Rational and civil debate between members of all religions and world views

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Reply to topic
Elijah John
First Post
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2016 12:29 pm  If Jesus died to "pay for our sins" Reply with quote

If Jesus' death was a sacrifice to "pay for our sins", why didn't Jesus present himself to the temple priests and say "I have come to offer myself as a sacrifice to pay for the sins of the world"?
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 21: Sat Jul 23, 2016 5:15 pm
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
Elijah John wrote:


Then along comes Paul and turns Jesus martyrdom into a human sacrifice.


Quote:
Isaiah 53:5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.
How do you interpret this verse? Who is he? Who is we/our?
Quote:

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(5) He was wounded . . .—Bruised. Both words refer to the death which crowned the sufferings of the Servant. That also was vicarious
....sums up Christian thought.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 22: Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:21 pm
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
Elijah John wrote:
If Jesus' death was a sacrifice to "pay for our sins", why didn't Jesus present himself to the temple priests and say "I have come to offer myself as a sacrifice to pay for the sins of the world"?

Quote:
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, . . . (Hebrews 2:9)

Jesus Christ was made to be "a little lower than the angels," exactly as man was created:

Quote:
What is man, that thou art mindful of him? ...For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, (Psalm 8:4-5)

And it is appointed unto men once to die:

Quote:
And it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: (Hebrews 9:27)

If it is appointed unto men once to die, then all mankind (including Jesus) die and our first death saves no one -- as it is simply a consequence of being born as men.

That is, every man is mortal and will die.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
MPG Recipient Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 23: Sun Jul 24, 2016 2:13 am
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post (1): Elijah John
Elijah John wrote:
You still have not refuted Micah 6.6-8


Quote:
Micah 6:6-8 Common EnglishBible (CEB)


6 With what should I approach the Lord
and bow down before God on high?
Should I come before him with entirely burned offerings,
with year-old calves?
7 Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams,
with many torrents of oil?
Should I give my oldest child for my crime;
the fruit of my body for the sin of my spirit?
8 He has told you, human one, what is good and
what the Lord requires from you:
to do justice, embrace faithful love, and walk humbly with your God.



QUESTION: Does Micah 6:6-8 indicate the Mosaic Law had been revoked and that as of the 6 century BCE animal sacrifices [burn offerings] were no longer a requirement for the Israelites?

Micah 6:6-8 (see above) is presented in a series of questions with an ultimate conclusion. The questions are in fact rhetorical in nature and serve the purpose of emphasising the concluding point, namely that God requires his people to display the noble qualities of love, justice, and to faithfully "walk wth God." Notice Micah does NOT conclude saying "so do not offer any more sacrifices, the Mosaic law has been revoked" he says that God requires his worshippers to display godly qualities. There is nothing in the verse that indicates that humility, love and justice are mutually exclusive to sacrifices, but conversely, the conclusion implies that lacking love, justice and humility can invalidate the most costly of sacrifices.

Quote:
To illustrate: As a mother that asks her child that just in from play "Are you going to eat that sandwhich with those dirty hands?" The mother is not actually prohibiting sandwhich eating, or indicating hand washing will henseforth replace eating, her question is highlighting what is important to have when eating that sandwhich (in this case a pair of clean hands).


Furthermore, we note taht all the questions are hyperbolic. A hyperbole is a type of metaphor that takes extreme examples, usually to emphasize a point. Micah's questions are all placed in the context of sacrifices but takes the most expensive sacrifices possible,in the numbers that few ordinary Israelites could possibly afford. The questions progress from something expensive (a young bull) to examples that few Israeltie could affort (a torrent - a small river - of oil) to end with an example of something that no Israelites was even asked for, his most valuable "possession" (the human sacfifice of his son). Was the POINT of this series of questions that it was wrong to make ANY sacrifices? If so, why did Micah choose such extreme examples? Or rather would it not be more reasonable to conclude that Micah was highlighting that the true value of worship lay in the underlying attitudes that should accompany that worship NOT that the religious law had henseforth been changed. In otherwords, its not the size or the expense of a sacrifice but that the most important thing in worship was a person's heart conditionNote the commentaries from bible scholars below.

Quote:
MacLaren's Expositions: "This is the Prophet’s answer to a question which he puts into the mouth of his hearers. They had the superstitious estimate of the worth of sacrifice, which conceives that the external offering is pleasing to God, and can satisfy for sin. Micah, like his great contemporary Isaiah, and the most of the prophets, wages war against that misconception of sacrifice, but does not thereby protest against its use.

Pulpit Commentary The prophet answers in his own person the questions in vers. 6 and 7, by showing the worthlessness of outward observances when the moral precepts and not observed.
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/micah/6-8.htm



CONCLUSION: Micah 6:6-8 is not making absolute statements of prohibition but rather is highlighting the relative importance of the attitutde and heart condition that must accompany worship, something which cannot be "bought" even with the most expensive sacrifices imaginable.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 24: Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:10 am
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
ttruscott wrote:



...and the positive truth He came to bring was that His death was for our atonement unto our perfection and was the perfect once and for all time fulfillment of the animal sacrifice system YHWH set in place.


No, no, ttruscott, you are making a virtue out of a vice. Accrediting humanity with sin and guilt is a negative. Telling folk they are bad is a negative.

Coming to say I am going to atone for the nastiness you did is a negative.

But I suppose some would shout "Hurrah!" on being told they are no longer sinners or guilty. They would, of course, be deceived, because things continued very much the same as they were.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 25: Sun Jul 24, 2016 6:27 am
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
[Replying to post 23 by JehovahsWitness]

Good answer, thoughtful and well supported. One that deserves a thoughtful rebuttal. (in the works.)

But let's go back to the OP...IF Jesus martyrdom was a "sacrifice to atone for our sins", then why didn't he present himself as such to the Temple priest, and allow himself to be slaughtered on the altar?

Answer, because Jesus' own native Judaism has no such provision for human sacrifice, never had.

Since humans sacrifice is such an abomination to YHVH, and detestable, then why would it be any different with Jesus, whom JW's acknowledge was completely human and not "God-incarnate"?

It is clear that Father YHVH loves his human Son Jesus, all the more reason to abhor the thought that he needed to be slain for the satisfaction of sin.

And again, the implication of YHVH God supposedly needing blood in order to forgive, implies that forgiveness is foreign to his nature. Forgiveness that needs to be bought with blood is not forgiveness at all.

That doctrine puts all the glory on the heroic Jesus, who appeases the bloodthirsty Father.

How can, how does that horrid doctrine inspire any love or devotion to the demanding Father? Seems to me if one loves the Father, one must hate the doctrine of vicarious atonement of Jesus.

In fact, the doctrine of blood appeasement is at odds with Jesus own portrayal of YHVH as a wise and loving, forgiving Father.

The Father (God) in the parable of the Prodigal Son needed no blood offering to embrace his contrite son.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 26: Sun Jul 24, 2016 7:54 am
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
Elijah John wrote:
IF Jesus martyrdom was a "sacrifice to atone for our sins", then why didn't he present himself as such to the Temple priest, and allow himself to be slaughtered on the altar?


EJ I already answered that question - because the whole Jewish system was a prophtic "Type" to the reality of the "antitype". In short we need to figure out what the High Priest did with the sacrifices and then figure out what the antitype of that is.

In what ways did the Temple system represent future features of True Worship?

Under the temple system the Israelites had to offer sacrifices for the redemtion of sin. The temple consisted of the outer courtyard, the temple building which was basically a rectangle box with the inner compartment divided off by a curtain. Behind the curtain was the Ark of the Covenent. The inner compartment (which was never seen by anyone but the high priest and that only once a year), was called the Holy of Holies.

Why did Jehovah require all this ceremony? What, if anything, did it represent and How did it point to future events?

The Temple based religious ceremonies existed to teach the israelites vital lessons so they could understand and identify the role of their coming messiah. Thanks to this system the Israelits should have understood that all humans were essentially sinful in nature. They already knew there would be an individual that would repair the damaged done by Adam in Eden and that blood (the sacrificial offering of a life) was intrinctly connected with redemption. They had all the pieces, they just needed someone to put all the pieces together. That person was the Messiah, Jesus Christ.

The temple itself was often refer to as the "house of God" so fittingly it represented heaven itself. Heaven is where God lives (Jesus later refered to his fathers abode, and likened it to a house with many rooms) The inner most sancturary where the Ark of the covenent would represent God's presence. Thus we can understand that no ordinary Israelite ever got to enter into that compartment, for all intense and purposes it was forever "invisible" to them. Who did get to see the "invisible" and why?

The only person that entered into the innermost part of the Temple was the High Priest. Once a year on Yom Kippor (the day of Atonement) he would enter with the blood of sacrifices to offer atonement for himself, the priests and the people ; the Priest would have to keep repeating this yearly because their was no sacrifice that had a high enough value to cover for the sins of the people for all time. What could this be trying to teach the Israelites?

The High Priest was the one chosen by God to carry in the value of the sacrifice. Thus Jesus fittingly is represente by that one (the High Priest). What is the blood value that would be presented to God (in the antitypical "most Holy")? The value of one sacrificed human life. Where were the animals slaughtered? Not in the temple but in the courtyard of the temple, if the temple represented heaven what would the courtyard represent? That would be outside heaven or a location that is not heaven ie, the earth itself; more particularly the small area of the earth that was intimately connected to pure worship, ie Jerusalem (compare Lk 13:33)

After his death and resurrection Jesus entered (returned) to heaven, into the very presence of his father and presented a job well done (the value of his own human life) as redemption for the antitypical "priesthood class" (144,000 future priestly kings) and the population in general (faithful mankind).

The High Priest acted as a mediator between the people and God. Jesus thus mediated between mankind and God to present the value of a sacrifice that would never have to be repeated.

CONCLUSION It is a mistake to reason that had Jesus' sacrifice been antitypical of the sacrifices of the Mosaic law, he would have had to present himseld to the High Priest. Jesus didn't have to present himself to the High Priest because Jesus WAS the High Priest (or rather He was appointed as the antitypical "High Priest"). All sacrifices were ultimately made to God and he (Jesus) presented the value of his sacrifice to God in the antytipical "Temple", heaven itself, 40 days after his death and resurrection. And that is the point of the law, the prophets, the Psalms and the entire bible.


Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:26 am; edited 1 time in total

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 27: Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:23 am
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
Elijah John wrote:

[Replying to post 23 by JehovahsWitness]

Good answer, thoughtful and well supported. One that deserves a thoughtful rebuttal. (in the works.)


Thanks. I've done Hosea and Micah, I'm having a busy weekend but if I can later I'll do 1 Samuel 15.22. If you have any other support texts on this subject of God prohibiting sacrifices, I'd appreciate you posting them, that way I can deal with them all in the same series of posts.

Peace out,

JW

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 28: Sun Jul 24, 2016 2:11 pm
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
[Replying to post 23 by JehovahsWitness]

You make an excellent case for your pov. Orthodoxy would agree with pretty much all or your points, and I agree that the prophtets, (including Jesus I would add) freely employed poetic and rhetorical devices such as hyperbole.

You say:

Quote:
Or rather would it not be more reasonable to conclude that Micah was highlighting that the true value of worship lay in the underlying attitudes that should accompany that worship NOT that the religious law had henseforth been changed. In otherwords, its not the size or the expense of a sacrifice but that the most important thing in worship was a person's heart condition


The condition of one's heart. The most important thing, important enough to render the sacrifices superfluous.

Yes, the sacrificial system still stood, at the time of the prophets .The revolution was broiling, but not yet boiling over. The prophets were taking rhetorical and spiritual pot shots, in a similar manner as the Zealots were using literal hit and run tactics and passive resistance in the face of Roman occupation.

I never meant to suggest that the Prophets had reached the point of overtly advocating revolution against the sacrificial system, that was a conclusion not yet realized. They too were perhaps unaware of the full implications of some of their own teachings. But the implications are there. That is how Judaism is able to stand today and ever since the of the destruction of the Temple. Non-bloody, means of atonement. Jews and primitive Christians believe in God's love and mercy, without benefit of blood theology.

But sometimes the Bible speaks more plainly, with verses such as:

Proverbs 14.6
Quote:
"by mercy and truth iniquity is purged, and by fear of YHVH men depart from evil."


Refrain: "Mercy and truth" The condition of one's heart. The most important thing, important enough to render the sacrifices superfluous.

And Hosea 14.2
Quote:
Take with you words, and turn to YHVH: Say unto him, take away all iniquity and recieve us graciously: so will we render the calves or our lips.


The condition of one's heart. The most important thing, important enough to render the sacrifices superfluous.

And Psalm 51.15-17
Quote:
O Lord, open thou my lips;
And my mouth shall show forth thy praise.
16
For thou delightest not in sacrifice; [a]else would I give it:
Thou hast no pleasure in burnt-offering.
17
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit:
A broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.


"A contrite and broken heart", The most important thing, important enough to render the sacrifices superfluous.

And sometimes the Prophets (I included King David and Solomon, as they speak prophetically sometimes) use the rhetorical devices of sarcasm, parody and irony to illustrate their point, and in fact, ridicule some long held beliefs: Psalm 50:9-15 American Standard Version (ASV)
Quote:
"I will take no bullock out of thy house,
Nor he-goats out of thy folds.
10
For every beast of the forest is mine,
And the cattle [a]upon a thousand hills.
11
I know all the birds of the mountains;
And the wild beasts of the field are mine.
12
If I were hungry, I would not tell thee;
For the world is mine, and the fulness thereof.
13
Will I eat the flesh of bulls,
Or drink the blood of goats?

14
Offer unto God the sacrifice of thanksgiving;
And pay thy vows unto the Most High


Thanksgiving is a condition of one's heart. The most important thing, important enough to render the sacrifices superfluous.

And consider Jeremiah 7.21-24:1
Quote:
Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel: Add your burnt-offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat ye flesh.(insert, satire, ridicule) 22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices 23 but this thing I commanded them, saying, Hearken unto my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and walk ye in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you. 24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in their own counsels and in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and [a]went backward, and not forward.


In other words, these "traditions of men" regarding blood atonement are, in effect, backsliding not progression. The Prophets exemplified Spiritual growth and devolpment (if folks don't like the word "evolution"), above and beyond Mosaic law.

And there is forgiveness and salvation with repentance and in the name of YHVH alone, consider Psalm 69.30-31
Quote:
American Standard Version (ASV)
30
I will praise the name of God with a song,
And will magnify him with thanksgiving.
31
And it will please Jehovah better than an ox,
Or a bullock that hath horns and hoofs.


and Psalm 79:9 American Standard Version (ASV):

Quote:
9
Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name;
And deliver us, and [a]forgive our sins, for thy name’s sake.



These are just a few examples, but there are others including Psalm 69.30-31, Psalm 40.6 and others. These passages focus on inner attitudes, conditions of the heart, which render sacrifice superfluous, at least by comparison.

And don't forget John (the Baptist) and Jesus, the Lord's prayer, the Beattitudes, and the Parables. Which teach that God is a forgiving Father, with no mention of the need for blood.

In fact, blood lust is contrary to YHVH God's nature. Bloodthirst is a characteristic of pagan deities.


Last edited by Elijah John on Sun Jul 24, 2016 4:43 pm; edited 3 times in total

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 29: Sun Jul 24, 2016 2:40 pm
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
JehovahsWitness wrote:

Elijah John wrote:
IF Jesus martyrdom was a "sacrifice to atone for our sins", then why didn't he present himself as such to the Temple priest, and allow himself to be slaughtered on the altar?


EJ I already answered that question - because the whole Jewish system was a prophtic "Type" to the reality of the "antitype". In short we need to figure out what the High Priest did with the sacrifices and then figure out what the antitype of that is.


Yeah, I remember, but not sure I understood. Perhaps because I am not clear what you mean by "antitype". Clarification please.


JehovahsWitness wrote:

Why did Jehovah require all this ceremony? What, if anything, did it represent and How did it point to future events?

The Temple based religious ceremonies existed to teach the israelites vital lessons so they could understand and identify the role of their coming messiah.


The Messiah had little if anything to do with Levitical law regarding sacrifices. The Messiah was always understood as a temporal not a Spiritual deliverer, not an atonement for sin in himself.

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Thanks to this system the Israelits should have understood that all humans were essentially sinful in nature.


That is a Pauline, and an Augustinian afterthought, revisionism, foreign to Judaism.

JehovahsWitness wrote:

Jesus didn't have to present himself to the High Priest because Jesus WAS the High Priest (or rather He was appointed as the antitypical "High Priest").


That is theological speculation made by the author of Hebrews and others. That notion cannot be tied to the historical Jesus.

JehovahsWitness wrote:
All sacrifices were ultimately made to God and he (Jesus) presented the value of his sacrifice to God in the antytipical "Temple", heaven itself, 40 days after his death and resurrection.


I don't think you have addressed how JW's reconcile the fact that Jesus was a human man, and the abomination of human sacrifice., In light of this dilemma, how can a good JW embrace Pauline blood theology?

JehovahsWitness wrote:


And that is the point of the law, the prophets, the Psalms and the entire bible.


Parts of the Epistles and Leviticus perhaps, but not of the prophets, the Psalms, the Wisdom writings, much of the Torah.

You have not demonstrated that the blood sacrificial system and "Jesus antitype" is the point of the "entire Bible".

The Bible is a collection of a people's sacred writing. If there is any one cohesive theme, it is that of the one, true Living God, YHVH, that runs through the Old and New Testaments. How He interacts with his Hebrew people and with the Nations in general. Universal, ethical monotheism.

It is not true that "Jesus is all over the Old Testament", despite the claims of Conventional Christianity.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 30: Sun Jul 24, 2016 7:06 pm
Reply
Re: If Jesus died to "pay for our sins"

Like this post
Elijah John wrote:

If Jesus' death was a sacrifice to "pay for our sins", . . .

Jesus' death is not what pays for anyone's sins.

Every human who ever lived, has or will die -- one hundred percent:

Quote:
And it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: (Hebrews 9:27)

If all of us are appointed to die, then one cannot die in place of another.

Once Jesus was born, He had no choice in whether or not He would die. It was assured!

He made that decision as the Word when He chose to be made flesh as a human.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version