The true essence of the Bible—there is some problem with it?!
Your last paragraph is ground-breaking--very true. That means Jesus would also know this fact, hence Mathew 20:28 could never have been uttered by Jesus; and iterestingly in the next chapter he says he did not come to die for anyone (Mathew 21:33-39)
That's close but not exactly what I am saying.
While Jews don't accept Jesus as the Messiah, they do recognize that the orthodox Christian view is that Jesus offered his life to humanity much as God gave the Passover lamb to the Jews for food though it was as an offering made by the Jews to God.
The Passover lamb, unlike other offerings to God, was not shared with Levitical priests nor were its organs or shanks removed and burned as offerings upon the altar as were other communal sacrifices. As Psalm 50:13 explains, God doesn't even partake of the blood poured out of sacrifices and offerings. So while the Passover lamb was an offering to God, it was a sacrifice that was given over for the Israelites to consume. Unlike other sacrifices of communion, this was one that, though offered entirely to God, was for the total consumption of the person being redeemed.
The same, supposedly, goes with the orthodox teaching of Jesus Christ's sacrifice. It is a redemption offered to God but it is a sacrifice designed to be consumed by those who are being redeemed. Jesus offers a perfect life not because God needs it but because humanity needs to be nourished by it. Adam could not "feed" his offspring a divine life as possessed by Jesus. But as 2 Peter 1:4 states, Jesus died that "you might become partakers of the Divine nature." Jesus came to give not perfect human life but to free humanity from mortality to partake of this "Divine nature." That's the traditional, non-JW Christian gospel.
While generally speaking Jews do not question the historicity of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth, the meanings Christians have attached to this event are not a part of my Jewish religious or cultural paradigm. That being said, whether or not Jesus literally uttered those words you point out or whether or not he intended to "die for anyone" I leave for Christians to say. What I stated was that the Watchtower view is incompatible with the traditional view cherished by Christianity for almost 2000 years.
Great thread - raises a lot of issues I haven't considered before. Thanks for starting and to all the commenters.
What I stated was that the Watchtower view is incompatible with the traditional view cherished by Christianity for almost 2000 years.
Interesting point, and having known only the WTS's slant on things, I was never aware of this.
A footnote: while to some this might paint a picture of "a puzzle wherein all the pieces come together and fit quite nicely," as one Christian friend put it, it also illustrates why Jews cannot accept Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah even though a lot of us see the logic in Christian antithetical theological constructs such as the above.
Why not? It requires that Jesus of Nazareth be the incarnation of the God of Abraham or worse, as proposed by Marcion of Sinope (the inventor of the first Christian Bible canon) a different deity altogether.
In Judaism, the God of Abraham is greater than the concept of "deity" and therefore cannot become incarnate. To a certain degree (and some Jews and Jewish sages argue to the fullest degree) God is only called "God" because we Jews are still employing an ancient label. Thus there are no such things as gods. The God of Abraham is far greater than a mere deity. The Origin of the universe would have to be. God is mystery, ineffible. What Jews wrote about God in the Bible was mere chicken scratch by comparison with the Real Thing.
So such a "God" is far beyond becoming the subject of incarnation like the Greeks and Romans believed, nor does God offer others to become God by sacrificing himself as a human and then presenting himself as an invisible presence in bread and wine that you have to believe is there (against all evidence to the contrary) in order to receive the full benefits of the redemption offered in the elements of Holy Communion.
Also, the Messiah would not merely be designated to rule. The Messiah would rule, and from earthly Jerusalem. Messiah does not mean "anointed one" as in "president elect" but "ruler in office." It refers to a king, a priest, even a prophet who is OFFICIALLY ACTING as such, not merely anointed to the office to do the work in some distant future and get killed before that future occurs. If you get anointed but murdered before you sit on your throne, you are never the king. That's Jewish law. Jesus said he came to fulfill the law but obviously forgot about that one.
But again, the traditional Christian view makes far more sense than the Watchtower view. It holds merit in that it carries the Jewish tradition along with it.
Sin is kept alive by religion, it was even invented by religion.
There are illegal and immoral things that people do. But for sin, you need religion.
This is a great thread.
Once the ransom is paid the captive should be freed. Once a person finishes his Jail Sentence for the crime he committed, he is free of his crime - Means, he paid for it.
But in this bizarre concept of Christian Ransom, Jesus died for our sins but we still suffer with the consequences of sins.
ICor 15:42: So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised up in in corruption.
If that is so, then Lazarus was resurrected without Corruption (Without Sin) and a person without sin is perfect and should be living eternally. Why did he die AGAIN?
Hebrews 9: 27 and as it is reserved for men to die once for all time, but after this a judgment
As per above, death is only once for mankind. But why did the resurrected die again?
The Wages of Sin is death. Once a person received his wages, he had got what he deserved, for the services(Or Sin) he had done. So Sin gets nullified for the resurrected ones. Then why did the resurrected Zombies die again
Hebrews 9: 27 is an apt scripture you cited. That means arrangement of ransom tricky and very complicated subject which will not work without breaking many already existing laws and logic, hence cannot be from God.
When God does something, we can expect precision like that of periodic table. For example, Gold is element 79 and mercury is element 80, which means that there is only a slight difference between their atomic structures. The mercury atom has one more proton in its nucleus and the corresponding electron in the outer (known as F shell) orbit.
In view of the above, I want to make an interesting observation:
If someone believes he is not a sinner from his birth, it means he is in truth; yet he will be called apostate (one who keeps away from truth). Though he is not rebellious, his very presence is rebellion. He is of creative mind.