Why were none of the previous sacrifices to God sufficient?

[Wootah]

What was special about Jesus's sacrifice and in contrast why were none of the previous sacrifices to God sufficient?

Also was Jesus perfect?

[JehovahsWitness]

Matthew 4:17
17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. [Was it at hand? NOPE!]

[Was it at hand? YEP!]

Mark 1:15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. [Was god's kingdom near? HARDLY!]

[Was god's kingdom near? ABSOLUTELY!]

Jesus got it all wrong: The kingdom of heaven was not at hand.

Jesus got it all right : The kingdom of heaven was at hand.



JW

[Miles]

[Replying to Miles in post #13]

But when you phrased your answer to Wootah's question: "Also was Jesus perfect? "

as "Scripturally, yes Jesus was perfect; ie. a sinless human being." it implies that the word "perfect" as used in scripture means "sinless" ["perfect; that is, sinless"].

All well and good, perhaps.

But the definitions you gave were from a dictionary, rather than being of 'the word "perfect" as used in scripture'.

Therefore I will now quote two sources that explain the meaning and usage of the Greek word often translated "perfect", in the New Testament.

Strong's Concordance

teleios: having reached its end, i.e. complete, by ext. perfect
Original Word: τέλειος, α, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: teleios
Phonetic Spelling: (tel'-i-os)
Definition: having reached its end, complete, perfect
Usage: perfect, (a) complete in all its parts, (b) full grown, of full age, (c) specially of the completeness of Christian character.

HELPS Word-studies

Cognate: 5046 téleios (an adjective, derived from 5056 /télos, "consummated goal") – mature (consummated) from going through the necessary stages to reach the end-goal, i.e. developed into a consummating completion by fulfilling the necessary process (spiritual journey). See 5056 (telos).

[This root (tel-) means "reaching the end (aim)." It is well-illustrated with the old pirate's telescope, unfolding (extending out) one stage at a time to function at full-strength (capacity effectiveness).]

As I've pointed out several times on DC&R, what is important in English language Bibles is what the current meaning of an English word is, and not its ancient derivation. After all, its an English speaking audience the Bible is addressing. Christians rely on the ability of a bible's scholars and translators to have gotten it right, and it would be extremely rare that any sniffing around in an ancient language by a lay Christian would produce a better translation than has already been made. So, it doesn't matter what the original meaning and usage of the Greek word for "perfect" was because its translation has already been done by professionals. And just as an FYI, taking less than five minutes of snooping around in Blue Letter Bible and using the accompanying Strong's Concordance I found three sources---there are likely several others as well---for the word that has been translated as "perfect" in the KJV Bible.

In some verses "perfect" is derived from H8552 תָּמִים (tamiym) a word meaning: entire (literally, figuratively or morally); also (as noun) integrity, truth:—without blemish, complete, full, perfect, sincerely (-ity), sound, without spot, undefiled, upright(-ly), whole.

In other verses "perfect" derives from H8003 שָׁלֵם (shalem) a word meaning: complete (literally or figuratively); especially friendly:—full, just, made ready, peaceable, perfect(-ed), quiet, Shalem (by mistake for a name), whole.

And in other verses yet "perfect" derives from H4357 מִכְלָה (miklah) a word meaning: completion (in plural concrete adverbial, wholly)

All of which means, we use contemporary definitions of an English bible's words, including "perfect."


.

[Miles]

I honestly don't understand how you can use Jesus' referencing the Kingdom as a mistake to indicate his imperfection.

Then I can only suggest you go back and reread my reasons.


.

[Miles]

Matthew 4:17
17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. [Was it at hand? NOPE!]

[Was it at hand? YEP!]

Mark 1:15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. [Was god's kingdom near? HARDLY!]

[Was god's kingdom near? ABSOLUTELY!]

Jesus got it all wrong: The kingdom of heaven was not at hand.

Jesus got it all right : The kingdom of heaven was at hand.

Then 1. when did it arrive? 2. What's its nature? And 3. what's your evidence?


.

[JehovahsWitness]

Matthew 4:17
17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. [Was it at hand? NOPE!]

Mark 1:15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. [Was god's kingdom near? HARDLY!]

....2. What's its nature? And 3. what's your evidence?

After you . You made the claim he was wrong first (citing as evidence the above). I presume you are able to offer more than one word explanation of your argumentation to support your case. And yes, it would indeed be helpful for you first to define your terms (kingdom of God/heaven).


Over to you,

JW

[Miles]

Matthew 4:17
17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. [Was it at hand? NOPE!]

Mark 1:15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. [Was god's kingdom near? HARDLY!]

....2. What's its nature? And 3. what's your evidence?

After you . You made the claim he was wrong first (citing as evidence the above). I presume you are able to offer more than one word explanation of your argumentation to support your case. And yes, it would indeed be helpful for you first to define your terms (kingdom of God/heaven).


Over to you,

JW

Okay.

In as much as "Kingdom of god/heaven" is pretty much a Christian term I'll have to defer to people with more expertise in Christianity and Judaism than myself to define it. Drawing on outside scholarly sources, Wikipedia says:

"The Kingdom of God (and its related form the Kingdom of Heaven in the Gospel of Matthew) is one of the key elements of the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament.[1][2] Drawing on Old Testament teachings, the Christian characterization of the relationship between God and humanity inherently involves the notion of the Kingship of God.[3][4] The Old Testament refers to "God the Judge of all" and the notion that all humans will eventually "be judged" is an essential element of Christian teachings.[5] Building on a number of New Testament passages, the Nicene Creed indicates that the task of judgment is assigned to Jesus.[5][6]

The New Testament is written against the backdrop of Second Temple Judaism. The view of the kingdom developed during that time included the restoration of Israel to a Davidic Kingdom and the intervention of God in history via the Danielic Son of Man. The coming of the kingdom of God involved God finally taking back the reins of history, which he had allowed to slacken as pagan Empires had ruled the nations. Most Jewish sources imagine a restoration of Israel and either a destruction of the nations or a gathering of the nations to obedience to the One True God. Jesus stands firmly in this tradition.

So, the Kingdom of God/Heaven is said to include:

1. The restoration of Israel to a Davidic Kingdom.
2. The intervention of God in history via the Danielic Son of Man.
3. God finally taking back the reins of history.
4. Either a destruction of the nations or a gathering of the nations to obedience to the One True God.

And as far as I know none or even part of this has happened, which makes Jesus mistaken in his pronouncements, and, in turn, not perfect. Simple as A, B, C.

HOWEVER! You say it has happened, so again I ask:

Then:

1. when did it arrive?
2. What do you think its nature is ? And
3. what's your evidence?

.

[JehovahsWitness]

So, the Kingdom of God/Heaven is said to include:

1. The restoration of Israel to a Davidic Kingdom.
2. The intervention of God in history via the Danielic Son of Man.
3. God finally taking back the reins of history.
4. Either a destruction of the nations or a gathering of the nations to obedience to the One True God.

And as far as I know none or even part of this has happened, which makes Jesus mistaken in his pronouncements, and, in turn, not perfect. Simple as A, B, C.

HOWEVER! You say it has happened, so again I ask:

Then:

1. when did it arrive?
2. What do you think its nature is ? And
3. what's your evidence?

.

I don't understand what you are saying could you boil all that down to a sentence?
I'm not asking what it INCLUDES but what it **is**

"The kingdom Jesus referred to was .... [ fill in the gap ] "

JW

[Miles]

I don't understand what you are saying could you boil all that down to a sentence?
I'm not asking what it INCLUDES but what it **is**

"The kingdom Jesus referred to was .... [ fill in the gap ] "

Sorry, but relating what it **IS** necessarily requires recounting what it consists of (includes).

So, according to the article "the kingdom Jesus referred to is to "consist of the restoration of Israel to a Davidic Kingdom and the intervention of God in history via the Danielic Son of Man. It will also consist of taking back the reins of history, which god had allowed to slacken as pagan Empires had ruled the nations. And there will be either a destruction of the nations or a gathering of the nations to obedience to the One True God.

Happen yet? Nope.

But in as much as you say it has already happened, again I ask:

1. when did it arrive?
2. What do you think its nature is ? And
3. what's your evidence?

.

[JehovahsWitness]

So, according to the article "the kingdom Jesus referred to is to "consist of the restoration of Israel to a Davidic Kingdom .

Well I don't agree he was talking about that at all. So I am not about to argue in defence of a position I do not hold (strawman). I do not believe Jesus was announcing the reestablishment if the Davidic Kingdom of Israel as an independent State.

Anything else?

JW

JOHN 18:36

Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world.

[Difflugia]

After you . You made the claim he was wrong first (citing as evidence the above). I presume you are able to offer more than one word explanation of your argumentation to support your case. And yes, it would indeed be helpful for you first to define your terms (kingdom of God/heaven).

I don't understand what you are saying could you boil all that down to a sentence?

I'm not asking what it INCLUDES but what it **is**

First it was too few words and now it's too many? I don't think what Miles wrote or meant in either of the posts is too opaque to effectively answer (if you have an effective answer, anyway), so why the weird specificity about how many words or sentences that express it?

Neither Matthew's narrator nor his Jesus fully explain what the Kingdom of Heaven is in the way that you're asking Miles to unless you're happy with what amounts to a tautology: the kingdom of heaven is the Earth and its population being ruled by God's avatar exactly as God Himself rules heaven.

Matthew's Jesus tells us what the Kingdom of Heaven won't be by giving examples that represent to Matthew inversions of divine order. The hypocrisy of the ruling class, that the unrepentent prosper, that demons afflict God's people with various hadships, and the success of those that ignore God and His law are all examples of things that exist now, but that will be violently and decisively banished when the Kingdom is made manifest.

So, which is it? Do you understand the Bible, Matthew, and Miles well enough to justify your dogmatic assertions that the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand when Matthew had Jesus claim it was and that it would be made manifest before certain events transpired? Or do you need further explanation of the most fundamental and central doctrine of Christ's Gospel according to Matthew?