Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?

[Heathen Hammer]

So you would be more rational than God?

Given a number of things put forth about him from others, and the conclusions that must be reached if those things were the case, I am already more rational.

And God is not allowed to change His mind?

There is changing one's mind and there is going back on one's word. What we are talking about is not 'just changing one's mind'. I already understand, it's established you live in fear of your God and I do not. What you are sugar coating here is spiritual murder and betrayal of trust candied up to appear like a flighty little 'oops'. No need for intellectual dishonesty because you're afraid to talk ill of your boss.

And you are attempting to corner this discussion by infringing upon the will of God?

Please

Dealing with God is dangerous?.....probably.

So is dealing with me.

 

[Thief]

Given a number of things put forth about him from others, and the conclusions that must be reached if those things were the case, I am already more rational.

There is changing one's mind and there is going back on one's word. What we are talking about is not 'just changing one's mind'. I already understand, it's established you live in fear of your God and I do not. What you are sugar coating here is spiritual murder and betrayal of trust candied up to appear like a flighty little 'oops'. No need for intellectual dishonesty because you're afraid to talk ill of your boss.

Please

So is dealing with me.

Yeah right!....dangerous....sure you are!

So now...back to your making denial of Something greater than you...
and you don't have to deal with it.

Especially if 'It' can change it's mind about you.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Yeah right!....dangerous....sure you are!

You're the one who keeps placing an epeen on a table; expecting no-one to ever lay theirs down to measure?

So now...back to your making denial of Something greater than you...
and you don't have to deal with it.

Oh, is that what you thought was going on?

Especially if 'It' can change it's mind about you.

What it thinks about me is irrelevant as I belong to a higher set.
In any case, you fail to address your inaccuracies about your God totally balking on a deal he'd previously made. Noted.

If your God's agreements are that worthless he's not worth following.

 

[Thief]

You're the one who keeps placing an epeen on a table; expecting no-one to ever lay theirs down to measure?



Oh, is that what you thought was going on?

What it thinks about me is irrelevant as I belong to a higher set.
In any case, you fail to address your inaccuracies about your God totally balking on a deal he'd previously made. Noted.

If your God's agreements are that worthless he's not worth following.

We already agree...Jesus did not die for our sins.
So maybe you have nothing to lean upon.

I still hold the parables as instruction...and fair warning.

Getting dealt with latter?...unavoidable.
There will always be Something greater than you.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

So, let me get this straight, Mr Thief,
You follow a God you fear, who makes blood-agreements with you, but can and does, break his side of those deals at any time; who requires the spilling of innocent blood in order to change his mind when it amuses him, but also can change his mind without any reason whatsoever to totally rework contracts he came to have made in the first place; and is waiting there lurking so that he can stand over you when you perish, so that he can, what? Surprise you with what horrible fate awaits you, when your deal originally called for something nice for you?

That's some undesirable rogue theology you've built for yourself. When you die, if that's your God, you're the one who is going to be surprised.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

So maybe you have nothing to lean upon.

Im not the one invested in the unreliable system, you are. You're the one with nothing to lean on here.

Your God is basically an alien/insect whose thought processes are nothing like anything you can predict or even relate to. The nice afterlife you think you deserve, will not be there for you. Your God does not keep his agreements. All the time you pretend to chastise me, as if you have a leg to stand on, when it's you who will be providing amusement for vengeful spirits.

It's been 2000 years since he's said anything, so, why do you assume you even have Heaven still there waiting for you? It's probably gone. All the previous souls gone off to him, poof, gone, wave of his hand, no concern at all needed; I mean, he's God, right, he can do whatever he wants! We are nothing to him, not worth worrying over, not worth keeping your covenants with. Nobody up there to chastise him for his dishonesty and misdeeds, right? Is that not the image you've been giddily promoting in this thread?

Oh, wait, but somehow you think you personally are immune to these capricious ways? God ditches out his old blood agreement with all humanity without notice... but no, you're gonna do all right, right?

It's funny to watch you.

 

[1robin]

"...Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?..."

Which of the three types of sin ?

English Standard Version (©2001)
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
1 John 1:7-9 But if we are living in the light, as God is in the light, then we have fellowship with each other, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, cleanses us from all sin. If we claim we have no sin, we are only fooling ourselves and not living in the truth. But if we confess our sins to him, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all wickedness.

Read more: Bible Verses About Sin: 10 Important Scriptures
Emphasis mine.

Apparently your three classes of sin are all forgiven by him. The only possible exception might be Blasphemy against the Holy spirit. The most accepted interpretation claims that this sin cannot be committed these days since Christ ascended and so all is all.

 

[1robin]

Since we are only talking about the spiritual, that the historical changes happened, are as-read.

We had direct access to God before; ask the Hebrews.
Having to go through Jesus is not direct access to God. Jesus is in between.
So, again, what changed?

Here we go again. The Hebrews did not have universal direct access to God. It was conditional and available to only a few. That was why they needed a High priest to address God on their behalf. Jesus is the reason why we have access. In the new covenant (testament) for the first time we have a direct relationship to God through the Holy spirit which lives in the heart of the believer. Even if Jesus is thought of as in between since he is God then there is no issue here. Since only in the new testament is the holy spirit guranteed as a permanent posession on conversion and the Holy spirit is God then there is no question we have a direct relationship with God. That is why the temple curtain was ripped when Jesus died. It says specifically the barrier between God and man was removed. As well as no more need of the blood of bulls and goats, written law, etc.

And yes the veil was a symbol for seperation between God and man.
Wesley's Notes
27:51 Immediately upon his death, while the sun was still darkened, the veil of the temple, which separated the holy of holies from the court of the priests, though made of the richest and strongest tapestry, was rent in two from the top to the bottom: so that while the priest was ministering at the golden altar (it being the time of the sacrifice) the sacred oracle, by an invisible power was laid open to full view: God thereby signifying the speedy removal of the veil of the Jewish ceremonies the casting down the partition wall, so that the Jews and Gentiles were now admitted to equal privileges, and the opening a way through the veil of his flesh for all believers into the most holy place. And the earth was shaken - There was a general earthquake through the whole globe, though chiefly near Jerusalem: God testifying thereby his wrath against the Jewish nation, for the horrid impiety they were committing.

Barne's notes on the bible
The vail of the temple - This was doubtless the veil, curiously performed, which separated the holy from the most holy place, dividing the temple into two apartments, Exodus 26:31-33.
In twain - In two pieces or parts. This was the time of day when the priest was burning incense in the holy place, and it is probable that he witnessed it. The most holy place has been usually considered as a type of heaven, and the tearing of the veil to signify that the way to heaven was now open to all - the great High Priest, the Lord Jesus, being about to enter in as the forerunner of his people. However, about the design of the tearing of the veil, the Scriptures are silent, and conjecture is useless.
And the earth did quake - Or shook. Earthquakes are violent convulsions of the ground, caused commonly by confined and rarefied air. This was probably, however, a miraculous convulsion of the earth, in attestation of the truth that the sufferer was the Messiah, the Son of God, and as an exhibition of wrath at the crimes of those who put him to death. It was not confined to Judea, but was felt in other countries. It is mentioned by Roman writers. The rocks rent - That is, were torn asunder. Rocks are still seen at Mount Calvary thus rent asunder, which are said to be the ones that were convulsed when the Saviour died.
Matthew 27:51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Here we go again. The Hebrews did not have universal direct access to God. It was conditional and available to only a few.

Oh, dear.
Somebody does not know their own religion's history.

I respectfully request that any of the forum's actual Hebrews chime in on this absurd statement.

That was why they needed a High priest to address God on their behalf. Jesus is the reason why we have access. In the new covenant (testament) for the first time we have a direct relationship to God through the Holy spirit which lives in the heart of the believer. Even if Jesus is thought of as in between since he is God then there is no issue here. Since only in the new testament is the holy spirit guranteed as a permanent posession on conversion and the Holy spirit is God then there is no question we have a direct relationship with God. That is why the temple curtain was ripped when Jesus died. It says specifically the barrier between God and man was removed. As well as no more need of the blood of bulls and goats, written law, etc.

God does not agree with you, according to his own scriptures, as I already quoted or cited to you. You are wrong. But don't let that stop you [it hasn't before]. Apparently you know God's written plans better than he wrote out, himself.

By all means listen to other incorrect Christian 'scholars '[lol! i mean, Barnes' notes are so absurd as to probably be from some YEC website - earthquakes are caused by rarefied air?? Jesus Christ.] about what the Hebrews are so wrong about.

Honestly it would be best for you to just put me on ignore.

 

[waitasec]

Oh good lord. For early Christianity it was the one being persecuted.

but that isn't what he was talking about...

 

[sojourner]

So God broke his own covenant? Interesting.

God establishes several covenants. the New Covenant is hardly surprising, and doesn't require breaking the older ones.

Yes

God has forgiven sin. The anger is past.

Yes. Or are you attempting to rebut using a personalized fringe interpretation?

Hardly a "personalized fringe" interpretation. I dispute the existence of a place called "hell."

At what point during Jesus' time on Earth did it change

At the Incarnation.

why

In order to reconcile humanity to God.

why weren't we allowed to opt out

We are. Which is why sin is still rampant.

since it wasn't the original covenant we agreed to

To what "original covenant" do you refer? There are several. Plus, the changed relationship doesn't indicate a covenant, until Jesus established it before the crucifixion.

God basically doesn't adhere to any rational rules [including his very own]

Oh? Attempting to rebut using a personalized fringe interpretation?

and changes things dangerously [for others] at random

isn't that the way of the universe?

 

[1robin]

Oh, dear.
Somebody does not know their own religion's history.

I respectfully request that any of the forum's actual Hebrews chime in on this absurd statement.

God does not agree with you, according to his own scriptures, as I already quoted or cited to you. You are wrong. But don't let that stop you [it hasn't before]. Apparently you know God's written plans better than he wrote out, himself.

By all means listen to other incorrect Christian 'scholars '[lol! i mean, Barnes' notes are so absurd as to probably be from some YEC website - earthquakes are caused by rarefied air?? Jesus Christ.] about what the Hebrews are so wrong about.

Honestly it would be best for you to just put me on ignore.

I do not have the patience to discuss something so obvious with someone who believes things so obsurd. You have already ended a thread by your sarcastic posts or the ones you provoked and I do not wish to get involved again with someone who claims victory so often for so little reason and thinks everyone but him is wrong including so far Paul, John, accepted commentaries, Newton, etc.... The rate of return on investment is 0 and so I am terminating any further discussion with you for the time being.

 

[1robin]

but that isn't what he was talking about...

Which is why I posted more than the one sentence you copied here. A great portion of Christianity's history was on the opposite end of the sword from what he was claiming. I mentioned that fact and asked him to point out what country was conquored by Christians for Christianitys sake. I do not deny there might be a few but it sure doesn't add up to what he claimed. I am an amateur military historian so think before you reply. Hint: Cortez isn't a good choice.

 

[waitasec]

Which is why I posted more than the one sentence you copied here. A great portion of Christianity's history was on the opposite end of the sword from what he was claiming. I mentioned that fact and asked him to point out what country was conquored by Christians for Christianitys sake. I do not deny there might be a few but it sure doesn't add up to what he claimed. I am an amateur military historian so think before you reply. Hint: Cortez isn't a good choice.

i beg to differ.

the beginnings...yes. christianity has been used as a tool for control longer than it has been subjected to persecution. period.

 

[1robin]

It would be nice to know what you are referring to?

Are you talking about the blood on the doors so the angel of death passed on the jewish homes? I need a bit more.

Sorry Cmike let me get caught up a bit. You write long posts so I have to put them off until I have a significan time to address them. The blood of the animals sacrificed to offer for sin plus the bllod on the doorposts were all according to the new testament types and shadows of the actuall thing to come. That is why they couldn't remove sin only push it forward. Forward to the real thing Christ's blood which could remove them. There are dozens and dozens of symbolic practices and objects that pointed perfectly to Christ.

It would be nice if you actually tell me where you got it from. I know it's Isaiah, but I don't memorize the whole thing.

Prophets is meant to be written in a flowery way.

It's talking about Israel.

Isaiah 53. I was looking for a bit more than "no it isn't". That hardly substitutes for a reason or proof.

All of these refer to Israel. G-D refers to Israel as one man in numerous passages. 44:2), “Fear not, My servant Jacob” ; (44:1) “And now, hearken, Jacob, My servant.” Here too (52:13), “Behold My servant shall prosper,” he said concerning the house of Jacob. יַשְׂכִּיל is an expression of prosperity. Comp. (I Sam. 18:14) “And David was successful (מַשְׂכִּי&#1500 in all his ways.”

I agree that some parts of Isaiah are referring to Israel and sometimes it even uses symbolic language to do so.

Jesus fulfilled none of the actual prophesies except riding a mule and being from Bethlehem.

I couldn't possibly dissagree more. Here is a list of 351 that he fulfilled.
http://www.accordingtothescriptures.org/prophecy/353prophecies.html
You can find hundreds of prophetic lists that Christ fulfilled to the letter all over the place. Either they are all lies or he is the messiah. I do not think any other option makes any sence. The fact that there are 351 prophecies so close enough in detail to be regarded as fulfilled by one man (by countless scholars) makes the claim that Christ wasn't the messiah seem desperate and intentional.

Here are a few of the more well known:
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. 700 B.C
Micah 5:2 But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.700 B.C
Jeremiah 31:15 This is what the LORD says: "A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because her children are no more." 625 B.C. (reference to Herod's slaughter)
Hosea 11:1 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. 725 B.C. Matthew 2:14-15 [14] So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, [15] where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son." (These two are a good illustration of something. If you choose to believe that this is about the "nation" Israel how do you explain Mathew 2:14. The chances that would happen to Jesus if he was not the messaiah is astronimical)
Isaiah 53:3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. 700 B.C (Again if you wish to force this into a prophecy concerning Israel how do you explain that this event in Jesus' life is recorded by four Gospels) The odds are unimagineable.
Psalm 69:21 They put gall in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst. 1000 B.C. (How in the world can you suggest this metaphorically happened to Israel when it literally happened to Jesus. The claim that they were purposely fulfilled isn't an option because he couldn't control many of them.)
More Messianic Prophecies Fulfilled by Jesus Christ
I am not going to post all three hundred plus, I think you can see my point above. It is easier to believe they are describing literal events recorded in the life of Christ than allegorical, flowery, vague references to Israel that also happened in detail to a literal man.

The messianic prophesis are in Ezekiel 37 and Michah 4:3

Michah 4

3. And he shall judge between many peoples and reprove mighty nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nations shall not lift the sword against nation; neither shall they learn war anymore (World peace)

Ezekiel 37


21. And say to them, So says the Lord God: Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the nations where they have gone, and I will gather them from every side, and I will bring them to their land. כא. (bring all the jews to Israel

22. And I will make them into one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be to them all as a king; and they shall no longer be two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms anymore. כב. One recognized king

23. And they shall no longer defile themselves with their idols, with their detestable things, or with all their transgressions, and I will save them from all their habitations in which they have sinned, and I will purify them, and they shall be to Me as a people, and I will be to them as a God. כג. All nations will worship one G-D

24. And My servant David shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be for them all, and they shall walk in My ordinances and observe My statutes and perform them. כד. Descendent of David


25. And they shall dwell on the land that I have given to My servant, to Jacob, wherein your forefathers lived; and they shall dwell upon it, they and their children and their children's children, forever; and My servant David shall be their prince forever. כה.All the jews will stay in Israel forever

26. And I will form a covenant of peace for them, an everlasting covenant shall be with them; and I will establish them and I will multiply them, and I will place My Sanctuary in their midst forever. כו. The temple in jerusalem will be rebuilt and stand forever


27. And My dwelling place shall be over them, and I will be to them for a God, and they shall be to Me as a people. כז.


28. And the nations shall know that I am the Lord, Who sanctifies Israel, when My Sanctuary is in their midst forever." The temple in jerusalem will be rebuilt and stand forever

There were prophecies given that concern Christs ministry in his first appearance and there are some that concern his second coming and even his final reign. So I do not see a conflict with the ones above. Also how do you explain Paul's belief considering his superb education and devotion to Jewish law. If there is one person who would have rejected Christ for Judaism it would have been him. What is the orthedox Jewish position on Christ. Do you believe it's all lies or he accidentally met all these conditions?

 

[1robin]

i beg to differ.

the beginnings...yes. christianity has been used as a tool for control longer than it has been subjected to persecution. period.

Without knowing what I consider a great portion your disagreement is meaningless. And you proved your claims by not giving a single example even when I asked for them. I claim that whatever time they spent forceing others to accept their religion in a general way is not all that long even combined. Regardless the bible in no way whatsoever allows for forceable conversion and so even someone claiming to be a Christian doing so is no reflection on the religion but instead on themselves. If you desire to judge a belief system then evaluate those who follow it not those who defy it. Even the doctrine of seperation of Church and state is taught by the bible.

 

[waitasec]

And you proved that by not giving a single example. I claim that whatever time they spent forceing others to accept their religion in a general way is not all that long even combined. Regardless the bible in no way whatsoever allows for forceable conversion and so even someone claiming to be a Christian doing so is no reflection on the religion but instead on themselves. If you desire to judge a belief system then evaluate those who follow it not those who defy it. Even the doctrine of seperation of Church and state is taught by the bible.

the dark ages should suffice...

king charlemagne ...


edit
2 cor 6:14

 

[1robin]

the dark ages should suffice...

king charlemagne ...


edit
2 cor 6:14

The dark ages as I understand them are so called primarily because the Catholic Church did not allow access to the bible in the peoples native language or at all in some cases except through them. It was also noted for it's Catholic suppression of scientific truth. While both these things are horrible and destable practices they are not examples of forced conversion by the sword. Did you have a specific event that I did not address that you are reffering to. You never did say whether the administrators satasfied you quandry about my picture?

 

[Jacksnyte]

I suggest you look into the American Holocaust. Millions of indigenous people forced to convert over a period of several hundred years, with the alternative very often being death.

 

[Thief]

That's some undesirable rogue theology you've built for yourself.

Make up your mind which discussion you are pursuing.....
The theology that I believe in....
or the one you think I believe in.

Each time you respond it's with some lengthy nay saying while describing God in a manner YOU think of God.

All this time...and I thought you actually understood some of my previous postings.

Apparently not at all.

So...
No one has died for you.
No one is waiting to see what stands up from the dust.
No one interested in you.
You want to be on your own.

I can live with that.