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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are works necessary for salvation (as the JW's claim) or can we be saved by belief alone in Jesus Christ's sacrificial death?
What must we do to be saved?
Are works necessary for salvation (as the JW's claim) or can we be saved by belief alone in Jesus Christ's sacrificial death?
What must we do to be saved?
Problem is, people think works means you earn salvation. In scripture works are separated into two categories: righteous and unrighteous. The righteous works lets god work through you so you dont earn your salvation, you live it. The latter means the works are from man. In the law, some people feel they need to work for salvation and others feel belief in god is not based on faith but from what man does.
That antiworks christian gets the context mixed up. But as a debate, its been repeated often. Some dont like works others do. Depends on how they define their relationship with christ. Is it one-sided or two-sided. Depends.
One is not 'saved' by a false messiah. One is 'saved' by one's good deeds, adherence to Noahide Law if one is not Jewish, and closeness to G-d.
IMO, of course
With a verbal repentance. You also forget that grain offerings would be acceptable. Blood is not necessarily a requirement.How does one atone for sins without blood sacrifice?
With a verbal repentance. You also forget that grain offerings would be acceptable. Blood is not necessarily a requirement.
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.” (Lev. 17:11)
Your understanding is almost so complete (and I am so much in agreement) that there is little room for commentary from me.
However, since "salvation" is the issue here in relation to "works", I will focus hard on that issue.
So... does one 'do good works' to BE saved, or because they ARE saved? In other words, the repentant Thief on the cross was saved solely because of belief, correct, apart from anything he could do to save himself?
How does one atone for sins without blood sacrifice?
Why blood?
I can see bread and wine. Maybe animals to an extent. But never a human being. That's like the American army sacrificing one person's life to save millions. I understand the justification, but it doesn't met our military off the hook for such an immoral action as Blood sacrifice. Sounds creepy and barbaric to tell you honest.
Why not keep the sacrifices in the OT?
I mean, since jesus was jewish I'd assume he didn't agree with using his blood as a literal atonement for sins. Sacrifice isn't about literal blood but the giving away ones life for the well-being of another. This can be done by anything of value. Blood is one way but not all see blood as the highest sacrifice.
Leviticius 5:11
“But if he cannot afford two turtledoves or two pigeons, then he shall bring as his offering for the sin that he has committed a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He shall put no oil on it and shall put no frankincense on it, for it is a sin offering.
This is to atone for a sin and it requires no blood.
Do you also remember what David wrote? He wrote this in psalm 40:
In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted,
but you have given me an open ear.
Burnt offering and sin offering
you have not required.
Then I said, “Behold, I have come;
in the scroll of the book it is written of me:
I delight to do your will, O my God;
your law is within my heart.”
Lastly, Jesus would not work for any kind of sacrifice at all. The first and most obvious reason is because he was a human. The following reasons are:
1. He was blemished. The Romans had smacked him, beaten him and cut him bloody. This makes him unacceptable. Even if this hadn't happened...
2. He was circumcised. This is also a blemish as far as a sacrifice is concerned.
3. He apparently came back to life, thus nullifying the entire thing.
None of the rules for sacrifices were upheld during the crucifixion. Not a single one, from it being a non-kosher animal, to it being blemished, to it not being done on an altar and to there being no priests, no ceremony.
It is completely possible for one to give a verbal repentance. G-d would not leave people who are unable to make sacrifices, blood or no, with no means of repentance. For the entirety of Israel's exile there has been no Temple, thus no sacrifices, and are we to believe that G-d, The Mater of All, The Most High, gives them no way to repent? Surely such is not worth worshipping. But He does give one a way to repent. Baruch HaShem!
The OT says 'the life of the flesh is in the blood, I have given it to you to make atonement on the alter'
the blood sacrifices of the Old testament point to the ultimate sacrifice once for all in Jesus
In the Passover there was a substitution, The life of a lamb without blemish (a blood sacrifice) substituted for the first born.
In Jesus all believers go from being alienated sinners to becoming a first born of God
I'd have to ask a Jew on this about the child sacrifice. As for the others, it's always been animal. The child first born was slit not for the well-being of others but as a consequence for the Pharaoh's actions. It wasn't a good thing. It was a consequence.