Israel, the Servant of God

Redemptionsong · Oct 20, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
The standard was never being "totally" obedient.

Proverbs 24:16,
For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief.

Does the 'just man' provide his own mercy? Surely, it is God who meets his need in time of trouble?

Under the law, is it not a sacrifice that pays for a sin? A payment is being made to cover sin. This is justice, not grace. Grace is the free gift of God. Grace is love.

Redemptionsong · Oct 20, 2021

Rival said:
He doesn't.

In nearly all cases blood was required. I seem to remember involvement in a lengthy thread on his subject many months ago!

Harel13 · Oct 20, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
In nearly all cases blood was required. I seem to remember involvement in a lengthy thread on his subject many months ago!

Likely. It's a subject that has been hashed and rehashed many many times here before.

Rival · Oct 20, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
In nearly all cases blood was required. I seem to remember involvement in a lengthy thread on his subject many months ago!

But the statement it is always required is simply untrue.

Redemptionsong · Oct 20, 2021

rosends said:
No, that makes no sense at all. Human sacrifice doesn't do anything more than disgust God.

I'm also sure we've discussed this before!

In Auschwitz there is a memorial to the Catholic priest Maximilian Kolbe, who gave his life to save a Polish army sergeant, who had been picked at random to die for a failed escape attempt.

Was this 'human sacrifice'? If not, then we should accept what the Gospels record, and believe that Jesus knew he had been sent to die for the sins of others.

Redemptionsong · Oct 20, 2021

Rival said:
But the statement it is always required is simply untrue.

One of the debatable issues was whether or not the poor, who could not afford a blood sacrifice, should pay with blood. As it turns out, the priests made a sacrifice on their behalf.

Rival · Oct 20, 2021

I don't really want to draw this out but I already betray myself.

You said,

74x12 said:
Why does God require blood for sins?

Even if, just for the sake of argument, all sacrifice needs blood, that's not what you said here. You said sins. G-d does not require blood for all sins (as Christianity asserts), not all sins require a sacrifice, etc.

rosends · Oct 20, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
I'm also sure we've discussed this before!

In Auschwitz there is a memorial to the Catholic priest Maximilian Kolbe, who gave his life to save a Polish army sergeant, who had been picked at random to die for a failed escape attempt.

Was this 'human sacrifice'? If not, then we should accept what the Gospels record, and believe that Jesus knew he had been sent to die for the sins of others.

No matter how many times you have discussed this, the underlying truth of it doesn't change. Human sacrifice is not acceptable to God.

This case of Kobe was not human sacrifice: it had no impact on the sins committed by the other person, nor was it demanded by God.

But if Jesus is to be accounted as a "sacrifice" (the claim I am resopnding to is the statement that "Jesus Christ is the sacrifice for those greater sins") then his death would have to be in the style and method of a sacrifice, bound by the same laws in order to effect a similar outcome. But it wasn't. And that's only part of the problem.

Redemptionsong · Oct 20, 2021

rosends said:
No matter how many times you have discussed this, the underlying truth of it doesn't change. Human sacrifice is not acceptable to God.

This case of Kobe was not human sacrifice: it had no impact on the sins committed by the other person, nor was it demanded by God.

But if Jesus is to be accounted as a "sacrifice" (the claim I am resopnding to is the statement that "Jesus Christ is the sacrifice for those greater sins") then his death would have to be in the style and method of a sacrifice, bound by the same laws in order to effect a similar outcome. But it wasn't. And that's only part of the problem.

God's sacrifice is associated with Pesach, with Jesus as the Lamb of God. Pesach celebrates freedom from slavery, and in accordance with scripture, it was the lamb's blood that provided the victory over death and the opportunity to be free. In similar, but spiritual fashion, Jesus is the unblemished lamb that God provides to free his people from slavery to sin.

Since the will of the Son was always in accord with that of his Father, there can be no issue over Jesus' death being involuntary. Not once did he offer resistance to his oppressors. Silence of the lamb!

rosends · Oct 20, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
His sacrifice is associated with Pesach, with Jesus as the Lamb of God. Pesach celebrates freedom from slavery, and in accordance with scripture, it was the lamb's blood that provided the victory over death and the opportunity to be free. In similar, but spiritual fashion, Jesus is the unblemished lamb that God provides to free his people from the wages of sin. Since the will of the Son was always in accord with that of his Father, there can be no issue over Jesus' death being involuntary. Not once did he offer resistance to his oppressors. Silence of the lamb!

The pascal sacrifice wasn't a sin sacrifice.
Plenty of Hebrews died in Egypt and afterwards so "victory over death" doesn't make much sense.
Jesus was not unblemished so he would not have been viable as an animal sacrifice.
He also wasn't a lamb.
He cried out on the cross so he wasn't silent.
No where does it say that the pascal sacrifice was silent.

2ndpillar · Oct 20, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
The things that you interpret here have nothing to do with the Church. You may have noticed in your reading of the Tanakh, and the NT, that the Church Age is a 'mystery', hidden from view in the Hebrew scriptures. There are hints of this Age, but nothing explicit.

Paul, the chosen apostle of Jesus, helps to explain the mystery, and the relationship between those living under law and those under grace.

To my understanding, the body of Christ, the Church, are taken off the earth before the nations attack lsrael and meet their fate. This resurrection event is also known as the 'rapture of the saints'.

You say that God and 'David' are two different entities, but that does not explain the role of God's Spirit in making 'David' the Messiah. Nor does it explain the role of the Messiah, the Son of God, in the salvation of Israel.

Who do you think is being 'mourned' in Zechariah 12:11?

You are kind of loose with your "church" term. There are approximately 38,000 different "church" sects, and with many killing each other over time. As for the "mystery", Yeshua came to be a light, whereas he brought the mysteries to light, and yet, he noted Isaiah, in saying there will be those with eyes, who cannot see. This lines up with Daniel 12, whereas the wicked/lawless will not understand. There are basically 2 churches, the church of hell, church of lawlessness/gospel of grace, led by Satan, whose message is you surely shall not die (Genesis 3:4) (1 Corinthians 15:51-52), and the message of the son of man, which is the message of the kingdom, which starts in the day of the LORD, which remains behind the door.(Matthew 24), whereas "immediately after the tribulation", comes the sign of the son of man, and the gathering together of the elect. Your rapture doctrine, stemming from some British teenager around the 17th century, is a doctrine of men, and is reputed in Matthew 13:30, whereas the church of the tares, the church of the devil, will be "first" gathered and thrown into the fire (great tribulation), and then the wheat will be gathered after. It was the Lord who chose 3 shepherds, Peter, Paul, and Judas per Zechariah 11, whereas the two "staffs", Peter and Paul would be used to pasture the "flock doomed for slaughter", which is the "Christian" church, established by the beast with two horns like a lamb , the Roman emperor Constantine in 325 AD at his convened Council of Nicaea, and who glorified Peter and Paul by building them each a basilica. Per Joel 2, there will be those in Jerusalem and on Zion who will "survive/escape", for they will flee when they see the "abomination of desolation" in the holy of holies" (Matthew 24;15-16). It will be the "elect" which are sealed to protect them from the four angels of Revelation 7, and the elect will be chosen from the 12 tribes of Israel, starting with Judah/Jews. As for Zechariah 12, that follows Jerusalem being a cup that causes reeling to the people around for coming against Judah and Jerusalem. That occurred in 1967 and 73, during the Israeli wars. It is in that day "that I will set out destroy all the nations which come up against Jerusalem. That day is described in Hosea 5 & 6, whereas Judah and Ephraim have been under punishment for 2 days (2 thousand years), and after those 2 days, on the 3rd day Judah and Ephraim will "acknowledge their guilt". We are now in the 3rd day, but that event has not happened as of now. As for your term "Messiah"/Christ/anointed one, all judges, priest, prophets and kings of Israel are anointed. God does the anointing by way of his anointed, which would preclude the self anointed.

2ndpillar · Oct 20, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
Does the 'just man' provide his own mercy? Surely, it is God who meets his need in time of trouble?

Under the law, is it not a sacrifice that pays for a sin? A payment is being made to cover sin. This is justice, not grace. Grace is the free gift of God. Grace is love.

Hosea 6:6 King James Bible
For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

The "tested stone"/rock "in Zion" is "justice" and "righteousness". (Isaiah 28:16) The day of the Lord, is the day God judges the nations/Gentiles (Joel 3:1-2).

The false gospel of grace, is having someone else die for your sins. Jeremiah 31:30, "everyone will die for their own iniquities/transgressions/lawlessness/sins". Everyone will die, and they will die for their own sins. The followers of the daughters of Babylon, which includes Christian churches, will also have to deal with her "plagues" (Revelation 18:4). It is the gospel of the serpent/devil, that "you surely shall not die" (Genesis 3:4).

Redemptionsong · Oct 21, 2021

rosends said:
The pascal sacrifice wasn't a sin sacrifice.
Plenty of Hebrews died in Egypt and afterwards so "victory over death" doesn't make much sense.
Jesus was not unblemished so he would not have been viable as an animal sacrifice.
He also wasn't a lamb.
He cried out on the cross so he wasn't silent.
No where does it say that the pascal sacrifice was silent.

No, the 'silence of the lamb' was my insertion, but Jesus' non-resistance is clear from the Gospels.

The death of the firstborn in Egypt was not experienced by the Hebrew firstborn because of the blood of the lambs. Other Hebrews died at other times, but the Exodus from Egypt would not have occurred without this intervention from God.

Jesus was not a lamb in the physical sense, but he took the role of the lamb to please his Father. And yes, he was unblemished in the eyes of God. Had Jesus not been unblemished, he would not have been resurrected from the dead, a record of which is found in all four Gospels. It is also an event predicted throughout the Tanakh.

rosends · Oct 21, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
No, the 'silence of the lamb' was my insertion, but Jesus' non-resistance is clear from the Gospels.

So he wasn't silent. Great.

Redemptionsong said:
The death of the firstborn in Egypt was not experienced by the Hebrew firstborn because of the blood of the lambs.

Also, the death of all male children had already taken place.

Redemptionsong said:
Other Hebrews died at other times, but the Exodus from Egypt would not have occurred without this intervention from God.

The exodus happened because of all the events of the exodus, including the adoption of the beginning of the month as a festival. It happened because of Pharaoh's resistance which led to the 10th plague. To say it would not have occurred without any of the elements is ignoring the rest.

Redemptionsong said:
Jesus was not a lamb in the physical sense, but he took the role of the lamb to please his Father.

So he wasn't silent and wasn't a lamb. Next thing you'll tell me is that he wasn't an actual sacrifice. Crazy.

Redemptionsong said:
And yes, he was unblemished in the eyes of God.

So he was blemished but not in the eyes of God (an exception to the "blemish" rule that is not part of the sacrificial rules laid out. But since he wasn't a lamb, nor was he a sacrifice, this shouldn't be a problem.

Redemptionsong said:
Had Jesus not been unblemished, he would not have been resurrected from the dead, a record of which is found in all four Gospels.

So a fictional collection of reverse engineered stories include fictional accounts of someone rising from the dead (one wonders if the people who were resurrected in the Tanach were "unblemished" -- the text never says that they were or had to be to get resurrected).

Redemptionsong said:
It is also an event predicted throughout the Tanakh.

No, not really, but nice try.

Redemptionsong · Oct 21, 2021

2ndpillar said:
You are kind of loose with your "church" term. There are approximately 38,000 different "church" sects, and with many killing each other over time. As for the "mystery", Yeshua came to be a light, whereas he brought the mysteries to light, and yet, he noted Isaiah, in saying there will be those with eyes, who cannot see. This lines up with Daniel 12, whereas the wicked/lawless will not understand. There are basically 2 churches, the church of hell, church of lawlessness/gospel of grace, led by Satan, whose message is you surely shall not die (Genesis 3:4) (1 Corinthians 15:51-52), and the message of the son of man, which is the message of the kingdom, which starts in the day of the LORD, which remains behind the door.(Matthew 24), whereas "immediately after the tribulation", comes the sign of the son of man, and the gathering together of the elect. Your rapture doctrine, stemming from some British teenager around the 17th century, is a doctrine of men, and is reputed in Matthew 13:30, whereas the church of the tares, the church of the devil, will be "first" gathered and thrown into the fire (great tribulation), and then the wheat will be gathered after. It was the Lord who chose 3 shepherds, Peter, Paul, and Judas per Zechariah 11, whereas the two "staffs", Peter and Paul would be used to pasture the "flock doomed for slaughter", which is the "Christian" church, established by the beast with two horns like a lamb , the Roman emperor Constantine in 325 AD at his convened Council of Nicaea, and who glorified Peter and Paul by building them each a basilica. Per Joel 2, there will be those in Jerusalem and on Zion who will "survive/escape", for they will flee when they see the "abomination of desolation" in the holy of holies" (Matthew 24;15-16). It will be the "elect" which are sealed to protect them from the four angels of Revelation 7, and the elect will be chosen from the 12 tribes of Israel, starting with Judah/Jews. As for Zechariah 12, that follows Jerusalem being a cup that causes reeling to the people around for coming against Judah and Jerusalem. That occurred in 1967 and 73, during the Israeli wars. It is in that day "that I will set out destroy all the nations which come up against Jerusalem. That day is described in Hosea 5 & 6, whereas Judah and Ephraim have been under punishment for 2 days (2 thousand years), and after those 2 days, on the 3rd day Judah and Ephraim will "acknowledge their guilt". We are now in the 3rd day, but that event has not happened as of now. As for your term "Messiah"/Christ/anointed one, all judges, priest, prophets and kings of Israel are anointed. God does the anointing by way of his anointed, which would preclude the self anointed.

No, I am not being loose with my use of the word 'Church'. The Church is the body of Christ, a spiritual body united by the Holy Spirit. This body first came into being at Pentecost, when the first believers, the apostles and other disciples of Jesus, received the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Today, there may be thousands of Christian denominations, but the key to being a Christian remains being 'born again'. This baptism comes (or should come) as the result of repentance, and faith in Jesus Christ as Lord.

As for other things you have written here, I really don't know where to start! There is so much error that it makes good appear evil!

2ndpillar · Oct 21, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
No, I am not being loose with my use of the word 'Church'. The Church is the body of Christ, a spiritual body united by the Holy Spirit. This body first came into being at Pentecost, when the first believers, the apostles and other disciples of Jesus, received the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Today, there may be thousands of Christian denominations, but the key to being a Christian remains being 'born again'. This baptism comes (or should come) as the result of repentance, and faith in Jesus Christ as Lord.

As for other things you have written here, I really don't know where to start! There is so much error that it makes good appear evil!

As for calling good evil and evil good, Isaiah 5:18-20 reports on those who drag iniquity and sin, using falsehood, are the perpetuators of such methods. That would be like saying the more I sin, the greater grace I receive (Romans 5:20). The more you sin, the further one is from God. If one is born again, born of God, they cannot sin (1 John 3:9), and they have already repented, turned away from sin, if "his seed abides in him". Now if one grows from the tare seed, the gospel of grace/lawlessness, of course, they are among the wicked/lawless (Matthew 13:41), who have only the furnace of fire to look forward too (Matthew 13:49-50). As for error, the indoctrination of men, well that kind of comes from adopting the same abominations used in worshipping the gods of the heads of the beast of Revelation 17, of which Rome was the 5th through 8th head, and the Roman church is the mother of the other harlot churches, whose foundational doctrine is rooted on moves and decrees made by the Pontifex Maximus of the pagan and Roman churches, the Roman emperor, Constantine, the 7th head of the beast of Revelation 17. The 7th head of the beast whose mark precludes one from the first resurrection (Revelation 20:4). Like mentioned in Matthew 13:20-23, one can hear the message of the "kingdom", yet they have not understood, and therefore produce no good fruit. Ask yourself, what is the "kingdom", and note according to Matthew 13:11-13, they will hear but not understand.

Isaiah 5:18-20 Woe to those who draw sin along with cords of deceit, and wickedness as with cart ropes, 19to those who say, "Let God hurry; let him hasten his work so we may see it. The plan of the Holy One of Israel- let it approach, let it come into view, so we may know it." 20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

Redemptionsong · Oct 21, 2021

rosends said:
So he wasn't silent. Great.

Also, the death of all male children had already taken place.

The exodus happened because of all the events of the exodus, including the adoption of the beginning of the month as a festival. It happened because of Pharaoh's resistance which led to the 10th plague. To say it would not have occurred without any of the elements is ignoring the rest.

So he wasn't silent and wasn't a lamb. Next thing you'll tell me is that he wasn't an actual sacrifice. Crazy.

So he was blemished but not in the eyes of God (an exception to the "blemish" rule that is not part of the sacrificial rules laid out. But since he wasn't a lamb, nor was he a sacrifice, this shouldn't be a problem.

So a fictional collection of reverse engineered stories include fictional accounts of someone rising from the dead (one wonders if the people who were resurrected in the Tanach were "unblemished" -- the text never says that they were or had to be to get resurrected).

No, not really, but nice try.

[IMO]

The Word of God is a parable. The God who created the heaven and the earth is bringing, with man's agreement, the things of the kingdom of heaven to earth. God wants people to be holy, as He is holy. For this to happen, the king of heaven, God, must also become the king of earth.

As the Almighty God of heaven, He informs the prophets of Israel that he is the King, but, sadly, many people on earth do not believe His word or serve Him.

The problem is, the earth cannot come under God's complete dominion until the people, all the people, choose to serve Him...or are destroyed. Without dominion, wickedness grows like a cancer.

Looking back, when God did apply the destructive force of a flood to destroy the wickedness of earth's inhabitants, all looked rosy for a while. Noah and his family emerged to a new world and a fresh beginning. But the root of evil remained in the hearts of men, and before long God was having to dictate numerous laws to ensure righteous living.

So the real problem with man, and with the world, is sin. The problem of sin is a problem of not trusting in God as a God of truth and righteousness. Sin means rejecting God in favour of our own righteousness.

Now, to my understanding, Jews do not accept the idea of universal sinfulness, or original sin. This is despite the outward evidence that everyone grows old and dies (the wages of sin). Yet, without an acknowledgment of human sinfulness the chances of ever changing the root causes of wickedness are doomed to failure.

The Messiah envisaged by Jews today, and expected in the future, is not offering a way out of sin. Is he?

[IMO]

rosends · Oct 21, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
[IMO]

The Word of God is a parable. The God who created the heaven and the earth is bringing, with man's agreement, the things of the kingdom of heaven to earth. God wants people to be holy, as He is holy. For this to happen, the king of heaven, God, must also become the king of earth.

As the Almighty God of heaven, He informs the prophets of Israel that he is the King, but, sadly, many people on earth do not believe His word or serve him.

The problem is, the earth cannot come under God's complete dominion until the people, all the people, choose to serve Him...or are destroyed. Without dominion, wickedness grows like a cancer.

Looking back, when God did apply the destructive force of a flood to destroy the wickedness of earth's inhabitants, all looked rosy for a while. Noah and his family emerged to a new world and a fresh beginning. But the root of evil remained in the hearts of men, and before long God was having to dictate numerous laws to ensure righteous living.

So the real problem with man, and with the world, is sin. The problem of sin is a problem of not trusting in God as a God of truth and righteousness. Sin means rejecting God in favour our own righteousness.

Now, to my understanding, Jews do not accept the idea of universal sinfulness, or original sin. This is despite the outward evidence that everyone grows old and dies, the wages of sin. Yet, without an acknowledgment of human sinfulness the chances of ever changing the root causes of wickedness are doomed to failure.

The Messiah envisaged by Jews today, and expected in the future, is not offering a way out of sin. Is he?

[IMO]

No -- that isn't the role of the messiah. Never was. And that isn't opinion.

Redemptionsong · Oct 21, 2021

rosends said:
No -- that isn't the role of the messiah. Never was. And that isn't opinion.

Then how does the world become a place of peace and holiness? How does the Messiah bring about this universal change of heart?

rosends · Oct 21, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
Then how does the world become a place of peace and holiness? How does the Messiah bring about this universal change of heart?

A leader inspires others to repent. While I'm not one who takes the Rebbe to be the messiah, but one fo the things that he did was start a movement that brought a significant number of people back to observance and identifying with Jewish law. That's what the messiah will do.

Israel, the Servant of God

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Am Yisrael Chai

se Dex me saut.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

se Dex me saut.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member