Jesus most important sermon..

[Elijah John]

For debate:

1) Where in this most important sermon of Jesus, does he ever mention the supposed importance of believing in his impending sacrifice on the cross to "pay for" our sins in order to be saved?

2) If, as Paul suggests, believing in Jesus death on the cross as "payment for sins" is so important for one's salvation, why didn't Jesus teach this "most important doctrine," in his most important sermon?

[JehovahsWitness]

For debate:

1) Where in this most important sermon of Jesus, does he ever mention the supposed importance of believing in his impending sacrifice on the cross to "pay for" our sins in order to be saved?

2) If, as Paul suggests, believing in Jesus death on the cross as "payment for sins" is so important for one's salvation, why didn't Jesus teach this "most important doctrine," in his most important sermon?

#1. Jesus doesn't make any direct reference to his sacrificial death in the Sermon on the mount.

#2. I don't know for sure; possibly because his Sermon was for the general public and arguably his most important doctrinal teachings and prophecies were reserved for his intimate acquaintances (compare Matthew 13:10, 11)

JW

[Elijah John]

For debate:

1) Where in this most important sermon of Jesus, does he ever mention the supposed importance of believing in his impending sacrifice on the cross to "pay for" our sins in order to be saved?

2) If, as Paul suggests, believing in Jesus death on the cross as "payment for sins" is so important for one's salvation, why didn't Jesus teach this "most important doctrine," in his most important sermon?

#1. Jesus doesn't make any direct reference to his sacrificial death in the Sermon on the mount.

#2. I don't know for sure; possibly because his Sermon was for the general public and arguably his most important doctrinal teachings and prophecies were reserved for his intimate acquaintances (compare Matthew 13:10, 11)

JW

Or perhaps Jesus never taught vicarious blood atonement. That was Paul's baby. An afterthought and revisionism.

Which begs the question, do we really need Paul to interpret Jesus?

And whose teachings are more important, Paul's or Jesus'?

Perhaps subjects for another thead.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 3 by Elijah John]


Practically of the writers in the Christian bible make reference to the value of the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ (see below). Only by rejecting the substance of the entire Christian bible can one make an argument that the ransom sacrifice of Jesus is solely a teaching of the Apostle Paul.

MATTHEW 26:28
for this is my blood, which confirms the covenant between God and his people. It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many. NLT

MARK 14:24
He said to them, "This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.

LUKE 22:20
In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. NIV

1 JOHN 1:7
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.

1 PETER 1:18-19
For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.

REVELATION 7:14
And I said to him, My Lord, you know. And he said to me, “These are those who came from great suffering and they have purified their garments and whitened them in the blood of The Lamb. - Aramaic Bible in Plain English

*While neither James and Jude directly refer to the blood sacrifice of Jesus, both make reference to Jesus' key position in the lives of Christians

To learn more please go to other posts related to

SIN, THE RANSOM SACRIFICE and ... MEMORIAL OF CHRIST'S DEATH

[Peds nurse]

For debate:

1) Where in this most important sermon of Jesus, does he ever mention the supposed importance of believing in his impending sacrifice on the cross to "pay for" our sins in order to be saved?

Hello Mr. EJ!!

This was the beginning of the ministry of Jesus. Very little miracles were recorded at this time, so for Him to say that He was the son of God, and would die and be crucified, would have been difficult for the crowd to handle.

If you go to verse 21-23, Jesus mentions that He will be the judge and not everyone will enter the kingdom.

2) If, as Paul suggests, believing in Jesus death on the cross as "payment for sins" is so important for one's salvation, why didn't Jesus teach this "most important doctrine," in his most important sermon?

I think, that the entire ministry of Jesus was a sermon. His voice called all people to a God who loves them. In John 14, Jesus says that no one will come to the Father except through Him. He did make known who He was, and why He came.

[catnip]

For debate:

1) Where in this most important sermon of Jesus, does he ever mention the supposed importance of believing in his impending sacrifice on the cross to "pay for" our sins in order to be saved?

There is no particular reason why all his teachings that are necessary would be in the two great sermons, the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew or the Sermon on the Plain in Luke. What I see Jesus teaching is faith and how to attain eternal life beginning with the act of repenting of our sins, followed by Baptism and then how to keep his Commandments. That would be salvation, of course. When he healed people, he would tell them in various ways: "Your sins have been forgiven," and "Your faith has made you well." He didn't take credit for what he had done.

2) If, as Paul suggests, believing in Jesus death on the cross as "payment for sins" is so important for one's salvation, why didn't Jesus teach this "most important doctrine," in his most important sermon?

If that were all Paul taught, I would have a problem with it as well. But it isn't. He also taught obedience and that is neglected and taught against by some denominations. What I find interesting about what Paul taught--that is also mentioned in the Gospels--is that Jesus died for the sin of ALL mankind--not just those of faith. So, what is the difference between having our sin forgiven as a general gift to mankind and being righteous, becoming a Child of God, etc.? It isn't just lip service. We have to believe in our hearts--thus faith.

[dio9]

[Replying to catnip]

It is too bad because we have so pitiful little of what Jesus was teaching in the Gospels we are forced to distill his teaching into simply, do what is right and have absolute faith and trust in God. Basically love God and do what you will . How can one not feed the hungry care for the sick and cloth the naked if one loves. In such few words Jesus gave a universal teaching.

But he never said I came that I may be crucified as an atonement for your sin.

[catnip]

[Replying to catnip]

It is too bad because we have so pitiful little of what Jesus was teaching in the Gospels we are forced to distill his teaching into simply, do what is right and have absolute faith and trust in God. Basically love God and do what you will . How can one not feed the hungry care for the sick and cloth the naked if one loves. In such few words Jesus gave a universal teaching.

But he never said I came that I may be crucified as an atonement for your sin.

You are the only person who has reflected this same sentiment I feel when hold the Gospels close--that we have so little! We have four Gospels, of which a great deal is repeated among them and sum total of those pages amount to a mere 142 pages. So little.

I'm sure he would not have wasted his breath if what he was teaching was of no importance. You are right that he never said that. If I implied that, I'm sorry.

[Peds nurse]

[Replying to catnip]

It is too bad because we have so pitiful little of what Jesus was teaching in the Gospels we are forced to distill his teaching into simply, do what is right and have absolute faith and trust in God. Basically love God and do what you will . How can one not feed the hungry care for the sick and cloth the naked if one loves. In such few words Jesus gave a universal teaching.

But he never said I came that I may be crucified as an atonement for your sin.

You are the only person who has reflected this same sentiment I feel when hold the Gospels close--that we have so little! We have four Gospels, of which a great deal is repeated among them and sum total of those pages amount to a mere 142 pages. So little.

Hello, my sweet friend Catnip!

Your words are nothing short of beautiful. We have so little, that we hold so close. The Gospels may not be much, at least in length, but nonetheless, they are powerful, loving, and soul saving words. Through them, we get a glimpse of our eternity.

Blessings, my friend!

[Checkpoint]

For debate:

1) Where in this most important sermon of Jesus, does he ever mention the supposed importance of believing in his impending sacrifice on the cross to "pay for" our sins in order to be saved?

2) If, as Paul suggests, believing in Jesus death on the cross as "payment for sins" is so important for one's salvation, why didn't Jesus teach this "most important doctrine," in his most important sermon?

#1. Jesus doesn't make any direct reference to his sacrificial death in the Sermon on the mount.

#2. I don't know for sure; possibly because his Sermon was for the general public and arguably his most important doctrinal teachings and prophecies were reserved for his intimate acquaintances (compare Matthew 13:10, 11)

JW

Or perhaps Jesus never taught vicarious blood atonement. That was Paul's baby. An afterthought and revisionism.

Which begs the question, do we really need Paul to interpret Jesus?

And whose teachings are more important, Paul's or Jesus'?

Perhaps subjects for another thead.

Or perhaps you got it all wrong that "Jesus never taught vicarious blood atonement. That was Paul's baby. An afterthought and revisionism".

In addition to what JW posted, how about these?

Matthew 20;28

even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

1 Timothy 2:6

who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

Not an afterthought, not revisionism, not Paul's baby, not in competition, but directly from Jesus himself.