• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Leviticus: Seedbed of NT Theology

A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Jeez smoky, I can hardly keep up.

You're spamming almost faster than I can drink.

*throws back two bottles of water*
 

Breathe

Hostis humani generis
sigh.gif
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
A great existentialist theologian once said something like this (in German), "Even if the name of Jesus were not on the citizen-rolls of Nazareth, it would not shake my fath."
That is, even if there were undisputable proof that Jesus never existed, the Christian faith is still a viable and constructive religion.
These are the guys I was delivered from by the searching light and transforming power of the Holy Spirit.

Searching Light:
1) How can his substitionary atonement for the sin of those who believe in him be "a viable and constructive religion" if it never occurred? . .how absurd is that? . .
this is their idea of "scholarship"?

This view completely focuses on the Christ of faith to the exclusion of the Jesus of history, and possible even the Christ of myth.
2) Exclude the historical facts of Jesus life, actions and words and you have no content for this "faith,". . .nor do you have any substitutionary atonement to deliver from God's just wrath on the sin of those who hold this "faith" without content. . .and without content, just what is it they believe? . .how's that for absurd nonsense? . .
absurd nonsense is not scholarship.
Others combine the Jesus of history, Christ of faith, and Christ of myth.
As theologians and churches fabricate their Jesus and Christ - some more constructively than others - they pick and choose from elements of history, faith, and myth in the Christian traditions.
Please show where classic orthodox Reformed theology of the 1646 Westminster Confession of Faith is anything but 100% Biblical.
Please show therein any fabrication outside the Scriptures. . .can't be done.
For the God-breathed Scripture (2Tim 3:16) of the NT is the only authoritative source for the truth regarding Jesus, the Christ.

And the NT says Jesus the Christ delivers you from the just wrath of God on your sin only through faith in Jesus the Christ and his substitutionary atonement for the sin of those who believe in him (Ro 3:25).

3) Therefore, on the authority of the God-breathed Scripture (2Tim 3:16) of the NT, you can't ignore the "historical" facts of Jesus' life, actions and words. They are the content of Christian faith.

Likewise, the authoritative NT presents Jesus, his life, actions and words as factual, not mythical. . .Jesus is not a myth.
The only fabrications and myths are your latter-day heretical novel speculations, 2000 years after the fact. . .without a shred of proof, and which contradicts the authoritative NT reports.

The Jesus of history was THE fact of substitutionary atonement for the sin of those who have faith in him.
 
Last edited:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
That one deserves two shots - 19th and 20th.

Just four more and smoky will have 24 spammy posts in less than 24 hours!
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
Leviticus can be called the seedbed and plumbline of NT theology, because in it are so many "patterns (prefigures) of things to come" (Heb 10:1) in Christ.
But the seeds are buried in the details. . .and are given to store up your heart, not just your head.
These OT prefigures fill out the picture of Christ's nature and work, as well as the nature of sin, the nature of holiness, and the nature of grace.
It is helpful to read the chapter in Leviticus first, then review the posts.

The first 15 chapters of Leviticus answer the question: How does sinful man approach a holy God so as to have fellowship with him? First, sin must be dealt with.
These chapters give the "three-legged stool" of God's remedy for sin. Note that a three-legged stool cannot be effective if one leg is missing.
The details of these chapters prefigure the Gospel, and are presented in the posts below:

PART I: God must be approached by sacrifice of substitutionary atonement.

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2339676-post1.html ----------------------------- Chp 1, part 1 -Whole Burnt (Holocaust) Offering

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2340121-post14.html -- Chp 1 (con't) - Symbols of Chp 1

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2340178-post16.html -- Chp 2 - Grain (Flour) Offering

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2340869-post28.html -- Chp 3 - Fellowship Offering (Prefigure: Lord's Supper)

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2342797-post65.html -- Chp 4 - Sin Offering

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2346756-post140.html -- Chps 5-7 - Guilt Offering

PART II: God must be approached through the mediation of the High Priest.

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2346759-post141.html -- Chp 8 - Establishment of Priesthood

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2346781-post142.html -- Chp 9-10 - Ministry of Priesthood (God's Wrath on their Sin)

PART III: God must be approached in cleanness (holiness).

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2350565-post215.html -- Chp 11 - Personal Defilement (Bodies, Food)

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2350567-post216.html -- Chp 12 - Personal Defilement (Childbirth), Prefigure: Gospel

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2352377-post246.html -- Chp 13 - Personal Defilement (Skin Diseases), Garments

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2352381-post247.html -- Chp 14 - Personal Defilement (Cleansing), Houses

---http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2353700-post251.html -- Chp 15 - Personal Defilement (Bodily Discharges)
----- Prefigure: Biblical Doctrine of the Total Corruption of Man's Nature (Ro 3:9-11)
_________________________________________________

The unity of the Bible is further shown in Jesus in Every Book of the Bible, here ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2359401-post1469.html
-
 

smokydot

Well-Known Member
con't from post #280, also here ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2356938-post280.html
. . .I personally don't think Jesus understood himself as the Messiah.
Here's what I think:

Jesus said (Mt 12:3, 5, 19:4, 21:16) "Have you not read. . .

Mt 1:21 --" She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sin."

Lk 2:11 -- "Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Messiah, the Lord."
[You don't think Joseph and Mary told him these things?]

Lk 24:26 -- Jesus said, "Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?"​

Lk 24:46 -- Jesus said, "This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day."​

Mt 16:15-17 -- Jesus said, "Who do you say I am? Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
Jesus said, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was. . .revealed to you by my Father in heaven."​

Mt 16:20 -- Jesus warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.​

Lk 4:41 -- Jesus "would not allow the demons to speak because they knew he was the Messiah."​

Lk 23:2 -- This man claims to be Messiah, a king."​

Lk 19:10 -- Jesus said, "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lot."

Jn 3:17 -- Jesus said, "For God sent his Son into the world. . .to save the world through him."

Jn 1:29 -- "John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, 'Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!"

Jn 3:13, 6:38, 42, 62 -- Jesus said, "I came down from heaven."

Mt 20:28, 26:28, Jn 10:11 -- Jesus said, "I came to die as a ransom for the sins of many."

Mt 9:2-6 -- Jesus said, "I have power to forgive sin."

Jn 5:22, 27, 8:26, 12:48, Mt 25:31-33 -- Jesus said, "I have authority to judge all mankind."

Jn 14:6, 5:25-26, 6:39-40 -- Jesus said, "I am the exclusive way to the Father, I am the source of all life and truth."

I also think you either do not know the NT. . .or you do not believe it. . .or both. . .which automatically excludes you from truly understanding it.

I think you traffic in latter-day heretical novel speculations 2,000 years after the fact.

I think you are abysmally ignorant of Scripture and grossly theologically inept.

Jesus said: "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God." (Mk 12:24)

Jesus said: "Go and learn what they mean." (Mt 9:13)

And I say: "Stop darkening the counsel of God with your lack of Biblical knowledge, gross theological ineptitude, and heretical novel speculations."
 
Last edited:

smokydot

Well-Known Member
con't from post #307, here ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2359785-post307.html -- Leviticus Chps 1-15 detailed.
To smoky: thanks for starting this thread so these ideas don't derail other threads.
To all other readers: Please note that this is not normative Christian theology We can't keep people from embarrassing themselves: where the OP is not anti-Semitic it's profoundly irrational.
Looks like someone is trying to extend "authority" as a "staff" member to "authority" over the Scriptures and orthodox Reformed NT theology. . .on both of which he is abysmally ignorant, and exhibits gross theological ineptitude. . .as can be seen in responses on this thread.

I'm really not sure what is the control issue of this respondent. . .in trying to police your understanding of the Biblical presentations here. . .as though you are too ignorant
to evaluate them for yourself. . .one wonders what is his invested interest here. . .my guess is, since he doesn't believe Scripture is the Word of God,
he doesn't want anyone presenting it without the imprimatur of his personal unorthodoxy, and is using his staff "position" to lend authority to his ignorance.
So, first cracker outa' the box, I've had to deal with what I had hoped to avoid on this thread. . .his red herring above, one of the elements of his admitted gamey MO.

That MO is documented in, and a very brief summary of it is provided after this link: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2337583-post1376.html.
Depending on how much you cross reference in it, it's a long read, covering six months of his admitted gamey MO, abysmal ignorance of Scripture and gross theological ineptitude. . .so pop up some corn, pour up your favorite beverage, and have a read.
And, in addition, you'll get to evaluate his knowledge of Scripture in the responses made on this thread. . .post #376 immediately above being a good example,

is also here ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2364569-post376.html
_____________________________________

To all readers: Please note that this respondent:

(1) has admitted his gamey MO in response to my posts on Scripture;
(2) manifests gross theological ineptitude. . .for this is normative orthodox Reformed Christian theology from the NT letter to the Hebrews, going all the way back to the 1600's, and of which, in his gross theologocial ineptitude, he is completely ignorant. . .he knows zip about Scripture and orthodox (Reformed) Christian theology;
(3) holds to many unorthodox latter-day speculative notions, which have no basis in Scripture, and are only his sophomoric conjectures. . .2000 years after the fact;
(4) does not believe the orthodox Reformed Christian tenet that Scripture is the Word of God written, but contrary to Jesus and the apostles, says the tenet is heresy;
(5) believes that Paul's theology is just a rationale for leaving Judaism to keep the law more painlessly in the "Jesus movement," demonstrating gross ignorance
even of the gospel itself; i.e., of free grace, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ;
(6) denies the revelation in the NT letter to the Hebrews of the OT's "shadows of things to come" (Heb 10:1) in Christ, as well as the letter's many explanations of the prefigures (types) of Jesus in the OT. See some of the types here ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2320006-post527.html.

I will not be refuting in detail his gamey MO of ridicule, red herrings, false charges, sidetracks, scorning, mocking, etc. which has gone on for six months now,
and will assuredly continue here, in lieu of making a substantive theological argument from Scripture, of both of which he is abysmally ignorant.

I trust the reader can evaluate the Biblical evidence for himself, and make his own decision regarding its accurate correspondence to the Scriptures.
I will present it. . .the reader gets to decide its truth for himself. . .and to deal with the attempted control of the thought police.
 
Last edited:

Breathe

Hostis humani generis
Looks like you've got an admirer, AE. The same post replied to dozens of times, with the same thing... :D
 

outhouse

Atheistically
repetition breaks down resistance, BUT it only works when you hear it from other people not the same source over and over and over and over and over and over and over X 1000
 

standardbearer

New Member
angellous evangellous says:
But I personally don't think that Jesus understood himself as the Messiah...

standardbearer asks:
do you believe Jesus was without sin?
 
Top