The Atonement of Jesus Christ and Why It Needed to Happen.

[Trailblazer]

To deny the historical Jesus is sophomoric tomfoolery.

I do not think Jews deny that Jesus existed, they just deny He was the Messiah.

I think the Book of Revelation adequately portrays Jesus "wrapping things up."

It portrays someone wrapping things us, but it never says it will be Jesus.

Jesus said, "I come in my father's name and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name (perhaps the antichrist), he you will receive."

Christ warned that many false prophets would come in His name. That is why we should not believe anyone who comes claiming to be Christ.

Mark 13:6 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

When Christ returned, He would have a new name, and it would not be Christ.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

What the Jews who don't believe is that Jesus is Resurrected, but they can't back that belief up in a million years with any kind of evidence or compelling argument.

Christians cannot back up their belief either because they have no proof that the bodily resurrection ever happened. All they have are stories that men wrote about Jesus long after He walked the earth. Stories are not proof that anything in the story ever happened. Christianity is a faith-based religion.

 

[Thief]

It really is a different topic. Really. God did not instruct Christians to persecute, torture, and kill Jews.

did not Moses put to sword 3,000 of his own people
as he returned from the mountain

 

[Thief]

God gave the land to Israel and instructed them to go within. The iniquities of the people within had reached its full. Remember that the Land ultimately doesn't belong to any people but to God -- God can entrust it to whomever he chooses, and God chose to entrust it to Israel.

iniquities of the people

as occupants of a territory

like the white man moving into the west and driving native Indians to reservation?

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

David was forgiven after confessing his sins and forgiven, without any sacrifice. In Psalms it is declared that the only sacrifice desired is a contrite heart. In Isaiah his sins are atoned by the application of coals onto his mouth. When Solomon dedicated the Temple he declared that when the Temple was not available the people would be forgiven (atoned for) if they repented, turned towards the site and prayed. They would get atonement specifically without any sacrifice being even possible. In Proverbs it says that through love and faithfulness (not sacrifices) comes atonement. Just a few examples.

I think we get an idea of this 'sacrifice' better with Jesus raising a man with palsy.

3 And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four.

4 And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay.

5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

6 But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,

7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

8 And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?

9 Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?

10 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,)

11 I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.

12 And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

What was the sacrifice here? Christ hadn't performed any atonement, yet this man was forgiven of his Sins just like David and Solomon. Faith was the key. Faith in what? Well, the actions of lowering this disabled man in the room, considering that Jesus had the power to heal him, it seems like they had very strong faith in Jesus. Faith that he obtained the power from God to heal both body and spirit.

David, Solomon, and Isaiah (Isaiah 1:18-19) all had access to the Atoning power of Christ, because their faith in Him and his atonement.

David, Job, Solomon, and Isaiah where some of the few that knew and understood Christ (the Messiah's) coming and gained the faith to repent knowing where they received their atonement of sin from. No longer did they need to sacrifice animals, but from the Sacrifice that God had for them. Repentance and Ordinances show a symbol of that faith in the Atonement. Think of the Passover. The ordinance of marking the doors with the blood of a pure animal, preferably Lamb, provided the means for Death to pass over. This was just a similitude for what Christ would have to do, though the people performing it understood it not except for the Prophets.

Job 19:25, Isaiah 54: 5, Psalms 19: 14

 

[Spartan]

I do not think Jews deny that Jesus existed, they just deny He was the Messiah.

It portrays someone wrapping things us, but it never says it will be Jesus.

Come on. From Revelation 19: The Heavenly Warrior Defeats the Beast

"I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: King of Kings and Lord of Lords."

Christ warned that many false prophets would come in His name. That is why we should not believe anyone who comes claiming to be Christ.

“But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." - Matthew 26

Christians cannot back up their belief either because they have no proof that the bodily resurrection ever happened. All they have are stories that men wrote about Jesus long after He walked the earth. Stories are not proof that anything in the story ever happened. Christianity is a faith-based religion.

You've got that backwards. Skeptics cannot back up their belief that the resurrection of Jesus never happened.

And there is evidence that Jesus is resurrected.

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 1: Why it Matters
https://crossexamined.org/evidence-jesus-resurrection-part-1-matters/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 2: How to do History
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-2-how-to-do-history/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 3: Fact (1) Jesus died by Crucifixion
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-3-fact-1-jesus-died-by-crucifixion/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 4: Fact (2) The Empty Tomb
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-4-fact-2-the-empty-tomb/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 5: Fact (3) The Postmortem Appearances to the Disciples
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-5-fact-3-the-postmortem-appearances-to-the-disciples/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 6: Facts (4) and (5) The Postmortem Appearances to Paul and James
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-6-facts-4-and-5-the-postmortem-appearances-to-paul-and-james/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 7: Reasoning to the Resurrection
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-7-reasoning-to-the-resurrection/

Evidence for Jesus Resurrection – Part 8: Some Unanswered Questions
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-8-some-unanswered-questions/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 9: Probabilities and Plagiarism
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-9-probabilities-and-plagarism/

Evidence for Jesus’ Resurrection – Part 10: Conclusion
https://crossexamined.org/the-evidence-for-jesus-resurrection-part-10-conclusion/

 

[Trailblazer]

Come on. From Revelation 19: The Heavenly Warrior Defeats the Beast

"I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: King of Kings and Lord of Lords."

I do not know the Book of Revelation very well but I believe that Baha'u'llah was King of Kings and Lord of Lords. I also believe He was the Lord of Hosts.

“But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." - Matthew 26

I believe that Jesus was the Son of man but Baha'u'llah was the return of the Son of Man.

The title ‘Son of man’ is symbolic of the perfect humanity that Jesus represented, but it does not apply exclusively to Jesus. It ultimately comes from the Book of Daniel, where it refers to the Messiah. It is a Baha’i teaching that the title applies to both Jesus and Baha’u’llah.

To explain in brief, the ‘Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven’ means that the return of the Christ Spirit promised in the Bible will be made manifest from the heaven of the will of God, and will appear in the form of a human being. The term “heaven” means loftiness and exaltation. Although Jesus was delivered from the womb of His mother, in reality He descended from the heaven of the will of God. Though dwelling on this earth, His true habitation was the realms above. While walking among mortals on earth, Jesus soared in the heaven of the divine presence.

You've got that backwards. Skeptics cannot back up their belief that the resurrection of Jesus never happened.

You've got that backwards. Skeptics do not have the burden to prove that the resurrection of Jesus never happened because they are not the ones making the claim. Christians make the claim so they bear the burden of proof, but there is no way they can ever prove it ever happened, not that it really matters because even if it happened a body rising from a grave is no big deal, not according to Jesus:

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Not to disagree with you personally, but some within Judaism don't share your opinion. Some at least tend to feel that the Temple had its time and place but that the destructions of the Temple led to greater emphasis on Torah and a greater emphasis on study with less emphasis on ritual.

Oh, yes. I'm well aware that many in Judaism don't share this opinion. It's not because it's ritual, though. The same Jews that reject the building of a third temple still circumcise their sons, still have bat and bar mitzvot, etc.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"Various Christian and Messianic Jewish websites list up to 300 Old Testament Messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled during his first advent. But the objections from Jewish rabbis and others deal with the remainder of the Messianic prophecies that have yet to be fulfilled. These include the rebuilding of the third Jewish Temple, the destruction of the enemies of Israel, and a thousand year millennial reign by the Messiah – Messiah ben David, the conquering king.

The answer to those objections is simple: Christian theology teaches that Jesus will fulfill the remaining prophecies during his Second Coming. So the objection is premature."

What's more - there are only two places in the Tanakh that I know of that predict / prophesy WHEN the Messiah will appear in history, and both of them predict the 1st century.

Here they are:

Until Shiloh Comes

DANIEL'S 70 WEEKS PROPHECY

Christians can't even agree among themselves how many messianic prophecies there are. This one is probably the highest estimate I've ever seen.

The truth is that the pages of the Tanakh act like Rorschach inkblots for Christians -- you all tend to see Jesus on every page, when in fact there is nothing messianic there.

There are actually only a few messianic prophecies, and Jesus fulfilled none of them. He did not:
1. reign over Israel from Jerusalem (be David).
2. bring all the Jews from diaspora back to Israel.
3. descend from David through the father's line,
4. usher in an era of world peace.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

But that does not prove anything.

It is in fact evidence of what an objective reading is.

 

[Trailblazer]

It is in fact evidence of what an objective reading is.

That still does not mean they interpreted it correctly.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

did not Moses put to sword 3,000 of his own people
as he returned from the mountain

I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. How does capital punishment relate to genocide?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

iniquities of the people

as occupants of a territory

like the white man moving into the west and driving native Indians to reservation?

Did God speak to the Europeans and tell them they had manifest destiny? No.

There is nothing comparable here.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That still does not mean they interpreted it correctly.

You don't get it. They don't have a dog in the race, unlike you or me. Their view is objective. If you don't see how valuable that is, I don't know what to say.

 

[viole]

f goodwill and peace to all. His sacrifice to many is not in vain. Those who follow Him, do so in respect to the sacrifice he made for mankind, which is to be free from sin, not so much for the resurrection of body, but for the cleanliness of soul.

Fine. But it was not much of a sacrifice, really. It is not clear at all what He sacrificed. Again, it is like paying the debts of all people while having the bank account constantly full. Great, surely helps the poor people, but that is what I would expect from anyone having that power.

You said you are impressed by a lot of things, which seems to explain why you are so impressed by what He did. So, fine with me.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Spartan]

Christians can't even agree among themselves how many messianic prophecies there are. This one is probably the highest estimate I've ever seen.

Jews and rabbis can't agree on that either, Indigo. In fact, Judaism has at least two Messiahs to argue over - Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David.

There are actually only a few messianic prophecies, and Jesus fulfilled none of them. He did not:
1. reign over Israel from Jerusalem (be David).
2. bring all the Jews from diaspora back to Israel.
3. descend from David through the father's line,
4. usher in an era of world peace.

Once again, the answer to those objections is simple: Christian theology teaches that Jesus will fulfill the remaining prophecies during his Second Coming. So the objection is premature.

 

[Spartan]

To explain in brief, the ‘Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven’ means that the return of the Christ Spirit promised in the Bible will be made manifest from the heaven of the will of God, and will appear in the form of a human being.

In the context of Daniel 7:13, where one "like a son of man" comes to the Ancient of Days (Almighty God) and is given dominion and sovereign power and universal worship of the sort that God alone possesses, the significance of Jesus' "son of man" usage cannot be overstated. It is functionally equivalent to saying that the one like a son of man is rightful heir and successor to the divine throne. "Son of man" is essentially the same as "Son of God" in this context. And if the person in Daniel 7:13-14 is only someone “like” a son of man, then it certainly implies there must be some differences. Otherwise it would say something like, “A son of man” came before the Ancient of Days

 

[Thief]

Did God speak to the Europeans and tell them they had manifest destiny?

you say ...no

and how do you know that?

you complain the Christians did harm unto the Jews

did they not believe it should be done?

 

[metis]

Oh, yes. I'm well aware that many in Judaism don't share this opinion. It's not because it's ritual, though. The same Jews that reject the building of a third temple still circumcise their sons, still have bat and bar mitzvot, etc.

I was not implying that the end of the sacrifices ended rituals as that's certainly not the case. But what it did do was to take the emphasis from the Temple observance and put it into Torah. Thus, the 2nd Temple period was really somewhat different than what was done during the 1st Temple period, which turn became more different after 70 c.e. The Pharisees and the Essenes were well equipped for the post-Temple period but not so much the Sadducees.

So, what I'm saying is that it's not an either/or dichotomy, but more of a transition that put increasing emphasis on Torah and Halacha. I hardly think that a person living in the 1st Temple period would feel comfortable in the post-Temple period. He probably would look and exclaim "Say whaaat???", or something like that.

Where some would be uncomfortable with Temple sacrifices today, imo, is a putting of more emphasis on the Temple sacrifices at the potential expense of Torah, plus I know some simply have no desire to have animal sacrifices reintroduced.

Anyhow, how do you see it?

 

[Harel13]

Until Shiloh Comes

I read the article. I was wondering: the author states that the time that kings of Judah died out and the sages stopped passing judgement was around the time that Jesus was born. The author assumes that "kings of Judah" means "kings who ruled over the territory of Judea". This is an odd interpretation of "Judah", considering that Jacob in his blessings/prophecies was clearly speaking to each of his sons and their respective descendants. Evidence for this can be seen in the phrase "...Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, So that tribute shall come to him And the homage of peoples be his." - notice the words I emphasized? His, him and his - talking about Judah himself - or a man, not a territory. Otherwise it should have said "Nor the ruler’s staff from between its feet, So that tribute shall come to it And the homage of peoples be it." Therefore, it's a big stretch to say that Judah is a territory and the prophecy refers to any sort of ruler who controlled Judea.
And as we know, descendants of Judah stopped ruling over Judea/Israel centuries earlier.

 

[Trailblazer]

You don't get it. They don't have a dog in the race, unlike you or me. Their view is objective. If you don't see how valuable that is, I don't know what to say.

Just because a view is objective that does not mean it is correct.
Who revealed that chapter of Isaiah?
Who else except Isaiah could really know what that chapter was supposed to refer to?
How could anyone else know for sure?
We all have our beliefs.