Jesus died for US...technically

by enigma1863 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan, please do. I don't see how bible scriptures could say anything about the history of determining death. And this is the theology most Christians teach.

    Alright. I currently do not have the time to sit down and gather scriptures to support what I'm putting forward, but I will provide them as soon as I am able.

    In the Old Testament, it was always understood that blood being spilled was offering atonement for sins. On the day of atonement each year, Israel took sacrifices to the priest for atonement and that animals blood was spilled and the life offered to God in asking for forgiveness of sins. Somewhere in Hebrews (I believe) Paul calls the law, "Faulty." He calls it so because it could NEVER fully atone for the original sin, and this is obvious because it needed to be repeated yearly. So these two points need to be remembers going forward:

    1. Only blood (life) offered to God atoned for sin in any significant way (I.e., Cains sacrifice was worth less than Abels).

    2. No blood (life) offered to God could ever atone completely for mankinds sin. No animal is equal to imperfect man, let alone sinlessness (which was lost).

    Having established the above, we move into the New Testament. It would be more proper to view John 3:16 not as saying God, "gave" but rather than he, "gave permission" or, "allowed." The scriptures state that Christ, "humbled himself and took a slaves form" from his pre-human, heavenly life to his human PERFECT state. This indicates very clearly it was his free choice to do this, and that is the most significant point to remember about the story. God did not FORCE Jesus to do this, Jesus humbled himself of his own free will and his Father (Almighty God) gave permission or allowed it. 

    I believe 2 Peter 2:1...? Calls Christ our, "owner." This is because he CHOSE to repurchase us, which follows an ancient custom of the repurchaser. You see an example of this in the book of Ruth. So what actually happened is as follows:

    Christ willingly, of his own free will, became a man and used his sinless blood (life) to completely atone in one payment for our sinful state in a transaction (of sorts) in which he literally buys mankind back from sin. Thus he atoned perfectly for all sin past, present, and future - nullifying the mosaic law because further atonement would never be necessary. 

    As a REWARD for his willful and loving deed, he was not left in the grave but raised to be king over mankind whom he now owned and rightfully rules. His perfect blood being spilled was a one time transaction which, once complete, accomplished fully the repurchasing of man. Thus it was necessary for him to die in order for us to have hope, and it was unnecessary for him to stay dead. If he had stayed on the earth eternally, and his blood never been offered, we would have no hope at all and would be eternally subject to sin, pain, and death. 


    Further, Kaik's comment is wrong in every way - no offense meant. But the Jews always had a mediator. The role was taken by the high priest at the temple, who mediated between them and God by over seeing the sacrifice. 

    second Christ is not 1/3rd of God. Even the trinity, if you believe, firmly asserts them as separate beings with the almighty at the head as superior to all. They make up a family, not all one person. Further the trinity is demonstrably wrong, as Hebrews 1 shows Christ with authority over all the angels, having been risen above them to the point of being worshipped - nothing is above him except God Almighty himself. Yet, Christ knew in John 14 he would have no authority over the Holy Spirit but would have to petition the Father to send it. Hence the Holy Spirit cannot be an angel because if it were Christ would be its authority and he is not. 

  • kaik
    kaik

    Drake, if you do not know about Judaism, please do not comment it. I am married to Jew, and all my in-laws are Jewish and some of them are Orthodox. Judaism does not have mediator. Judaism does not teach it. Period. You do not need it. There is nobody between you and G-d; therefore, Jesus sacrifice does not make sense in the eyes of Jews, their faith, and their cultural context. You comment my post on topic you HAVE NO CLUE! I stated that Jews do not accept Jesus. This is fact. Anyone to be professing Jew cannot reconcile Christian nonsense of Jesus Christ.  Whatever is written in NT including in John 14 have no whatsoever authority for Jews as it is not considered a part of their holy writings. Somewhere in your post you failed to see though you evangelical indoctrination that there is entire religion that predates Christianity, have books that Christian misused for their own faith, and yet you see them wrong, because you believe your faith is right.

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake

    @kaik

    unless your wife travels to Jerusalem to sacrifice the first fruits of her flock every year, then we are talking about a very different Judaism. I have no problem admitting I know nothing about modern day Judaism. But it's a completely different religion from the days of Christ, and even more so from before that. 

  • breakfast of champions
    breakfast of champions

    Yes! Thank you for the  OP.

    This is something that always bothered me.

    When you give something, that means it's GONE. You don't get it back in some form or another. Pretty logical.

  • kaik
    kaik
    Drake, Christianity of today is different from Christianity of the 16th century, from 1054 split, or from being the minority faith of the Roman empire population. Any case, Judaism predates Christianity and my point is that no Jews could accept a concept of redemption by Jesus because it never made sense to them. This was the same in the 1st century or today. Judaism for much of his history stresses emphasis on direct relationship with G-d and there is no need anyone for paying up for your own sin. Everyone is responsible only for its own sin, it is not inherited (yes, Jews do not believe in original Adamic sin), G-d cannot sacrifice himself to pay debt to Himself. Again you fail to see what Judaism was and is about. Judaism also does not have centralized worship nor have central organization responsible for interpretation of their writings and faith. Jews do not travel to Jerusalem either to do sacrifice, nor stoning disobedient children.
  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake
    I understand your point. But it has no bearing on the question asked. The first century Christians, according to scripture, did understand the repurchasing aspect of christs death. This is the point. How the Jews of the day felt is irrelevant to the OP.
  • Slidin Fast
    Slidin Fast

    The whole concept is obscene.  Am I responsible for the faults of my father? How about my grandfather(s) neither of whom I ever met?  What possible link is there between what a fictitious* man did 7000 years ago  to me. How about my son?  Should he pay for my sins?  Can he not build his own life without being damned by me?  

    Jewish atonement involved animal slaughter on an industrial scale, blood flowing in rivers all to make a point about  drumming in the guilt of the beaten down worshipers.

    So comes the saviour, more blood this time human, yes human sacrifice.  This all to balance the scales of divine justice.  There is no justice here, nothing to see folks, move on.

    This account is barbaric in the extreme.  Why do we even give it breath? 

    * I say fiction simply because the account does not fit with the abundant and persuasive evidence of human remains and trace earth-wide massively more ancient than the newbie, Adam.




  • kaik
    kaik

    1st century Christians were most likely Jews. Since Jews do not have a temple they do not perform sacrifices or offerings which cased in 70AD. There is not temple, no offering as their beliefs dictates that this can be done only in the temple. It is actually forbidden to make offering elsewhere. Therefore, Jews believe repentance for and of their own, individual sins directly to G-d (Hosea 14:2). For Jews back then and today; there cannot be mediator between you and G-d. Therefore, no need for Jesus. You are responsible for your own sin, not for sin anyone else. This is one of the central teaching of Judaism.

    Slidin fast, when I was with WT, the entire concept of the Christ sacrifice never made sense. The original sin, being imperfect due Adam and Eve, etc.

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake

    @ kaik

    first off, isn't your screen name a racial slur against Jewish people?


    secondly Paul's letters date back to as early as the 40s and 50s ad, and he was writing to Gentiles. So no, in the first century there were many more Christians than just Jews. Further, what we are arguing is the same argument that was the issue back then. The Jews did not accept Christ as the messiah, did not accept the ransom, and denied him. The point of this thread however is not how the Jews responded. What was sought after, and requested by me, was explaining how it makes sense. I did so. The points you've made in your first and last post are just historically and demonstsbky incorrect. The second you made was spot on, but has no bearing on the discussion. It's kike we are talking about the King of Jordan and how he's on a rampage and you chime in with, "the patriots won the super bowl." Yes, that's true but......

    anyway, I've explained it from the bibles perspective. I was going to come back to post the scriptures supporting it but it appears this may just be pointless, I cant tell if the thread is looking for an honest explanation or just to poke fun. So if scriptures would be appreciated by anyone just PM me and I'll put them all together.

  • kaik
    kaik

    drake, English is not my native language; therefore, there is difference between kike and kaik especially they do not belong to the same group of language, and this nickname is from ugro-finnish language which was Slavicized. Actually my SN predates my English as it followed it my since my childhood in far away place you most likely never heard off.

    Whatever Paul wrote is irrelevant to the Jews. Paul was a false apostle and Jesus was a false Messiah. If you even bother to read a bit of Jewish faith or have at least college course on Judaism, I wont have to debate why there is too many fallacies in Christianity when it comes to ransom, and entire nonsense surrounding his existence. To Jews Jesus did not fulfill anything that would make him to be a Messiah. There is no reason accept him as Messiah when their writing clearly pointed out who he would be. Christian made a construct on OT outside of Judaism.  Every rabbi would not have a problem to prove that NT is wrong and entire Christianity is founded on false understanding of OT.  For 2000 years, Christians are unable to prove Jewish faith to be wrong, no religious Jews would accept Jesus, or reconcile the NT with OT.

    Any case, I think I have a put enough on this topics.  Jews do not believe Jesus is messiah nor that there is a need for mediator between you and the G-d. Everyone is free to believe what he or she desires. There is no debate on it. Jews and millions of other people do not believe in Christianity and the sky have not fallen down.


Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit