Do you really believe that Jesus died for our sins?

[URAVIP2ME]

Yes, it very much is my prerogative... thank you for helping me realize that. It is my life, my opinions... my thoughts... I will interpret things the way I see them. I'm not going to just believe other peoples interpretations because they tell me they are truth. I am going to read about everything and find what I like best and what fits my heart, mind, and soul...
Until next time... Have a wonderful night.

What Jesus believed fit his heart, mind and soul [life] because Jesus by age 12 already had a well-rounded Scriptural education on which he could draw from and base his beliefs; not his own philosophies. Jesus showed what great respect he had for the holy writings by often prefacing his statements with, "it is written". Written down already in the Hebrew OT Scriptures. Romans 15:4 says those things that were written aforetime were written for our instruction....that we would have hope.

When Jesus referred to or quoted Scripture he was also showing that there are corresponding or parallel verses on which to compare. So Jesus drew his hope from already existing Scripture that he was the Messiah that would be the crowned king of God's kingdom or royal government that would not only bring Peace on Earth toward men of goodwill, but that he would also bring healing or curing for the nations as promised to Abraham.

Matthew chapter 25 is unique to our day because notice the righteous people in that chapter are alive on earth having the hope of a wonderful future right in front of them. Jesus as the fine Shepherd leads them into his peaceful 1000-year reign over earth, blessing not only the earth itself, but blessing all the family life on earth with the hope of living on a beautiful paradisaic earth forever.


Genesis 12:3; 22:17,18; Revelation 20:6, 22:2, 21:4,5; Micah 4:3,4; Isaiah 2:4, 9:7; Daniel 2:44; 7:13,14.

 

[Bennettresearch]

This post actually opened up my mind a little bit more. I never realized this before. Very interesting find bennetresearch and thank you for posting it. I have read a lot about religion the past couple of months (I am taking a class on it) and do remember reading about how (in Christianity) sacrifice was frowned upon. I just never thought about it like that before. There are so many things that just don't make sense in the world... Nothing ever adds up does it? History is a mystery.

Dezzie

Hi

Many christians may not want to acknowledge it, but there are parallels in the great teachers. Buddism touching upon christianity and Jesus touching upon Buddism. Some truths are universal and are not the property of anyone.

Craig

 

[Bennettresearch]

There are no paralles between the paths of enlightenment left by Confuscious, Buddha et al as compared to the one left by Lord Jesus. The path left by Jesus works on an entirely different process and why it is by far the quickest way to reach enlightenment. There is however similarities in the phrases they used, all enlightened people speak in the same voice and carry the same intent and meaning.

You say I missed the point of the thread, I say I didn't. There are many ways a person can teach.

You just contradicted yourself here.Truth in universal. Jesus was a great techer, he spoke a universal truth. It is dishonest to deny that others have thought of these very same things.

 

[Bennettresearch]

You're just drawing the line in a different position, and in doing so taking the sacrifice out.

The Carpenter knew what He was doing and spoke repeatedly of the consequence. He knew how His ministry would end.

But I too, draw the line in a different position.
That the Son of Man would persist in His teachings, completely to the fatal rejection under authority...is a sacrifice.

But that we are 'saved' by the crucifixion...is not true.
We are saved by the teachings...we are saved as we take the word unto our shoulders....and that could bring us to the same fateful end.

'Take up your cross and follow Me'....so He did say.

Most scholars do not believe that Jesus gave any reference to the cross before the crucifixion. You are being suckered by the propaganda of the New Testament.

You are insisting upon changing the subject of this thread. It is about the doctrinal claim that Jesus literally died to cleanse our sins. This is far different than any personal sacrifices Jesus may have made for his cause.

I am not arguing that Jesus did not make personal sacrifices, only that the act of the crucifixion was not for the purpose of cleansing our personal sins.

 

[Bennettresearch]

I doubt what the Hindus have to say is relevant but what John said is:

John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up; 15 that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Paul did say this: 1Co 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

Your statement here is a bit confused but it is a sure thing that Paul did not dream up anything but was led by the spirit.
However he did not say that he devised the theology but that he received it and that it was foretold in the scriptures (Isa 53).

Of course God doesn't like it because He doesn't like sin. He hates divorce also but He legalized it.


On the contrary as shown before John is well aware of the significance of the cross and the aprt that God plays in it. And there is no doubt that the crucifixion is seen as an execution of an innocent man. The two ae not at cross purposes. God is quite capable of taking the acts of men, co-opting them and even can maneuver men to act according to His will.

People were warned not to change the book of Revelation but that is not the same thing as predicting that someone actually would.

I believe both Jesus and Paul and find no discrepancy.

You are truly blinded by the light. May you achieve enlightment sometime within your lifespan.

 

[Bennettresearch]

Is the John of Revelation the same person as the apostle John?


1 Corinthians 11:23-26.

Coincidentally to the topic of this thread, it's quoted in the Catholic liturgy of the Eucharist, which, in their theology, is very interwoven with the idea of Jesus dying for the sins of humanity.


I think if you read the epistles carefully, you see offhand and oblique references to disagreements with other Christian leaders of the time. However, in general, I agree with the way you've put it; these disagreements tend to get glossed over.

There is no proof that John the Apostle wrote Revelation. After spending many years with this prophecy I believe he did write it well before 95 CE when it first appeared.

Sorry, I don't consider a propaganda quote from the last supper to qualify as a quotation from Jesus. How about all of the doctrinal aspects of Paul that have been incorporated into the church that originate from Paul, and not Jesus?

I have trouble getting through an epistle of Paul without getting mad.

 

[Bennettresearch]

This makes no sense.
1 Man offends God by seeking knowledge (eating the fruit)
2 God demands retribution by Man with a blood sacrifice.
3. Retribution would demand human sacrifice not god sacrifice.
4. Killing the son of God, the supposed offended one, is illogical.

If Jack kills Henry's son, it makes no sense for Henry to punish John by killing Henry's own grandson.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Human sacrifice is barbaric. It is intuitively wrong.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not sinister but irrational and clearly rubbish. Jesus was going to die inevitably whether on the cross by the Romans or of old age surrounded by his 23 great grandchildren. The sinister part if the story that a Cosmic Creator would violate intuitive natural law morality. No matter what happened to Jesus...if Jesus really existed...the time was ripe to invent a new religion as Judaism and Paganism were losing credibility. If no Jesus, Paul could have invented him.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no such thing as "scriptural evidence" there is only scriptural hearsay. The story of Abraham and Izhak was clearly amusing to God. The story of Japhtheh sacrificing his daughter in Judges indicates God wanted Japhtheh to keep his promise. A good God would have stopped him.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I desire compassion" is 180 degrees from the God who killed all life on the planet (men, women, children, babies, pregnant mothers and a billion billion species of non-human animals. A compassionate God would not send the plagues to innocent Egyptians because the Pharaoh refused to release the Jews. A compassionate God would not order Israelite troops without provocation, to attack Heshbon and Bashon, killing men, women, children and babies but keep the virgin girls for yourselves.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All barbaric tribes have their stories of sacrifice, eucharistic meals, burnt offerings. The Jews were not different from other Bronze Age savages. God was designed by War Lords deliberately designed as cruel, violent, capricious, and infinitely vindictive. This was to instill fear and obedience of the common people to the War Lord who invented that God. Moses invented God, a composite from earlier Semitic Gods consolidated into one gigantic cosmic monster. There never was anything lovable about God. People praise the "god fearing man.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More fear tactics.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

John would be right if there was a real Jesus and he was crucified by the Romans for the political crime of a claim to the throne of Israel. "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews." That sign was placed on the cross. We have no verification that any of this actually happened. It could simply be a fictional story. The Romans who kept excellent records, failed to notice this event. If the Romans executed a usurper, rebel, or claiming king in its provinces, the Romans would have recorded it. They recorded such executions and spread the news to discourage future rebellions. If the story above was true, it is very unlikely the Romans would have erased or not recorded the events.

Revelation is a very psychotic book written by a man with a serious mental illness. It is not worth commenting upon anymore than a raving psychotic in Western Washington State Hospital.

Paul suffered from epilepsy. It was likely a seizure (Complex Partial secondarily generalizing) on the road to Damascus. The description of the event was very believable and fits well with the blinding light, visual and auditory hallucinations, falling down with motor movements.

Ardipithecus
"The Clergy hate me, because they KNOW, that I KNOW, that they do not KNOW. - Robert Ingersoll 1884

Revelation is a very psychotic book written by a man with a serious mental illness. It is not worth commenting upon anymore than a raving psychotic in Western Washington State Hospital.
>

</p> </p>

I was agreeing with you up to this point. I hope I'm not responding to his roomate there. Do you get to hang out in gravelly lake much?

Craig

 

[Bennettresearch]

I present Biblical evidence for everything I say, you present nothing but rubbishing Rhetoric which is the unsupported imaginations of your own sick mind.


The Christian hating persecuting person of Saul died with his confrontation with Jesus of Nazareth in his new body of blinding light, and the new Christian loving person, &#8220;Paul&#8221; was born that day.



But of course you don&#8217;t believe the biblical records and so, you put forward some unsubstantiated rubbish that you invented in you own sick little mind.


So if you believe what is written here of Paul, then it becomes obvious that you are forced to believe the conversion of Paul when he met Jesus of Nazareth on the road to Damascus, as you either believe what is recorded in scripture or disbelieve. But Peter who was later chastised by the Lord in a dream, and saw the spirit of the Lord descend on the Gentiles who ate pork and all those foods forbidden by the law, came to accept that Paul was correct in his belief that the old law was fulfilled in Jesus and all food was acceptable to the believers.

Mondo Mumbo Jumbo Matey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do you always project your mental flaws into other people? I have quoted what little I could find in your very very long rambling and incoherent posts that actually has anything to do with this thread.

I don't appreciate someone hijacking a thread to get on their soapbox and fill it up with insanely long posts that are off topic. Go start your own thread about these dual beings you dreamed up and stay on topic here.

The Saul that persecuted christians is the same as Paul who simply changed his name. He is the same person. And let me repeat myself here. Son of man means prophet, simple like that. There is no capitalization in the original text and just because it is capitalized in the gospels doesn't give it any special meaning like you have invented.

Craig

 

[footprints]

You just contradicted yourself here.Truth in universal. Jesus was a great techer, he spoke a universal truth. It is dishonest to deny that others have thought of these very same things.

It is only a contradiction from your minds perspective. Truth is perception based. There are many truths in reality as they pertain to specific subjects, not all these truths align with each other and can be diametrically opposed to each other.

If your mind can read, that all enlightened people speak the same words (see the same things), and then relate that to denying the words of others like Buddha, Biami et al. What can I say, this is how your mind works. If nothing else, as Jesus attests and proves in his path of enlightenment, humans will use any justification, excuses and reasons to keep their own knowledge sacred.

As for the path of enlightenment left by Jesus, you cannot even tell me what it is, or how and why it works, yet you decry it by suggesting it is a contradiction. The closest thing to it we have on earth is that left by some hunter and gatherer societies, albeit they were dealing with reality, and Jesus was dealing with a justified world. Buddha, Krishna et al, used a completely different process to achieve the same thing. There are many paths which lead to Nirvana.

 

[Bennettresearch]

It is only a contradiction from your minds perspective. Truth is perception based. There are many truths in reality as they pertain to specific subjects, not all these truths align with each other and can be diametrically opposed to each other.

If your mind can read, that all enlightened people speak the same words (see the same things), and then relate that to denying the words of others like Buddha, Biami et al. What can I say, this is how your mind works. If nothing else, as Jesus attests and proves in his path of enlightenment, humans will use any justification, excuses and reasons to keep their own knowledge sacred.

As for the path of enlightenment left by Jesus, you cannot even tell me what it is, or how and why it works, yet you decry it by suggesting it is a contradiction. The closest thing to it we have on earth is that left by some hunter and gatherer societies, albeit they were dealing with reality, and Jesus was dealing with a justified world. Buddha, Krishna et al, used a completely different process to achieve the same thing. There are many paths which lead to Nirvana.

blah blah blah. I certainly wouldn't look to you for enlightenment. I don't recall ever saying that I knew everything about Jesus. This is your construct and an invented challenge. This thread is about church doctrine originating from Paul. Do you believe Jesus or Paul? Simple question but you seem to want turn it into a personal attack. Don't quit your job job to become a psychoanalyst. It seems that your mind is constructing the confusion.

 

[Thief]

Most scholars do not believe that Jesus gave any reference to the cross before the crucifixion. You are being suckered by the propaganda of the New Testament.

You are insisting upon changing the subject of this thread. It is about the doctrinal claim that Jesus literally died to cleanse our sins. This is far different than any personal sacrifices Jesus may have made for his cause.

I am not arguing that Jesus did not make personal sacrifices, only that the act of the crucifixion was not for the purpose of cleansing our personal sins.

So how are we different?

 

[Muffled]

You are truly blinded by the light. May you achieve enlightment sometime within your lifespan.

I don't suppose that you recognize the irony of your statement.

Perhaps you would prefer that I don't use colors?

So in other words I am right but you just won't admit it. I get that from Penguin a lot.

 

[S-word]

I don't suppose that you recognize the irony of your statement.

Perhaps you would prefer that I don't use colors?

So in other words I am right but you just won't admit it. I get that from Penguin a lot.

Which one? The dirty penguin, or the one who is only 9/10ths of a Penguin?

 

[Muffled]

There is no proof that John the Apostle wrote Revelation. After spending many years with this prophecy I believe he did write it well before 95 CE when it first appeared.

Sorry, I don't consider a propaganda quote from the last supper to qualify as a quotation from Jesus. How about all of the doctrinal aspects of Paul that have been incorporated into the church that originate from Paul, and not Jesus?

I have trouble getting through an epistle of Paul without getting mad.

There is no sense for you to discuss this doctrine if you don't believe in God. Such a person will not believe in the necessity of forgiveness. There is a fiery place waiting for such a person.

Paul's doctrine is the doctrine of Jesus.

I don't think Paul is the cause as it appears that there is some derangement when you approach the subject.:thud:

 

[Muffled]

Which one? The dirty penguin, or the one who is only 9/10ths of a Penguin?

Dirty Penguin. Sorry about my confusion. I was thinking that he just changed his name and lopped off the dirty 1/10th, lol.

 

[logician]

There is no sense for you to discuss this doctrine if you don't believe in God. Such a person will not believe in the necessity of forgiveness. There is a fiery place waiting for such a person.

.:thud:

Joe's bar and grill?

 

[footprints]

blah blah blah. I certainly wouldn't look to you for enlightenment. I don't recall ever saying that I knew everything about Jesus. This is your construct and an invented challenge. This thread is about church doctrine originating from Paul. Do you believe Jesus or Paul? Simple question but you seem to want turn it into a personal attack. Don't quit your job job to become a psychoanalyst. It seems that your mind is constructing the confusion.

You are entitled to your justifications, reasons and excuses, anything which helps you to keep your own intelligence.

I have already answered the thread topic, and it was you who challenged what I said.

 

[Bennettresearch]

So how are we different?

We are only different in that you are not addressing whether the crucifixion was an actual human sacrifice to cleanse our sins or not. The personal sacrifice you speak of is not the issue and I would not argue against it.
Craig

 

[Bennettresearch]

There is no sense for you to discuss this doctrine if you don't believe in God. Such a person will not believe in the necessity of forgiveness. There is a fiery place waiting for such a person.

Paul's doctrine is the doctrine of Jesus.

I don't think Paul is the cause as it appears that there is some derangement when you approach the subject.:thud:

It's getting to the point that you may be alone in your belief. Paul knew almost nothing about Jesus and his letters are of his opinions. They are not the word of God or Jesus. I can rightly say that you prefer the word of Paul over Jesus.

 

[Bennettresearch]

You are entitled to your justifications, reasons and excuses, anything which helps you to keep your own intelligence.

I have already answered the thread topic, and it was you who challenged what I said.

Hi Bennettresearch,
Can you tell me the process of the path of enlightenment which Jesus left to follow? Is it written anywhere in the Bible as a distinct path? Can you explain how and why it works?.

</p>
This is where we started. It clearly shows that you addressed and challenged me. Now you are whining like some kind of victim of my assault upon you. Puleeeeeease.
Why don't you make sure you have your facts straight before you make accusations? You have been pressing the issue and I have responded. You arrogantly psychoanalyze me and have invented the construct.
I believe that this personal attack only shows the fact that you really have no point and a very weak argument.