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.
I would recommend, "From Genesis to Chronicles" by Gerhard Von Rad. This is one of the Genius type people in the study of the Old Testament but he has a writing style that does not bog down in the technical nuances but is more conversational to where it is very readable to the average person, but you know that he has a great knowledge behind what he is saying.
Oh, for a condensed version in English!
Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by Not Authorized
God has called some to literal scripture, you may be such a one. For as Jesus said, the Law and the Prophets will remain, so I say the whole Christian Bible will remain until heaven and earth pass away.
By their fruits they are known.
Please watch carefully, and keep yourself clear from evil fruits of neglecting the poor, or starting wars, or cutting people off from love, joy, or peace.
Watch closely for there are false teachers who claim to believe all that you believe and yet also teach hate and war and killing. Be careful, and only kill those who Jesus told to kill, which as far as I can tell was no one.
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
If eating bread and drinking wine(even unfermented for some) is participation in the flesh and blood of Christ, then shouldn't you consider some your fellow participant's in Christ even if they seem to be false? Just a question for consideration.
Yet he says himself clear as day that he desires not sacrifice, but to bring sinners to repentance. He is quoting Hosea 6. And Hosea 6 goes directly into this topic head on. He tells you plain as day he isn't about the sacrifice, he is about the understanding(required to bring sinners to repentance).
At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
But when the Pharisees saw [it], they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
But I say unto you, That in this place is [one] greater than the temple.
But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
1 "Come, let us return to the LORD.
He has torn us to pieces
but he will heal us;
he has injured us
but he will bind up our wounds."
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
I mean, if you want to liken the blood and flesh of Jesus into being the role of wisdom giving understanding, and him giving his life to others in this manner so they too can have that wisdom and understanding, then I can find agreement in that. And when you bring up the verses in reference to his blood and flesh etc and the eating of it, I'm pretty sure that is exactly what it symbolizes.
In the last super scene that was quoted, they are eating bread and drinking wine, and Jesus says that the bread is his flesh and the wine is his blood. He is making specific and direct mentions towards Proverbs 9, to say this is what these things represent.
But that isn't how it's being used by Christianity. Instead, it becomes all about the sacrifice instead of the understanding. The blood and flesh no longer represent the bread and wine, which represent wisdom giving people understanding as Jesus did etc.
Instead, it becomes end of the law, just believe in the sacrifice and you are saved, no matter what Jesus might have actually said.
"Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
"All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: "
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?
"When his disciples heard [it], they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?"
"But Jesus beheld [them], and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."
I showed you where the last super was in the OT.
I showed you the true meaning behind what he is saying there. I showed you how this understanding and wisdom he is given is needed to keep the commandments.
What more do you need?
Honestly, while I find the worshiping of the death of truth a bit backwards
it's really not that big of a deal if you believe that.
But, believe this - at the end of the day, you had better keep the commandments and keep them properly(means being like Jesus).
It's that the sacrifice is used as a way of telling people they are ok even if they don't keep the commandments that bugs me so much.
Also, we haven't even gotten into how the sacrifice could have not paid the price for sins because of the 2 births and 2
As if his death in the physical is to represent the price for sins, then it's still a price we all pay - otherwise nobody has ever believed.
And it is in this manner that he "saves people".
All those things mentioned can be true, but they aren't true in the context of Christianity.
Matthew 5
17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
S. 3:3-4: It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong). Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of Allah will suffer the severest penalty, and Allah is Exalted in Might, Lord of Retribution.
S. 5:46-47 And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil). Let the People of the Gospel judge by that which Allah hath revealed therein. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are evil-livers.
Originally posted by Not Authorized
Badmedia, You missed the entire point of what he was saying context of what Hosea 6, Matthew 4, Luke 2, and Matthew 12.
First we pointed out specifically that Christ was to die for our sins, being made a curse for us. This was not a Pauline Idea, Christ stated it himself and said that just like when Moses raised up the Serpent, he would be also. You claim it's idolatry, yet you demand we stick with Christ's words.
If it is, then we got a problem as that breaks one of the 10 commandments.
You can't have it both ways. Christ himself is condoning idolatry or he is not -- not us. Either your theology is wrong, or he was not Sinless. There is no two ways to this. Which is it? What did he mean by it?
Or shall we open the escape hatch and say this is a fraudulent text as it directly rebukes your theology and his sacrifice?
We tried to explain this, but you didn't hear us.
Your retort at this point, is to pulling up Hosea 6 and Luke 2 and Matthew 4 as your ultimate reference that he doesn't desire sacrifice. Therefore, since he desires not sacrifice, he can't be one, correct? That's the logic you are implying. As such with this logic, Christ really didn't mean he would be a sacrifice, or made sin for us when he quoted from the books of Moses or any other hints of his upcoming death.
John 3:16 directly refutes your standing. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
If we believe, what do we have?
John 14
10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
13And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Originally posted by Not Authorized
Actually it's a reference to the Order of Melchizedek, but I'm not even going to get into it here, as I don't think you would understand.
Your theology is 100% reversed here. The Flesh and Blood do not represent Bread and Wine as Wisdom, but Wisdom points to the Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ. Christ defined it as such, and so did your Proverbs 9 reference. If you hear Wisdom, you WILL come to his table, and eat his flesh, and drink his blood.
Wisdom made the bread and wine, but Wisdom is NOT the bread and wine. That bread and wine is specifically Christ's Body, and his Blood. In his Wisdom, God gives us his flesh and his blood so that we might live, as we cannot do it ourselves.
I figured you would have realized the commandments are not enough in Matthew 19. In verse 20 -
"Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
Remember, Jesus speaks to them only in Parables after Matthew 13 and this is in Matthew 19.
"All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: "
Why Parables?
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Answer: To conceal/hide the truth. Now lets move on.
Originally posted by Not Authorized
Jesus flat out dictates that this is impossible for men. But with God all things are possible. Only with his mercy is it as such, which goes back to your Hosea 6 quotation. If you have his mercy, then you will pass through that Camel's eye, as God can make it as wide as he wants.
Peter drives this nail home in verse 27. Peter denied the Christ 3 Times, he was told to "get behind me Satan", and any number of instances where he certainly is in the flesh. Peter was about as far from the "perfection" that God requires -- yet he was saved.
Again, Wisdom points to Christ, not Christ pointing to Wisdom.
Christ himself said it was impossible as you being a man. Only with God all things are possible, you will never be perfect, you are condemned already. Are these also not his words?
You need to believe on Him and his mercy. That was the whole point of him coming to sinners.
The Cross was not a tragedy, it was a triumph.
Your Eternal destiny depends on it.
But, believe this - at the end of the day, you had better keep the commandments and keep them properly(means being like Jesus).
You have the law, you have the commandments, you need not anything else. Sounds like the very Pharisee's Christ rebuked.
You have your own righteousness, following the law. You don't need Christ to show mercy on you or any need for his righteousness.
I just need to walk the same path, and make myself my own Christ. My own god, me.
Which is a dangerous doctrine, and is not true Christianity. If a so called Christian sins willfully, habitability, with no remorse, he is in full bondage of sin, he was never saved. If i sin, i am struck with an awesome amount of guilt. We are free FROM sin, not free TO sin.
Honestly, it's a futile effort, as you will NEVER be satisfied with sin again. Any born again will tell you the same thing.
I don't love my neighbor as myself to save myself, I do it cause Christ died for me, and if I love him, then I will do it. Not so that I am saved, but because I am saved already and his laws are written on a new heart.
I KNOW, present tense, I have eternal life.
Interesting. You do realize that Christ, before he gave up the Ghost, said "tetelestai" not so much as it is finished, but more accurately describing a financial transaction that has taken place? IE, “Paid in full”, purchase made, payment received. Who is the purchase, and what was the payment?
You must be born again. You are born spiritually dead. And the Spirit makes you born again, not you, but by his sovereignty that he does so. The 2nd death, is later. Everyone is resurrected. Some unto life, others unto damnation. If you are unsaved, first you die physically, then you die the 2nd death at the resurrection.
In contrast, your methodology makes him a false prophet if he did not come to forgive sins. If your theology is correct, and Christ showed us the way, then no one is saved. Why? No ones followed his path. Name me one person but Christ that rose up on the 3rd day after they died, and is now living eternally on this Earth.
The manner in which he saves people is that the Father gives us to Him, and what the Father gives the Son will not lose, nor the Father. Salvation is his work, not yours.
Originally posted by badmedia
Yes he has a purpose, yes it needed to be done, yes he lays down his life for others. Yes he pays a huge price/ransom in an attempt to help and save people. But is it his life that saves, or is it his death is at issue here.
But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment:
Originally posted by Joecroft
reply to post by badmedia
So if the receiving the Holy Spirit, is helping us to keep the commandments, which I believe it does, then that means, Jesus death is just as important, as his life.
What do you think?
- JC
Originally posted by badmedia
Well, even if such was the case, then it is still a bit different than washing your sins away in blood isn't it?….
Originally posted by badmedia
When he says it is good for you. In the OT the word used is expedient. NIV uses good, NKJV uses advantage. He means that his going away is the quickest method for people to come to understanding. This I think is a bit different than the sacrifice.
Originally posted by Joecroft
This idea that Jesus death on the cross is a “free gift”, that forgives us of all of our sins, in one clean swoop, is actually in conflict with Jesus life and teachings. I mean why (and this is just one example) would Jesus tell people, they need to pray to the Father/God for the forgiveness of their sins, if they are already forgiven, by believing that Jesus did it all, in one act, on the cross…No, I don’t believe that is how it works.
Yes Jesus died for our sins and it is a “free gift” but only in the sense that his death brought us the “Holy Spirit”. The “Holy Spirit” convicts us of our sins and in this way, help’s us to keep the commandments.
Jesus death only helps us with our sins because it brought the “counselor”. Once you receive the “Holy Spirit” you are then connected back to the Father/God and are in a relationship with him, which is an on going life walk. The “Holy Spirit“ does not take away all the sins that you will ever do, in one go, because it’s an on going process with the Father/God.
John 16
25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.
When you say “come to understanding”, do you mean the understanding that death had no hold over Jesus, because of his death and resurrection?
Originally posted by badmedia
I see. I'm just not so sure the holy spirit is really a new thing, but maybe a new label. As in my experience the holy spirit is like the father in that it is beyond labels and such, but we as humans must use labels like it in order to speak.
Originally posted by badmedia
But I also see that described in the OT as well in like Proverbs 8. Where people are rewarded with riches - real riches of wisdom and understanding. Because it's those riches that the holy spirit brings. Someone who is poor in spirit does not have these riches. Someone who is rich in spirit does have them. And as I have mentioned before, someone who is poor in spirit is blessed because they have not had the chance to turn down the truth/holy spirit(and they will accept the truth when it comes to them).
Originally posted by badmedia
To come to understanding is about many things and everything. As odd as it may sound, understanding a few basic things in terms of who/what you are and in terms of reality will in itself lead to many other things becoming somewhat obvious - including why the physical death is not real, the 2 births and so forth.
But, as you come to understanding in terms of death and the resurrection, then not only will you see why death had no hold on Jesus, but also why death has no hold on you. When you understand, you will say and see for yourself why the physical death isn't real. And from that you can understand why Jesus says not to fear that which can kill the body, but only that which can kill the soul(real death). Because the death of the body/flesh is not the real death.
Originally posted by Joecroft
I should just point out that what I explained in my last post, is the only way I could make sense of Jesus dieing for sins and at the same time, not be in conflict with his life teachings.
Well, the Holy Spirit has always been around, it spoke to the men in the Old Testament, like the prophets, wise men and Holy men. Although throughout the Old Testament it is only received by a select few.
The arrival of Jesus on the other hand seems to change all that, because now anyone who believes through Jesus, can receive the Holy Spirit. The day of Pentecost where the Holy Spirit was poured out on believers, for example, was something that never happened prier to Jesus.
Yes, the Holy Spirit is not new, but it’s now accessible to anyone who believes in Jesus. Jesus does say that the Holy Spirit will testify to all truth, so yes the Holy Spirit will bring wisdom, knowledge and understanding.
Yes I agree with all of this, but I have been wondering about the “poor in spirit”. I’m not sure about this, so I’m just going to throw it out there. “Fatherless” seems pretty straight forward, meaning people who don’t know God, but I have been considering if the “poor in spirit”, is referring to people who believe in God but have not yet received Gods Holy Spirit or do not fully understand God, even though they are still blessed.
This is the first thing the Holy Spirit taught me, that death is not real and this was when I was just on the verge of believing in God. It was only much later I began to piece together the understanding of it. To use you number analogy, I was shown 2+2=4 (but try to imagine no one has ever seen 2+2=4 before). This was completely new too me, and yet somehow I believed it but without understanding, the understanding came about more slowly, later on.
Like you said “in itself lead to many other things becoming somewhat obvious”, which is absolutely true.
Originally posted by pthena
The question remains: If Paul was creating a religion for Gentiles, why does he include blood sacrifice of Jesus for forgiveness of sins? Wouldn't he have been better off just ignoring blood sacrifice? He could have, but he didn't. So he is still relevant to the blood sacrifice debate.