by SweetBabyCheezits 87 Replies latest jw friends
And yet, according to legend, we couldn't do otherwise if we tried.
We can't do otherwise without God.
The sin is our desire, our want, our pride and arrogance of trying to BE God, of trying to control and dominate each other, forcing our will on others.
Untill we come to the realization that without God we are "broken" and "incomplete", we will remain in "sin".
Oh you mean like Christians robbing, stealing, murdering, raping, lying and cheating on every continent they touched, now I get it.
Oh you mean like Christians robbing, stealing, murdering, raping, lying and cheating on every continent they touched, now I get it.
Exactly, just like that, the arrogance and pride of belieing that they somehow KNOW IT ALL, that they are THE TRUTH, the pride and arrogance that drove the chruch heirachy to commit horrific acts in "the name of God and Christ", that is the very thing that describes our fallen state and is a prime example of NOT ENOUGH Christ, not an example of TOO much Christ.
Well, I put on big boy pants for now, Tammy.
Thanks for the consideration, though.
Well, okay then :)
That's how God is said to have defined it... in the OT. Exodus 21:24, for example. Nvm. I forget that your concept of God kinda defies the OT description of him.
I think that's all they were capable of understanding at that time, yes. And allowances were made when they were too hard-hearted/headed to accept anything else. Allowances made by God, or by the people speaking for God? Jesus suggested Moses made those allowances for the people.
But this is way off tangent and I merely wished to show that there are different forms of justice that we have had, and that we may have in the future.
So why not just forgive? Why does forgiveness have to be based on a blood sacrifice? Why not show mercy without the drama?
I don't think forgiveness had to be based on a blood sacrifice; simply on putting our faith and trust in Christ. Perhaps we needed the connection to sacrifice in order to understand. Perhaps, as Christ said, it had to happen in the way that it was written in the scriptures, so that everything written about him could be fulfilled.
But we needed Christ to show us the way to life and the Father; to show us Truth - which we weren't getting from religions. He showed us how we are meant to act. To forgive, even to the point of death. To remain loyal in our faith, even to death. To show that He trusted his Father 100%, to keep his word to His Son - and we can as well; that we can also trust him to do as he said.
Why wasn't it just this way from the start, with God just forgiving us and covering our weaknesses?
I'm not sure. Perhaps people were unwilling to listen, or to trust him? Perhaps they did not want to repent or ask forgiveness; perhaps they had too much pride or anger or stubbornness. Perhaps they wanted to do things on their own according to their own desires, and every step brought them farther and farther away from the true God. (as opposed to all their idols and made-up gods) So they had to deal with things on their own, just as they chose... until such a time as God determined.
Its the same with us and our children. We don't force them to do what we want, even when we know its best, even when we know that their choices are going to hurt or even kill them. We let them go their own way and often that means learning things the hard way. We welcome them with open arms when/if they return to us. But what if they don't know how to return to us? Someone needs to show them the way.
I can't help but wonder something: If I'd died from SIDS as a baby, maybe I'd be getting an everlasting reward right now... but, instead, according to popular opinion, if I die now I'm going to hell. Or, according to JWs, everlasting unconsciousness.
You know I don't believe any of that. I don't even think either is scriptural. Just popular opinion (man-made interpretations), and how often are those right? If you are going to allow
I would like to say that we cannot love our children or one another more than God does. We can, however, love our children and one another more than "man's limited definition of"God has shown.
Tammy
I don't think forgiveness had to be based on a blood sacrifice; simply on putting our faith and trust in Christ.
Why do nouveau Christians insist on re-writing the bible and the entire doctrine of redemption because they find it objectionable that their God demanded blood sacrifice in order to appease his wrath at the human race?
By his stripes we are healed. It HAD to be violent, it HAD to be blood, nothing else would do. I mean good grief the entire Jewish system of worship (instituted by God in the bible) involved blood sacrifice, and per scripture was just pointing to the ultimate blood sacrifice that was to come later.
Did you read the rest of what I said, superpunk? Can you also show me from the scriptures where it says that God wanted to be appeased through the bloody, violent, torturous death of his Son?
Tammy
Romans 3:25 25 whom God displayed publicly as ( A ) a propitiation ( B ) in His blood through faith This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the ( C ) forbearance of God He ( D ) passed over the sins previously committed;
1 John 4:10 10 In this is love, (A) not that we loved God, but that (B) He loved us and sent His Son to be (C) the propitiation for our sins.
1 John 2:2 2 and He Himself is (A) the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also (B) for those of the whole world.
Propitiation
Short Definition: a sin offering, covering
Definition: (a) a sin offering, by which the wrath of the deity shall be appeased; a means of propitiation, (b) the covering of the ark, which was sprinkled with the atoning blood on the Day of Atonement.
2435hilast?rion (a substantival adjective, derived from 2433/hiláskomai, "to propitiate") – the place of propitiation; the lid of the golden ark (the mercy-seat) where the blood of a vicarious lamb appeased God's wrath on sin.
ETA: Maybe he didn't want it, but he required it, didn't he? Is there a difference?
ETA: Maybe he didn't want it, but he required it, didn't he? Is there a difference?
No difference, I don't think. But did God require it, or did someone else - even us? There are other places in the bible that state that God does not want sacrifice. He wants mercy. We killed Christ; not God. God didn't ask anyone to kill Christ. But God did know it would happen. Knowing this, God still sent His Son to us (sacrificing him apart from himself... and knowing his son would make atonement by doing what we should be doing FOR US - which is remaining loyal and forgiving, showing mercy and love - thereby showing us what we are to do, and live.)
Tammy
Tammy,
Bear with me here, but that doesn't make any sense to me. Are you saying Jesus could have come here, shown us the way to live, not die, and we then could just follow Jesus' example and be right with God and forgiven?
Can you also show me from the scriptures where it says that God wanted to be appeased through the bloody, violent, torturous death of his Son?
Have you read Isaiah 53? Particularly the conclusion of Isaiah's rant?
10 Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [ c ] his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
11 After he has suffered,
he will see the light of life [ d ] and be satisfied [ e ] ;
by his knowledge [ f ] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.
Romans demonstrates the matter even more clearly, stating numerous times that the only way we as sinners can be saved from God's wrath (in his righteousness he cannot stand us) is by Christ's blood. By default he hates us all, considers us his enemy, and the only way he could stop hating us was through the bloody sacrifice of a human which is just about the only thing that gets him to stop being so damn cranky.
9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!
Propitiation is the appeasement of God's wrath - in this case through blood sacrifice, as God required. Trying to paint it as anything else is to re-write not only the dictionary, but the entirety of Christian tradition, which it seems nouveau-Christians, who invent their own doctrines and beliefs as they see fit, seem to have no problem with?
