- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi brother Kerwin,
I have already brought out lot of arguments on Lev 17:11 stating that the subject was not atonement but forbidding eating of blood. God gave many different ways to atone for the sins of mankind including non-blood offerings. The view of the writer of Hebrews can not be agreed that only blood is required for sin atonemnt therefore Jesus' human blood atoned for. God never intended any human blood for the sin atonement except the blood of animals. You check for yourself. God hated human sacrifices in general like they do for Pagan gods.Adam,
Thank you for answering and I agree that the main topic of Leviticus 17:11 is about explaining to the people of Isreal-Judah why God chose to ban the eating of blood. God's explanation though is that the blood among other things was given to the Israelites to make atonement for their lives. You did not clearly make the point that he was speaking of the blood of animals and the blood of human beings in general was not given to the Isrealites to make atonement for their lives.
We know Jesus shed human blood on the cross but even though human blood was shed it was not a human sacrifice for a human's self-sacrifice is not what God banned when he banned human sacrifice, Deuteronomy 12:31. The best know example I know of self sacrifice in scripture is that of Samson which is commended though it was in a time that even the bible seems to say was without order.
In fact according to Jewish Law a sincere Jew is required to give his life in order to avoid sexual imorality, murder, and idolitry. Now Jesus gave his life in order to enable others to avoid these and other sins and so he would be mandated to do so because he was able to do so.
Quote (kerwin @ June 02 2010,22:12) Adam, Thank you for answering and I agree that the main topic of Leviticus 17:11 is about explaining to the people of Isreal-Judah why God chose to ban the eating of blood. God's explanation though is that the blood among other things was given to the Israelites to make atonement for their lives. You did not clearly make the point that he was speaking of the blood of animals and the blood of human beings in general was not given to the Isrealites to make atonement for their lives.
We know Jesus shed human blood on the cross but even though human blood was shed it was not a human sacrifice for a human's self-sacrifice is not what God banned when he banned human sacrifice, Deuteronomy 12:31. The best know example I know of self sacrifice in scripture is that of Samson which is commended though it was in a time that even the bible seems to say was without order.
In fact according to Jewish Law a sincere Jew is required to give his life in order to avoid sexual imorality, murder, and idolitry. Now Jesus gave his life in order to enable others to avoid these and other sins and so he would be mandated to do so because he was able to do so.
“””In fact according to Jewish Law a sincere Jew is required to give his life in order to avoid sexual immorality, murder, and idolatry. “””
I don't know of such a law, in fact suicide is murder, is it not?
Blood was shed to make atonement for their sins, not their lives.Hbr 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Hbr 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
Hbr 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
Christs sacrifice for our sins, did away with all other sacrifices.
Hbr 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Georg
George,
Jewish Law is the application of their interpretation of God's law to possible occurrences in life.
I believe I do understand their reasoning though as the penalty for the actions they state self sacrifice is not suicide for is death. Since God sentences you to death for these actions it follows that if you kill yourself to avoid doing them then you avoid doing evil and you would have died anyways.
I am not sure that Jesus would agree with these Jews on these particular points but Samson was commended for his self sacrifice and Jesus also sacrificed himself.
You fellow student,
Kerwin
Hi brother Kerwin,
Thanks for you responses above. But as I see your logics on self sacrifice seems to deviate from what the mainline Christianity believes on Jesus' death as atonement for sins of mankind but not for himself. As I have already told God never intended human blood for sin atonement since the context of Lev 17:11 was about forbidding of eating of blood of animals and not human blood. As brother Georg rightly told self sacrifice for avoiding unforeseen event is nothing but suicide which is a sin and not any atonement. Christianity interpreted Jesus' death as sole atonement for sins of mankind which is not according to Hebrew scriptures.Thanks and peace to you
AdamAdam,
I do not know about mainstream Christianity but scripture teaches that Jesus sacrificed himself for the sins of each of us, Ephesians 5:3, Hebrews 7:27, and Hebrews 9:26. It does not teach he was a human sacrifice.
As far as I can see calling Jesus' act of mercy a human sacrifice is just a way to call what is good, evil.
God stated he provided the blood of animals as atonement for the sins of the Hebrew people despite the fact he also banned all people, Jew or Gentile, from eating blood. In the same way if he declares the blood Jesus shed on the cross is good enough to atone for all those that choose to change their ways and obey all God commands through faith in his Son then it is so.
Quote (kerwin @ June 03 2010,16:29) Adam, I do not know about mainstream Christianity but scripture teaches that Jesus sacrificed himself for the sins of each of us, Ephesians 5:3, Hebrews 7:27, and Hebrews 9:26. It does not teach he was a human sacrifice.
As far as I can see calling Jesus' act of mercy a human sacrifice is just a way to call what is good, evil.
God stated he provided the blood of animals as atonement for the sins of the Hebrew people despite the fact he also banned all people, Jew or Gentile, from eating blood. In the same way if he declares the blood Jesus shed on the cross is good enough to atone for all those that choose to change their ways and obey all God commands through faith in his Son then it is so.
Again your intepretation is not according to mainline Christianity. The so called two letters you quoted from NT are forged letters of Paul are telling the same truth that Jesus blood was the atonement for sins which is nothing but human sacrifice instead of animal sacrifice. I believe NT writers are human beings like you and me who interpreted Jesus' death in those terms. It can not be taken as God's dictation to these writers. I don't agree with those writers who commit silly mistakes in quoting the Hebrew scriptures to prove their dogma like Matthew, Mark,John etc. What reliability you can find in such writings if they are from such human bias. They understood Jesus in their own community so they made these scriptures. If you want please read research material like that of Bart D Ehrman especially his books Misquoting Jesus, Jesus Interrupted etc. You will realize how much human are Christian scriptures they are not received as FAX copy from heaven as Don Brown rightly said.Adam,
You have no real evidence that either Ephesians or Hebrews are forged letters. At the best you have suspicians and I have my doubts they can be called reasonable.
In short we are examining the truth of scripture and I pointed out that those two letter do teach Jesus' action was one of self sacrifice and self sacrifice is a Jewis teaching based on their interpretation of scripture. In short teaching that Jesus sacrificed himself and that sacrifice was noble because it led to the sealing of the new covenant testified beforehand is consistent with scripture. It also happens to be consistent with Jewish law even as it stands today.
As for whether the writers of the New Testiment scripture were carried along by the Spirit of God the prove is in the message of their doctrine. If you are a believer then you know they were but if you are an unbeliever then you do not believe they were because you do not believe what God saids. That is a simple truth.
As for those you recomend, I simply do not have the time to look at what they wrote. I do know that I have read some of what those that doubt the accuracy of scripture state and it was pure nonsence merely demonstrating their lack of understanding.
If you have not caught on my primary concern is the message of the new covenant and thus how to obtain a righteousnes that is like God's. I consider that many of those whom call themselves teachers are prone to put obstacles in the way of that pursuit. It is only by the grace of God that I am able to avoid those obstacles.
Your fellow student,
Kerwin
Quote (kerwin @ June 03 2010,17:47) Adam, You have no real evidence that either Ephesians or Hebrews are forged letters. At the best you have suspicians and I have my doubts they can be called reasonable.
In short we are examining the truth of scripture and I pointed out that those two letter do teach Jesus' action was one of self sacrifice and self sacrifice is a Jewis teaching based on their interpretation of scripture. In short teaching that Jesus sacrificed himself and that sacrifice was noble because it led to the sealing of the new covenant testified beforehand is consistent with scripture. It also happens to be consistent with Jewish law even as it stands today.
As for whether the writers of the New Testiment scripture were carried along by the Spirit of God the prove is in the message of their doctrine. If you are a believer then you know they were but if you are an unbeliever then you do not believe they were because you do not believe what God saids. That is a simple truth.
As for those you recomend, I simply do not have the time to look at what they wrote. I do know that I have read some of what those that doubt the accuracy of scripture state and it was pure nonsence merely demonstrating their lack of understanding.
If you have not caught on my primary concern is the message of the new covenant and thus how to obtain a righteousnes that is like God's. I consider that many of those whom call themselves teachers are prone to put obstacles in the way of that pursuit. It is only by the grace of God that I am able to avoid those obstacles.
Your fellow student,
Kerwin
Most liberal scholars of New Testament theology believe that:Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Philemon, Galatians, Philippians and 1 Thessalonians were written by Paul.
Colossians may have been written by Paul.
2 Thessalonians and Ephesians probably were not.
1 and 2 Timothy and Titus were definitely pseudonymous (written by a unknown person, passing the writings off as Paul's.) They were written 35 to 85 years after Paul's death. Although such a writer would be considered a forger today, the practice was quite common in the 1st century CE, and was considered acceptable behavior.Fr. Raymond E. Brown, is a member of the Vatican's Roman Pontifical Biblical Commission, and was described by Time magazine as “probably the premier Catholic scripture scholar in the U.S.” 6 He has expressed his beliefs concerning the authorship of these epistles:
In his opinion, of the thirteen epistles which say that they were written by Paul, critical scholars have reached a near consensus that seven are Paul's: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Philippians, Philemon and Romans.
Agreement that he did not write: 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus is about 90%
Ephesians is about 80%
Colossians is about 60%
2 Thessalonians is a slight majority.He notes that the emphasis in Colossians and Ephesians is on ecclesiology — concern with the church itself as the body of Christ. This differs from epistles that are certain to have been written by Paul; the latter writings dealt largely with Christology; they focused on Jesus.
If you still believe them to be written by Paul it is purely your belief and nothing to do with God's authorization.
Peace to you
AdamAdam,
Do you know what a liberal scollar is? Another word is progressive or one biased toward change. That makes them unreliable witnesses since their desire is to alter God's word.
The other witness is a Roman Catholic. Have you ever checked what that sect's view of scripture is? They have had various beliefs but limited innerancy is probably the most common now which means that witness is also probably biased.
I fail to understand what reason for pointing out that Colossians and Ephesians seem to have different main topics than others as that does not tell you they have different authors but only that the author had different concerns when writting them.
So you present to me with witnesses that have a reason to distort the truth with no real evidence to support their claims and expect me to believe their claims.
All that is irrelevant since the bottom line does not change and that is the message of scripture is consistent and true.
Then there is nothing for you to argue here on Christianity simply to believe whatever it says in its wrings including the divinity of Jesus the man. Please gothrough this allegation;
http://www.ftarchives.net/foote/crimes/c4.htmAdam,
Our debate is over the correct interpretation of scriptures and thus is a tool used with God's direction for me and others to gain understanding.
Here is a quote from the entry for Mysticism as Wikipedia which Nick linked to that I find true of scripture.
Wikepedia entry for Mysticism reads:
Quote The mystic interprets the world through a different lens than is present in ordinary experience, which can prove to be a significant obstacle to those who research mystical teachings and paths. Much like poetry, the words of mystics are often idiosyncratic and esoteric, can seem confusing and opaque, simultaneously over-simplified and full of subtle meanings hidden from the unenlightened.
Jesus even tells us this. I happen to admit I am a student which means I do not believe I have yet been completely enlightened by God. I debate these issues in my search for a complete understanding of God's message of the new covenant and related doctrines.
We are to believe the true interpretation and our lack of understanding of parts of that message is evidence of a certain amount of unbelief. Unbelief is like a curtain and can be drawn back to reveal the total light that is God's truth in the Anointed One.
Looking to man and his false doctrines is not the answer as only God reveals his truth to those who hunger and thirst for righteousness. I believe I am one but the proof is in the pudding and God is the one who judges.
Your Fellow Student,
Kerwin
Quote (kerwin @ June 03 2010,20:47) Our debate is over the correct interpretation of scriptures and thus is a tool used with God's direction for me and others to gain understanding.
That is the paradox of every one who is debating in this forum but no one is correct why so?Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 03 2010,20:45) Hi GM,
Too much intellectualism is killing your faith.
Hi brother Nick,
I appreciate your concern on me. It is not intellectualism infact it is frustration on contradiction of our scriptures that is killing believers. Don't worry I take it lightly.Peace and love to you
AdamQuote (gollamudi @ June 03 2010,16:01) Quote (kerwin @ June 03 2010,20:47) Our debate is over the correct interpretation of scriptures and thus is a tool used with God's direction for me and others to gain understanding.
That is the paradox of every one who is debating in this forum but no one is correct why so?
We are lost and looking for a way out.We are students subject to error but neverless learning.
One of us is correct in all things.
We are lost and fellowing the teachings of man.
A combination of all or some of these.
or Other answers.
I do not see the paradox.
Examples of pious forgeries of NT:
Pious fraud in relation to the New Testament era and that of the early church refers to the practice of passing off a writing as that of someone else in order to give it added authority. People would choose the name of an authority such as an apostle in order to get their work have greater credibility. By definition, as the name suggests, such activity is by nature fraudulent . Since the early Christians were particularly careful about knowing who wrote what they made sure the correct titles were on all the works of the New Testament. In the second century AD a church officer was dismissed for passing off his otherwise orthodox work as that of the apostle Peter (who was of course dead by this time).Allegations of pious fraud have frequently been made against various works of the New Testament canon. Often this is done without consideration of all the facts in an attempt to cast doubt upon the work itself. It must be remembered that works were not accepted unless the author was known for certain and this uncertainty was one of the factors which delayed the acceptance of the Book of Revelation for a time.
Example of alleged Pious Frauds
THE BAPTISMAL FORGERYThe contradictory “baptismal formulas,” the simple “in the name of the Lord” of Peter in Acts, and the elaborated forgery of Matthew, “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” are sufficiently branded with falsity in the preceding paragraphs, and may be dismissed without further notice. This “Trinitarian Formula” is most palpably a late forgery, never uttered by Jesus Christ; for the Holy “Trinity” was not itself officially invented until the Council of Constantinople, in 381 A.D.
THE FORGED GOSPEL ENDINGS
“The conclusion of Mark (xvi, 9-20) is admittedly not genuine.
THE “WOMAN IN ADULTERY” FORGERY
The CE. has admitted that the so-called pericope adulterae, was regarded as spurious until the Council of Trent, in 1546, declared it divine truth;
THE “LORD'S PRAYER” FORGERY
As may be seen by mere comparison, the “Doxology” at the end of the Lord's Prayer in Matthew (vi, 13): “For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen,” is an interpolation into the original text, and is omitted as spurious by the Revised Version;
THE “UNKNOWN GOD” FORGERY
Paul's use of the pretended inscription on the statue on Mars' Hill, “To the Unknown God,” on which is based his famous harangue to the Athenians: “Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.” This omits the truth, for the whole inscription would have been fatal to his cause.
THE FORGED EPISTLES, ETC.
But the entire “Pauline group” is in the same forged class with Hebrews, says EB. after exhaustive consideration of the proofs, internal and external:
THE “EPISTLE OF PETER” FORGERIES
THE “GOD MANIFEST” FORGERY
THE “THREE HEAVENLY WITNESSES” FORGERY
Source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_Pious_Fraud_and_give_examples
Hi Adam:
These scriptures may interest you:
Quote Exodus 12:12For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD. 13And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt.
Quote 11:23By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months of his parents, because they saw he was a proper child; and they were not afraid of the king's commandment. 24By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
25Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
26Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.
27By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.
28Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them.
Quote Matthew 26:28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Quote John 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the worldQuote 23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. 23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Is there any questions?
Love in Christ,
MartyAdam,
Are you attempting to claim that someone inserted writing into the gospels that was not actually part of them. I am not going to disagree with that claim ads is true in some cases. I happen to know that some of what is written in our modern versions is questionable and that issue has been addressed in various threads on this board. I generally refer to them as transcribing errors if they prove to be false. I also know translators make mistakes. The goal is to filter out such errors and come to the truth.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
