6:50 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by Angel
11-10-2004 1:32 AM


God Said So
In Message 108 you answered several questions from Yaro concerning the sacrifice that Jesus supposedly made for our sins. In the last answer:
Yaro,"Couldn't god just make everyone 'saved', why does he need to kill himself for it?"
Reply According to the Old Law, no He couldn't. There had to be a sacrifice (Jesus), so that His words would not be hipocritical. God isn't a liar, so thus to keep with the Old Law, (it is written so it shall be done) it had to be done.
You state that God could not have done without the sacrifice of a human to save everyone from sin because of what was said in the "Old Law." You have yet to show me where it is stated in the "Old Law." None of the verses you showed me in Message 129 are part of the "Old Law."
In Message 111 Yaro also asked where the sacrificial need for human blood was in the "Old Law."
And your answer in Message 123 is just that "God said so."
All I get is
quote:
If you honestly can't see where it fortells of it, then that is fine with me. I see it, and so do millions of others. I guess when/if the time is right, you will be able to see it too.
So at the right time, the words should read differently?
Of course I haven't had a Christian yet who could truly answer the question about where God shows the need for human sacrifice to cover sins. The supposed prophecies of a coming messiah don't prove a need for human sacrifice to make mankind right with God.
Christianity contends that Jesus was a necessary sacrifice to atone for the sins of mankind. Unfortunately they can't back up this claim.
Many Christians think of sacrifice, as you mentioned, as giving up oneself for loved ones. Which may be closer to the truth than the sacrifice for sins.
Jesus may have let himself be taken and crucified to save the Jewish community from Roman punishment.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Angel, posted 11-10-2004 1:32 AM Angel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Angel, posted 11-10-2004 12:43 PM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 154 of 286 (158158)
11-10-2004 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by Angel
11-10-2004 12:43 PM


Re: God Said So
quote:
I beg to differ, the Old Law consists of the entire Old Testament. I say this because there are laws (commandments) in each book. Jesus simply fulfilled the Old Law, therefore making a New Law.
The Law consists of the Mosaic Laws of the Jews and the Oral Law. It is not considered to be the entire Old Testament.
quote:
Have you ever read the Bible with an open mind
I have over 40 years of Christianity, Bible Study, and Church involvement under my belt. I do understand the reality of the Bible. I do read with an open mind.
Understanding the writings in the Bible as they were intended for the people they were written for, does not mean I am "against" the Bible. I don't, however, support religious dogma and tradition.
quote:
I accept your 'may' as your belief, in return you should except my 'may' as mine.
My may is a possible theory not a belief.
You obviously do not intend to clarify your vague answers.
So good luck on the forum.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Angel, posted 11-10-2004 12:43 PM Angel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Angel, posted 11-10-2004 9:34 PM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 188 of 286 (158327)
11-11-2004 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by Angel
11-10-2004 9:34 PM


Argue the Position, Not the Person
I made my points in Message 133. You did not address those points.
Angel writes:
If you honestly can't see where it fortells of it, then that is fine with me. I see it, and so do millions of others. I guess when/if the time is right, you will be able to see it too.
This type of reply does not backup your assertion. I understand that what you say is what you believe, but you should be able to show the basis of your belief so that others can see the point.
I see in Message 186 that you have addressed what you believe to be said in the verses you provided.
Now you need to address the points I made in Message 133.
If the verse reads in past tense, why do you see a future revelation?
Why do you see sacrifice in Isaiah 52:13 when none is mentioned?
Where I read appalled you read loathing.
I haven't read anywhere that Jesus was marred beyond human likeness, and yet you feel that the verse describes Jesus.
You state that most people hated Jesus and what he stood for and yet the Gospels mention large crowds that sought his teaching.
Isaiah 53:10 (NIV)
If he would render himself as a guilt offering, he will see his offspring, he will prolong his days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
Jesus had no offspring mentioned in the NT.
Where does the first part of chapter 52 fit into the future?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Angel, posted 11-10-2004 9:34 PM Angel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Angel, posted 11-11-2004 10:08 AM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 199 of 286 (158414)
11-11-2004 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by Angel
11-11-2004 10:08 AM


Re: Argue the Position, Not the Person
As I said before, your answers pretty much curtail any further discussion.
So since you have made your opinions known, I bid you good day.
Again, welcome to the forum, take care, and enjoy!
(BTW, I do mean what I say.)

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Angel, posted 11-11-2004 10:08 AM Angel has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 226 of 286 (159008)
11-13-2004 7:27 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by Lithodid-Man
11-12-2004 8:43 PM


Re: The Isaiahs must be turning in their graves....
So did David not understand God's laws when he wrote in Psalm 40 that he felt God did not desire or require sacrifice or offerings?
6 Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired; My ears You have opened; Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required.
or in Psalm 51
16 For You do not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it; You are not pleased with burnt offering.
Yes I read the chapters completely.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Lithodid-Man, posted 11-12-2004 8:43 PM Lithodid-Man has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by arachnophilia, posted 11-13-2004 7:53 AM purpledawn has replied
 Message 242 by Lithodid-Man, posted 11-13-2004 7:41 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 241 of 286 (159138)
11-13-2004 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by arachnophilia
11-13-2004 7:53 AM


Re: The Isaiahs must be turning in their graves....
quote:
i think it has more to do with a change in the religion.
A change which way?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by arachnophilia, posted 11-13-2004 7:53 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by arachnophilia, posted 11-14-2004 12:52 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 248 of 286 (159306)
11-14-2004 6:34 AM
Reply to: Message 247 by ramoss
11-14-2004 4:04 AM


Re: So what is the issue?
quote:
how does God forgive sin? What are the requirements for atonement?
Jesus even said:
Matthew 9:13
But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by ramoss, posted 11-14-2004 4:04 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by ramoss, posted 11-14-2004 9:19 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 270 of 286 (160429)
11-17-2004 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by jar
11-14-2004 5:02 PM


Speculation
Since we are speculating, here is another scenario for Jesus minus the magic.
We begin the story with an itinerant Jewish teacher, Jesus.
Just as he was taught by his teachers, he taught.
Mark 12:28-33
One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, Of all the commandments, which is the most important?
The most important one, answered Jesus, is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ (Deuteronomy 6:4-5) The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ (Leviticus 19:18) There is no commandment greater than these.
Well said, teacher, the man replied. You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Mark 1:14-15
After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God. The time has come, he said. The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!
The good news, as preached by Jesus, was about the coming of the Kingdom of God on Earth.
According to the history of the Jews, the Messiah was expected to inaugurate a physical Kingdom of God on Earth. Even in 52-60 CE (History of the Jews, by Paul Johnson) about 4,000 people waited on the Mount of Olives expecting the walls of Jerusalem to fall like Jericho’s.
Judaism, just as in Christianity, had several sects even then as they do today. The various disagreements Jesus had with the Pharisees etc. appear to be nothing more than differing views on dogma and tradition, just as we have today. As I understand it the Jewish tradition encourages questions and debating.
Before 175 BCE intellectual Jewish reformists wanted to improve Judaism.
Excerpt from History of the Jews:
They embarked on the first Biblical criticism: the Law, as now written, was not very old and certainly did not go back to Moses. They argued that the original laws were far more universalistic. ...The reformers did not want to abolish the Law completely but to purge it of those elements which forbade participation in Greek culturefor instance, the ban on nudity, which kept pious Jews out of the gymnasium and stadiumand reduce it to its ethical core, so universalizing it.
Judaism was struggling with change long before Jesus.
Back to the Kingdom of God on Earth. The anointed one would be considered the son of God just as David, who was also an anointed one, was considered the son of God. The Messiah was to regain David’s throne. This would not make Jesus a threat to the Jews, but it would make him a threat to the Romans. Excerpt from the History of Christianity by Kenneth Scott Latourette 1953:
Various views of the Messiah were held, but all agreed that he was the anointedfor that is what the word meanta king who was to reign under divine commission. In the periods of subjugation to foreign rulers the Messiah was anticipated as the deliverer from the alien and as one who would set up the ideal realm in which God’s will would be perfectly done.
Although all the Jews may not have had a problem with Roman rule, there were groups that did as evidenced by the uprising in 6 CE by Judas of Gamala and 44 CE by Theudas. The uprisings reached large scale in 66 CE and 135 CE.
Given the political climate of the time, when Jesus preached that the Kingdom of God is at hand, I can understand the unsettling thoughts of the Jewish leaders. This type of preaching could be seen by the Romans as a prelude to another uprising. Would the Romans come against the source of the threat or the entire Jewish community?
Jesus expected God to use his awesome power, as in the days of old, and bring about the Kingdom of God on Earth. When he was hanging on the cross, he realized it wasn’t going to happen.
Mark 15:34
At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" which is translated, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"
No sacrifice for the sins of mankind.
Only right behavior and forgiveness can cleanse you.
NOTE: The lack of magic does not detract from the rational moral teachings of Jesus, the OT, or the epistles.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by jar, posted 11-14-2004 5:02 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by arachnophilia, posted 11-17-2004 8:16 PM purpledawn has not replied
 Message 272 by dpardo, posted 11-18-2004 1:22 AM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 278 of 286 (161026)
11-18-2004 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by dpardo
11-18-2004 1:22 AM


Re: Speculation
My scenerio addresses the possible reality of the event.
He was a real man undergoing real trauma. Was he truly making a reference to a familiar song by David or expressing his own anguish of the moment?
Sometimes a pencil is just a pencil.
Separate the literary devices from possible reality.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by dpardo, posted 11-18-2004 1:22 AM dpardo 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