The Atonement Doctrine (Did Jesus Die For Our Sins?)

[Ben Avraham]

yes, Jesus died for our sins and this is in fulfillment of Old Testament promises such as the iniquity of the land being removed in a day such as in ZechariahGod would redeem

Yes Jesus would take away the iniquity of the land in a day as Zechariah promised

And here is the evidence that Zechariah was not talking about Jesus: Was the iniquity of the Land removed in a day? It was not. When Jesus was born, the Land of Israel was suffering under the occupation of Rome, during Jesus' lifetime, that occupation got only worse and, when Jesus died, the Land was destroyed an the Jews exiled for another 2000 years. Why? Because of the iniquity of the Land that Jesus did not remove. Next time you say the above, mention that you believe by faith that this happened thus and thus. Besides, Jesus could not die for the sins of another because the Prophets were clear enough that no one can die for the sins of another. (Ezekiel 18:3,20)

 

[meghanwaterlillies]

And here is the evidence that Zechariah was not talking about Jesus: Was the iniquity of the Land removed in a day? It was not. When Jesus was born, the Land of Israel was suffering under the occupation of Rome, during Jesus' lifetime, that occupation got only worse and, when Jesus died, the Land was destroyed an the Jews exiled for another 2000 years. Why? Because of the iniquity of the Land that Jesus did not remove. Next time you say the above, mention that you believe by faith that this happened thus and thus. Besides, Jesus could not die for the sins of another because the Prophets were clear enough that no one can die for the sins of another. (Ezekiel 18:3,20)

This reminds me of a song...
Do you remember they way we felt .... back when couldn't control ourselves...
...
Remind me, oh remind me...
I hope your land gets healed. I sincerely do.

 

[Rise]

Sorry I could not respond sooner, but sometimes life's obligations get too busy and I can't continue taking the time to respond to ongoing threads.

...

First, I have to point out that for all your words, you actually never dealt with most of the major scriptural objections I raised to your claims:

1. I showed how Amos 5, in context, doesn't imply that God hates sacrifice in general, but rather hypocritical worship.

2. Jesus told people to observe the sacrifices.

3. Jesus is plainly stated to be a willing sacrifice on our behalf.

4. God used animal sacrifice and blood to establish his covenant with Abraham.

5. The real meaning of the word Parim, in context, as an animal sacrifice.

6. Examples in the Bible where God looks favorably and takes pleasure in animal sacrifice to Him.

7. The foundational nature of a lamb sacrifice all throughout the BIble as a key recurring theme.

Your position is simply crushed under the weight of the whole body of Scripture in context.

Yahushua is not the Passover Lamb.

1 Corinthians 5:7

Paul just flat out already told you that you are wrong.

The fact that I even posted that verse in the post you were responding to, yet you didn't seem to see it or understand it, doesn't speak well for the supposed truth of your position.

Virtually every comparison one can make between him and the original Passover lamb fails to fit the bill.

Colossians 2:16-17
Hebrews 10:1

If they were only types and shadows of the reality to come later, then it is not expected that the reality will be exactly like what is basically just a model of the real thing.

It would be completely nonsensical to say "Christ can't be the passover lamb because he wasn't actually a lamb!"
To say such a thing is to misunderstand what a type and shadow is in the first place.

Actually, "coats of skin" is a metaphor for the covering of sin.

Of course it is - But God still killed an animal to do it.
It's a type and a shadow of a greater reality to come.

That's like trying to claim that all the references to animal sacrifice in the Bible don't actually involve animal sacrifice, because it's only a metaphor of Christ to come.

No, it's both. It involves animal sacrifice AND it's a metaphor of Christ to come.

There are passages such as Deuteronomy 16:5-6 and Numbers 28:16-24 that can be employed to defend the transformation of Passover into a celebration of animal sacrifice, but this is because the Israelites were stubborn and disobedient and wanted to eat meat (Numbers 11) that God gave them a lesser law than He wanted to, as Paul states that the Law was written for sinners in 1 Timothy.

You have no scriptural or historical reason to claim that animal sacrifice was a later transformation of the passover, when the books of Moses themselves record that the very first passover involved the slaughter of a lamb and also says that it was a continued observance involving the sacrifice of a lamb.
You also have no scriptual or historical reason to claim that God didn't want them to originally do this.

Both of those ideas are strait inventions out of your mind.
You're trying to force a conclusion onto the text that a sound reading of the text cannot support.

If the Israelites had been obedient to God in the first place then the Law of Moses would not have been written as it was to begin with. In fact, the sale of sacrificial animals in the temple is what provoked Yahushua to destroy the market in the temple, because people where making Passover into an annual ritual of sacrifice.

Distorting and taking grossly out of context the scripture.

I already gave you scripture references that include Jesus telling a man to observe the sacrifice at the temple to honor Jesus healing him.
I also already pointed out that animal sacrifice will continue at the temple in the future, with the Lord present in Jerusalem, as seen in Ezekiel.

Matthew 21:12-13 tells you why Jesus overturned the tables:
It says he drove out all who were "buying and selling".
They were "money changers" who were "selling" sacrificial animals.
He accused them then of making the temple a "den of robbers".

His problem is with people who are profiting off the observance of God's laws, not the fact that they are killing animals.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I think an example is the sacrifice of Noah.
Noah offered a sacrifice and God promised never to destroy the world again with a flood
Noah being a type of Christ.

umm and yes, one man offering an animal blood sacrifice for the world... did I mention many feel Noah landed on the mountain on the equivalent of Easter?

 

[Ben Avraham]

This reminds me of a song...
Do you remember they way we felt .... back when couldn't control ourselves...

Remind me, oh remind me...
I hope your land gets healed. I sincerely do.

This can be better evaluated when listening to the song. For instance, one thing is to read Psalm 137 and another
much more appreciating is to listen to the song, "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat, sat and wept, as we thought
of Zion.' Since I found that video in the You Tube, I listen to that song first before I start to work in the forums.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I think an example is the sacrifice of Noah.
Noah offered a sacrifice and God promised never to destroy the world again with a flood
Noah being a type of Christ.

I see Noah as typical of Abraham.

 

[whirlingmerc]

This can be better evaluated when listening to the song. For instance, one thing is to read Psalm 137 and another
much more appreciating is to listen to the song, "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat, sat and wept, as we thought
of Zion.' Since I found that video in the You Tube, I listen to that song first before I start to work in the forums.

I like how in Psalm 137, we 'hang up our harps' and then David (who is long gone and a type of Christc) picks up his harp and plays his heart out 8 more Psalms and someday all kings will sing of God's glory as well, all kings, all people, everything that has breath. The first octet Psalms start with the blessed man the anointed poured out on Mt Zion reminiscent of Christ's incarnation death and resurrection but this last 8 of David as well, the death in 137 and then the resurrection of David and the redemption of the world.... isn't it great?

Psalms book 5: Songs for coming home

 

[meghanwaterlillies]

This can be better evaluated when listening to the song. For instance, one thing is to read Psalm 137 and another
much more appreciating is to listen to the song, "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat, sat and wept, as we thought
of Zion.' Since I found that video in the You Tube, I listen to that song first before I start to work in the forums.

Oh thanks interestingly helpful

 

[Muffled]

OK, then I will believe that Muslims are Christian and Christians are not, having strayed from being Christian by not understanding the role of Jesus.

Of course, Bahai are Muslims and Raelians are Bahai. I have a sneaking suspicion that Buddhists are Raelian but I can't check right now because I'm writing about how black is white and up is down.

I believe that is a nice try but mostly Muslims do not understand the role of Jesus and although many calling themselves Christian strayed there are still enough who have understood the role of Jesus.

I believe technically that Christians and Jews are Muslims also but not in the sense that adherents of Islam view it.

I don't believe I saw anything on Wikipedia about Raelians that would cause me to agree with that.

 

[Muffled]

I have had a little theological training as well and, yes, Christianity is wrong.

I believe you have to believe that because the alternative is to believe you are on God's **** list. (Begins with an S and ends with a T in case you can't read the asterisks.

 

[rosends]

I believe you have to believe that because the alternative is to believe you are on God's **** list. (Begins with an S and ends with a T in case you can't read the asterisks.

No, I don't have to believe it. I simply believe it and I don't know how not to.

 

[rosends]

I believe that is a nice try but mostly Muslims do not understand the role of Jesus and although many calling themselves Christian strayed there are still enough who have understood the role of Jesus.

I believe technically that Christians and Jews are Muslims also but not in the sense that adherents of Islam view it.

I don't believe I saw anything on Wikipedia about Raelians that would cause me to agree with that.

Well technically, Christians and Jews are all left handed, but not in the sense that left-handed people view it.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I do like how Psalms 88 (the Psalm of Heman) and 89 (the Psalm of Ethan) foreshadow the arrest, death and resurrection of Jesus and end Book 3... since book 2 and 3 of the Psalms poetically match Exodus and Leviticus it is fitting and as the ultimate sacrifice there is a portending of the Messiah dying at the end as the ultimate sacrifice.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I do like how Psalms 88 (the Psalm of Heman) and 89 (the Psalm of Ethan) foreshadow the arrest, death and resurrection of Jesus and end Book 3... since book 2 and 3 of the Psalms poetically match Exodus and Leviticus it is fitting and as the ultimate sacrifice there is a portending of the Messiah dying at the end as the ultimate sacrifice.

Can you show me what, in Psalm 88 you see to assume that it is talking about the death and resurrection of Jesus? What I see is that the main point of that Psalm is that HaShem is not a God of the dead but of the living. That the dead no longer can praise Him. (Ecclesiastes 9:5,6) Why would HaShem bring the dead back to praise Him if the world is already crowded with living ones? Preferably, HaShem rather bless the living to make the world of the living qua Baallei T'shuvah or even converts from the Gentiles to increase the living who can praise the Lord and not bring them from the grave.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I like how in Psalm 137, we 'hang up our harps' and then David (who is long gone and a type of Christc) picks up his harp and plays his heart out 8 more Psalms and someday all kings will sing of God's glory as well, all kings, all people, everything that has breath. The first octet Psalms start with the blessed man the anointed poured out on Mt Zion reminiscent of Christ's incarnation death and resurrection but this last 8 of David as well, the death in 137 and then the resurrection of David and the redemption of the world.... isn't it great?

Psalms book 5: Songs for coming home

Allow me the question but, in what sense was David a type of Jesus? David was an anointed king. Jesus, in spite of being acclaimed king of the Jews in Jerusalem, never became a king at all. (Luke 19:37-40) Yeah! How could David have been a type of Jesus? Do you have any idea what David thought of the resurrection? When he got the news of the death of his son, in a minute he asked for food to eat and went back to his business. When asked about this attitude of his, he said that the dead would never return from the grave, no matter what! (II Samuel 12:23)

 

[Rival]

I do like how Psalms 88 (the Psalm of Heman) and 89 (the Psalm of Ethan) foreshadow the arrest, death and resurrection of Jesus and end Book 3... since book 2 and 3 of the Psalms poetically match Exodus and Leviticus it is fitting and as the ultimate sacrifice there is a portending of the Messiah dying at the end as the ultimate sacrifice.

In-case you missed the boat, G-d does not approve human sacrifice.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Allow me the question but, in what sense was David a type of Jesus? David was an anointed king. Jesus, in spite of being acclaimed king of the Jews in Jerusalem, never became a king at all. (Luke 19:37-40) Yeah! How could David have been a type of Jesus? Do you have any idea what David thought of the resurrection? When he got the news of the death of his son, in a minute he asked for food to eat and went back to his business. When asked about this attitude of his, he said that the dead would never return from the grave, no matter what! (II Samuel 12:23)

The law is a picture of heavenly realities and the law provides for a king, so the law portends the Messiah King. It doesn't matter what David thought or didn't think about it as God wrote a story of His glory using David.

A good example of David as a type of Messiah is in Ezekiel where God will Himself be shepherd after the false shepherd messed things up and after about 25 of these statements God says 'I will set David as shepherd over them' so David is a type of the Messiah but more than that an incarnated Messiah.... isn't it great?

 

[Ron Hackel]

I've shown this in several posts, but here is another try. You are using the wrong definition of words.

Every use of "SIN" in the Bible is not trusting God. Satan has put it in our minds it has to do with our moral actions. That is another definition of sin, but not the one to understand Scripture. The churches use the passage that "sin is transgression of the law". They couple that with "the wages of sin is death" and they're off to the races.

God gave mankind the perfect way to interact (Ten Commandments). Don't take God's advice (don't trust him) and you'll break the commandments. I'll give you more verses that harmonize with what I've stated.

ROMANS 14 : 23 "and everything that does not come from faith is sin."
PSALM 78 : 32 "In spite of all this, they kept on sinning; in spite of his wonders, they did not believe." HEBREWS 3 : 8 "do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion during the time of testing in the desert"
They refused to trust God. He took them from slavery, yet when they so the Egyptians coming after them in the desert, they complained to Moses, "wasn't there enough graves in Egypt that you dragged out here to die. They had lost trust in a few days. After crossing the Red Sea they praised God, but a few days later they complained that God had saved them from the Egyptians just so they could die of thirst. God made the water drinkable at Marah. A few days later their food supply started to run low. Again they complained that God gave them water just so they could starve to death. It went on and on.
PSALM 5 : 10 "Banish them for their many sins, for they have rebelled against you."

JEREMIAH 9 : 3 "They make ready their tongue like a bow, to shoot lies; it is not by truth that they triumph in the land. They go from one sin to another; they do not acknowledge me,' declares the Lord."

JEREMIAH 9 : 5&6 "they weary themselves with sinning. You live in the midst of deception; in their deceit they refuse to acknowledge me."

When the Spirit uses the word righteous it means trusting in the Lord. Jesus gave us the robe of righteousness-trust in a loving God. He didn't die to pay any penalty. There isn't a verse in the Bible that says that.

 

[Thief]

i find it noteworthy.....'sin' in Spanish means....'without'

living in sin.....living without God

 

[Ben Avraham]

i find it noteworthy.....'sin' in Spanish means....'without' living in sin.....living without God

Indeed, "sin in Spanish means without" and I find interesting your analogy of "sin" in Spanish as a transgression of the Law; but I hope you are joking because sin in Spanish does not at all mean a transgression of the Law.