It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Blood of Christ, the Blood of the Lamb.

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:56 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Theres quite a few passages in the OT that tell you that this "god" wants the blood of the innocent...

I think the earliest is in Leviticus...

There isn't ever an explanation for it... aside from the fact that said god wants blood...

Though if one puts certain passages together it all makes sense...

the life of a person is in the blood according to the OT... and said books also tell you... an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life

and sin = death

Thus one can trade their death with another death for salvation... which is complete nonsense

But then... this wasn't God in the OT





posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Blood is physical blood in every instance of its use in the Whole Bible.

including these verses.

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Heb 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [for us].
Heb 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
Re 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, [and] the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

let's enter God wants blood into our Bible search engine and see if what you say is true.

Search results: 0

Now let's try innocent blood

Search results: 19 let's look at them shall we

De 19:10 That innocent blood be not shed in thy land, which the LORD thy God giveth thee [for] an inheritance, and [so] blood be upon thee.
De 19:13 Thine eye shall not pity him, but thou shalt put away [the guilt of] innocent blood from Israel, that it may go well with thee.
De 21:8 Be merciful, O LORD, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel's charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them.
De 21:9 So shalt thou put away the [guilt of] innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do [that which is] right in the sight of the LORD.
1Sa 19:5 For he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the LORD wrought a great salvation for all Israel: thou sawest [it], and didst rejoice: wherefore then wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause?
1Ki 2:31 And the king said unto him, Do as he hath said, and fall upon him, and bury him; that thou mayest take away the innocent blood, which Joab shed, from me, and from the house of my father.
2Ki 21:16 Moreover Manasseh shed innocent blood very much, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another; beside his sin wherewith he made Judah to sin, in doing [that which was] evil in the sight of the LORD.
2Ki 24:4 And also for the innocent blood that he shed: for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; which the LORD would not pardon.
Ps 94:21 They gather themselves together against the soul of the righteous, and condemn the innocent blood.
Ps 106:38 And shed innocent blood, [even] the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood.
Pr 6:17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
Isa 59:7 Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts [are] thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction [are] in their paths.
Jer 7:6 [If] ye oppress not the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt:
Jer 22:3 Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.
Jer 22:17 But thine eyes and thine heart [are] not but for thy covetousness, and for to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, and for violence, to do [it].
Jer 26:15 But know ye for certain, that if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city, and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the LORD hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears.
Joe 3:19 Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence [against] the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land.
Jon 1:14 Wherefore they cried unto the LORD, and said, We beseech thee, O LORD, we beseech thee, let us not perish for this man's life, and lay not upon us innocent blood: for thou, O LORD, hast done as it pleased thee.
Mt 27:4 Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What [is that] to us? see thou [to that].
Sorry, not one of them is God asking for innocent blood. as a matter of fact all of these verses are about someone taking and shedding innocent blood and God condemns it.

It is far easier to just say something of an opinion about God and claim it is somewhere in the Bible than to actually prove it.

Before posting try searching your claims in the Bible. There are literally thousands of Bible programs out there both online and for your home home computer/laptop that you can get. The noble thing to do is search the scriptures to see if what is being taught is true.



edit on 5-6-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: TheOnlyAnswer
a reply to: Woodcarver

So you'd like quantifiable, repeatable, physical evidence of the transcendent, immaterial, eternal creator God of the Bible?

I mean, so would I, but do you think that's reasonable?


How about some simple evidence that the sacrificial blood of innocent animals appeased this God for centuries, until it didn't. And, then, this biblical God came down to earth himself, incarnate, to die a sacrificial, yet torturous and humiliating death, to appease himself, in order to redeem us with super human/god blood? But, we are redeemed, in this God's sight, only if we believe the ticket to heaven lies in the shedding of this certain man's innocent blood.


Seeing as you just re-asked the previous question, I'll refer you to my previous answer.
I get it. You have beef with the Bible and the God contained within it.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer

To a degree, you're right. But, my real beef is with those who assume that the biblical god is THE representation of the "God" that everyone is referring to whenever "God" is being discussed, and their reaction to those who disagree with that presumption and their predictable accusations of atheism, "hating God/spitting in God's face", arrogantly judging God, and all kinds of immorality in general.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer

To a degree, you're right. But, my real beef is with those who assume that the biblical god is THE representation of the "God" that everyone is referring to whenever "God" is being discussed, and their reaction to those who disagree with that presumption and their predictable accusations of atheism, "hating God/spitting in God's face", arrogantly judging God, and all kinds of immorality in general.



I don't know a single person who believes their world view is wrong. If they did so they would change it to the one they believed to be right.

Truth is exclusive. If one believes something to be true then it, necessarily, means that every competing view is wrong. That's true for the Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Atheist etc.

Sorry that you feel judged by Christians who lash out at those(you) who disagree with them. That's not representative of how Christ calls us to operate in this world. I do feel uncomfortable, embarrassed even, when fellow believers act in such a way. Just know that Christ is the mold the Christian tries to conform to, by the grace of God, but it's we sinful humans that are the ones in error, not Him. That leads to confrontation and even arrogance even from those who claim Christ.

Anyways, hope you're well.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer




I don't know a single person who believes their world view is wrong. If they did so they would change it to the one they believed to be right. Truth is exclusive. If one believes something to be true then it, necessarily, means that every competing view is wrong. That's true for the Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Atheist etc.


No it isn't. There are lots of people who will tell you that they are open to ideas, love intellectual discussions that challenge their precepts and/or are still developing their view of "what is spirituality".



Even Christians tune into lectures and Bible studies to widen their understanding of how to interpret the scriptures and how to apply "Christ" to their everyday life.



Just know that Christ is the mold the Christian tries to conform to, by the grace of God, but it's we sinful humans that are the ones in error, not Him.


It all depends on how the individual interprets "Christ's" teachings. For example, many Christians will quote Paul and claim his words to be "Christ's" teachings. They're not.

Then, you'll find Christians who say that Jesus's teaching don't apply to everyone, across the board. Or, Christians who claim that other Christians aren't really Christians, and so forth.

You'll find there are as many "justifications" for sinning in the Bible as you'll find in the Goldman/Sachs play book. History proves this.



edit on 5-6-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest


There was nothing redemptive flowing through His veins, it was His thinking that saved those of us who believe in Him, and it is His thinking that washes our souls if we keep it in our Hearts. Text

You have very good points in which I do agree but if I may would like to offer some of my understanding. I am not unteachable so if I venture off topic then please correct me.

A sin offering was instituted by the Creator not that the blood of the offering could erase sin but that the sacrifice would deprive the sinner of that portion of their wealth. Livestock was very precious to survival and a measure of wealth.

Naturally all life must eventually die and the life which has blood must be destroyed by bleeding the life force. When a sacrifice was offered, it was offered according to the wealth of the sinner. Those who had great wealth were deprived of a greater amount than those who had very little. But in all cases it was instituted to make the sinner aware of sin by taking away a portion of their riches.

Now unfortunately the Hebrew’s were just as savage as all other people and most all had the practice of drinking the blood of the sacrifice. Even today that practice is common in some cultures. I can remember as a youth that even in Britain there were some who still had a taste for blood pudding or kidney pie. This is more common than you might imagine. In order to curb this desire the Hebrews were forbidden to kill their own sacrifice and to even be tempted to lie to God and eat their sacrifice and drink the blood of that sacrifice. So it was ordered by the law of Moses that only a Levitical priestly member could take that sacrifice and destroy it upon the alter of fire. This settled the matter of the sinner ever drinking blood or the temptation of cheating God.

But the God of Abraham was not satisfied with this necessity at all. The Creator did not sanction blood for sin. He was not pleased with the blood of animals or fowl. It became too common and meaningless and eventually became a way of a money game with temple authorities becoming the profiteers. It simply lost its purpose. Blood was not the purpose to begin with but soon became the central theme for many.

Life is in the blood and it is a fact that once the blood has lost its purpose then life ceases. That isn’t even in the equation. The entire purpose of the preexisting Jesus was not to simply be born and bleed His blood and then you are forgiven of your sins. That is what most are taught but that is not true at all. Yes the scriptures say that He shed His blood for the remission of sin but not in the sense of what is being taught.

The Hebrews believed in a collective society. They believed that once you die your spirit enters Sheol. They also believed that the world would one day be destroyed and this terrified them as to what happens to them in Sheol when the world is destroyed. Would they then be destroyed also? Jesus came upon the scene and offered the solution. His purpose was to rescue those in Sheol by offering them a heavenly kingdom. He would deliver them from Sheol if they would turn away from sin without that need to sacrifice.

How could He do this? He would naturally have to give His life’s blood just the same as all terrestrial life has to do the same. But once He would do this He would then present this offer to those in Sheol and if those in Sheol accepted His death and resurrection as remission for sin, then those who accepted would be removed from Sheol and have salvation. Now naturally this offer was given to the living also so that when each would die they would circumvent Sheol and enter the heavenly kingdom. Thus we have his blood for remission of sin.

This purpose of the Christ Jesus as the Word of God became so Romanized and polluted that it does not even resemble the teaching of the original Nazarenes of Jesus and brother James. It retained that false teaching of the temple money changers and exists today in almost all denominations of Christianity as well as other religions. But the entire purpose of Jesus was to present His New Jerusalem as His kingdom of heaven to His creation. Most are not even aware that Jesus as the Word was our Creator and as our Creator entered His own creation and gave His blood for the remission of sin. But only on the condition that we repent and not as a blanket such as was in the Mosaic convention. He gave us an escape from destruction by shedding His blood.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

You don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. I'm not saying keep your head in the sand, or not listen to competing views, or challenge your worldview. I'm saying that every individual has a view of the world they believe to be right. And until there is a reason to change it or they are convinced to change it they will believe their view to be truth. They will not live in a contradiction. I love to challenge my worldview, it doesn't mean I believe it wrong.

I was an Atheist. I believe in a naturalistic cause to the Universe. It wasn't until I challenged that worldview did I see errors in my thinking. Then, working through issues(and by God's Grace) did I come into Christianity.

The Dalai Lama believes his Buddhist path to be Truth. He does not believe it be be false. His 'if' qualifier does not mean that he doesn't believe his current worldview to be untrue.

There are a lot of people that seem to have an anthropocentric view of spirituality/reality. What do 'I' think, how do 'I' define spirituality. This can lead to as many views of reality as there are people and really doesn't get a person closer to Truth.

I can only speak as a believer in Christ but I think the wiser position would be to say 'if' there is a God what does that God say about reality, spirituality, morality, existence. Start from that position as opposed to Human first approach.

Your last three paragraph basically took issue with Christian infighting regarding the Bible and doctrine. This again goes back to what I was saying previously about us just being sinful humans. It bleeds into everything.

Respectfully.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer




I can only speak as a believer in Christ but I think the wiser position would be to say 'if' there is a God what does that God say about reality, spirituality, morality, existence. Start from that position as opposed to Human first approach.


I agree, but going to your original post, to which I replied;



a reply to: Woodcarver:
So you'd like quantifiable, repeatable, physical evidence of the transcendent, immaterial, eternal creator God of the Bible?


This is my beef, as you put it.

You are assuming that the biblical god is the deity that defines and embodies that transcendent, immaterial, eternal creator God. Based on the biblical characterization of that Old Testament deity, I couldn't disagree more the such a alignment! Add to that his supposed incarnation for the purpose of being a final human sacrifice of blood, unto himself, for our shortcoming to his standards, and any understanding of "god" just spirals further and further away from us.


edit on 5-6-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer




I can only speak as a believer in Christ but I think the wiser position would be to say 'if' there is a God what does that God say about reality, spirituality, morality, existence. Start from that position as opposed to Human first approach.


I agree, but going to your original post, to which I replied;



a reply to: Woodcarver:
So you'd like quantifiable, repeatable, physical evidence of the transcendent, immaterial, eternal creator God of the Bible?


This is my beef, as you put it.

You are assuming that the biblical god is the deity that defines and embodies that transcendent, immaterial, eternal creator God. Based on the biblical characterization of that Old Testament deity, I couldn't disagree more the such a alignment! Add to that his supposed incarnation for the purpose of being a final human sacrifice of blood, unto himself, for our shortcoming to his standards, and any understanding of "god" just spirals further and further away from us.



Of course. I believe Jesus to be the truth. I believe the Bible to be his inspired Word to human beings. It's not an assumption or a belief I came to in ignorance but came to after careful consideration of all the information I had available to me.

It's ok if you disagree or take issue with the God presented in the Old Testament.

I don't understand what you're getting at. I was replying to another poster who wanted physical proof of a transcendent, immaterial, eternal being. On top of that He implied(or maybe I inferred) that he'd like that evidence to prove the Judeo-Christian God of the Bible. That doesn't make sense to me. I think it would be great if it could exist(I don't believe it ever will) but it's lack of physical evidence, in no way, causes me issue.

Can I ask you a question? What do you believe about the nature of our reality? Who we are, why we're here, meaning, morality etc. Do you have beliefs? What are they? Do you believe them to be true?

I ask in all respect and with a genuine curiosity about you.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


It is far easier to just say something of an opinion about God and claim it is somewhere in the Bible than to actually prove it.

Before posting try searching your claims in the Bible. There are literally thousands of Bible programs out there both online and for your home home computer/laptop that you can get. The noble thing to do is search the scriptures to see if what is being taught is true.



So i guess a lamb isn't an innocent creature...

Placing one's "sins" on a lamb and spilling its blood isn't in the bible... anywhere

Not to mention the rest of the animals that were killed for various reasons.




posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Please tell me how my sin was forgiven by the blood of the lamb. What changed or what are the nuts and bolts of it, how does it work and how does it apply now to me 2000 yrs. later. a reply to: BELIEVERpriest



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer



Can I ask you a question? What do you believe about the nature of our reality?


I believe that we are all spiritual beings having a physical experience, and that the story of Jesus is allegory and meant to speak to the human condition and experience. We all leave the unity of god's side to enter into this temporary physical reality, where death is a guarantee. Afterwards we return to source, reevaluate and re calibrate and then carry on.



Do you believe them to be true?


It works for me.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer



Can I ask you a question? What do you believe about the nature of our reality?


I believe that we are all spiritual beings having a physical experience, and that the story of Jesus is allegory and meant to speak to the human condition and experience. We all leave the unity of god's side to enter into this temporary physical reality, where death is a guarantee. Afterwards we return to source, reevaluate and re calibrate and then carry on.



Do you believe them to be true?


It works for me.



In your world view, who created matter? Who created the spiritual aspect of our being? Was it created at all or was it a by product of time+matter+chance?

In your world view is there objective morality? Good and evil, right and wrong and if so how do you define it? Where does that definition come from?

You use the word 'source' which I'm very familiar with regarding a lot of 'new age'(old age) thought. Where did you get your definition of source? Do you trust the 'source' of the definition?

Are your beliefs something you formulated for yourself or were they from outside yourself. If from inside yourself how can you trust them to be Truth?

Are we individuals when we return to 'source' or are we source?

Regardless of the fact that I disagree, I'm glad it works for you. Atheism worked for me too, until it didn't.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon
1) you are trying to understand this with the mind of a man

2) the death of the sacrifice was the substitutionary death for the one who had sinned. If he did it not he would have to bear the cost himself.

3) the blood had to be sprinkled on the Mercy seat in order for it to have an effect for the one sacrificing.

4) no where in the Bible does it say that animals are innocent. You are probably a PETA member, that is why you try to impose a human quality to an animal. Animals have no concept of innocence and guilty. Unless trained they don't know any wrong or right.

But God required the death of an animal if it had killed a man, and he also said if a man kills a man he is to have his life taken.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer




In your world view, who created matter? Who created the spiritual aspect of our being? Was it created at all or was it a by product of time+matter+chance?


To put it simply, because this thread isn't about me,....WE did. WE are the Ain Soph. We are the "WE" as in let "US" create....

I believe that god is the culmination of all that naturally arises from the universe. All that is matter is "god's" body and that is conscious is "god's" mind.



Are your beliefs something you formulated for yourself or were they from outside yourself. If from inside yourself how can you trust them to be Truth?


My "beliefs" are formulated in the same manner as any other rational person, through personal experience and critical thinking.

When I was little, I remember having a headache, and being incredulous how my mother could NOT have a headache too. I thought the whole world must have the same headache that I was experiencing! It was a harsh reality to find out that I was alone with my headache.

Around the same time, my mother told me "This color is blue." I was incredulous. I asked her how I could be sure that what I was seeing was the same thing that she was seeing, that what was blue to me was actually blue to her too. She told me that it didn't matter if we all see something different inside our head when we see blue, as long as we all agree that "this" is called "blue". If someone tells you its red, then you should worry, she told me.

Christianity looks blue to me, but Christians keep telling me it's red! I have to trust my mother's advice and my own reality in this case.




posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

You're correct, this thread isn't about you.
Apologies to the OP.

I won't continue in this manner, in this thread. But I encourage you to keep thinking.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

God required a lot more killing of animals than just ones who killed a human.

Animals were killed by the thousands at times to please God.

And animals are innocent because they don't know good and evil. They are exempt, innocent.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Szarah

Christians believe the body goes to heaven... Or they're given a new physical body

So according to him he does have blood still



So who said no flesh can enter heaven? I'm pretty sure that even Enoch was "translated" to heaven into the angel Metatron. And that sex is neutral because we we be like angels.


I can't cite the passages off hand but I am pretty sure no flesh can enter heaven is a teaching in the Bible.

Not that that makes your statement incorrect as the Bible has little to do with what Christians believe in many cases.




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join