Enoch, Elijah, Jesus and Psalm 91

reply to post by theophilus40

He asked that the cup would pass from only if it was God's will. He also ended his prayer by asking that God's will, not his, be done.

He asked that Gods will be done. And Psalm 91 suggests that it was Gods will that the cup would pass.

When he as arrested he refused to allow angels to rescue him because to do so would be to God against his fathers will.
Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?”
-Matthew 26:53-54 ESV

Jesus did not call on His father to send the legions of angels to rescue him. because Jesus had fully submitted to the will of God. If it was Gods will for him to be rescued, then God would have done so.

These sacrifices didn't actually take away sins. They were prophecies of what Jesus would do.

The sacrifices were not a prophecy of anything... they were just a part of the Israelites religious practice.

However, Christian theologians fabricate a connection between Jesus sin sacrifice and the Old testament sacrifices of the "unblemished animal". Jesus is seen as the perfect sacrifice.... despite the fact that the bible does NOT condone human sacrifice.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

These sacrifices didn't actually take away sins. They were prophecies of what Jesus would do.

The sacrifices were not a prophecy of anything... they were just a part of the Israelites religious practice.

Here is one of the commands about offering the Passover lamb.

It shall be eaten in one house; you shall not take any of the flesh outside the house, and you shall not break any of its bones.
(Exodus 12:46 ESV)

It is quoted in the account of the crucifixion.

So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe. For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken.”
(John 19:32-36 ESV)

reply to post by theophilus40

Here is one of the commands about offering the Passover lamb.

It shall be eaten in one house; you shall not take any of the flesh outside the house, and you shall not break any of its bones.
-Exodus 12:46

Those are all ritualistic instructions for eating the pashal lamb which the circumcized Israelites were expected to follow.

If you want to cling on to the idea that Jesus was like the paschal lamb, then go all the way.


An alien living among you who wants to celebrate the LORD's Passover must have all the males in his household circumcised; then he may take part like one born in the land. No uncircumcised male may eat of it.
-Exodus 12:48

Are you a circumcized jew?
If you are not, then don't associate Jesus with a ritual that demanded participants be circumcized.


Secondly, we see that the Paschal lamb rituals involved priests and special tools and utensils....

The killing took place in the court of the Temple at Jerusalem, and might be performed by a layman, although the blood had to be caught by a priest, and rows of priests with gold or silver cups in their hands stood in line from the Temple court to the altar, where the blood was sprinkled. These cups were rounded on the bottom, so that they could not be set down; for in that case the blood might coagulate. The priest who caught the blood as it dropped from the victim then handed the cup to the priest next to him, receiving from him an empty one, and the full cup was passed along the line until it reached the last priest, who sprinkled its contents on the altar. The lamb was then hung upon special hooks or sticks and skinned; but if the eve of the Passover fell on a Sabbath, the skin was removed down to the breast only. The abdomen was then cut open, and the fatty portions intended for the altar were taken out, placed in a vessel, salted, and offered by the priest on the altar, while the remaining entrails likewise were taken out and cleansed

(wiki)

However, Jesus' sacrifice however was carried out by brutal Roman executioners using carpenters tools. Does that sound like a sacrifice that God called for?

Also, I had made this chart for a different thread about the same subject.

For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken.”
-John 19:32-36

Did Jesus not have bones in his hands and feet?

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

However, Christian theologians fabricate a connection between Jesus sin sacrifice and the Old testament sacrifices of the "unblemished animal". Jesus is seen as the perfect sacrifice.... despite the fact that the bible does NOT condone human sacrifice.

Uh, we don't fabricate anything. John the Baptist is the one who claimed he'd take away the sins of the world. It's called symbolism. You'll never get the real message if you can't look deeper into what happened. We know our shepherd and we hear his voice.

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

It was John the Baptist, the last prophet of the old testament who made this distinction.

Sorry but, fail .

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Uh, we don't fabricate anything. John the Baptist is the one who claimed he'd take away the sins of the world. It's called symbolism. You'll never get the real message if you can't look deeper into what happened. We know our shepherd and we hear his voice.

"Taking away the sin of the world" does NOT necessarily mean a sin "sacrifice" carried out via a brutal Roman execution.

Jesus taught people to obey him and worship God.... and he taught people to stop sinning. Does this not mean he "took away" sin.

Also, if belief in Jesus sin sacrifice really took away the believers sin, why does Jesus reject many who would come to him calling him "Lord, Lord"? ....implying they can only be Christians, who believed Jesus died on the cross for their sins.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


just look at how much mumble jumble is used and how it makes christians all dreamy eyed and teary, yet when placed together it sounds conflicting and odd.
Jesus pbuh is the lamb, he is also the shepherd.
he is the king, he is also a servant who came to serve.
he is the son, he is also the father.
he is divine, he is also human.
he is sinless, yet he took sin of the whole world and became the most sinful person?? and paid the price on the cross?
If the lambs were working fine for jews, why God had to kill His son?? To save people or lambs? Jesus pbuh is then the saviour of lambs not humans, yet lambs are still killed for food, so it was all in vain.
Punishment for any sin is death, and anyone who believes in Son of God will not die. Yet christians die. and if that means eternal death then atheist would love it. Thats what they believe nothing after death.
And if it means hell, then why not say hell is punishment for sin not just death.
So if Jesus pbuh wants to save christians by taking their sins(alleged) then just dying is not enough, he should go to hell(God forgive me for this!) for the sins of the world.
Thats justice, otherwise just let people who dont believe in him as dying for their sins, taste death and put them in heaven after 3 days. Yaay!!!