I do not trust the Bible. I trust God.
-
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!
What was the Death of Jesus about?
- Thread starter blü 2
- Start date
Ouch! Interesting, but painful.
Neuropteron
Active Member
i,
Bu2: Even if I accept that (and in fact I know of no rule, then or now, that prevents anyone of the Jewish faith from directly addressing their God ...
According to the Bible:
Ex 19:5 "...if you will strictly obey ...and keep my covenant" What follows is a set of rules (around 600) outlining strict conditions that had to be followed to the letter before petitions or prayers were accepted by Jehovah. The response was: Ex 24z;3 "All that Jehovah has spoken we are willing to do and be obedient"
An Israelite or a proselyte that refused to follow these rule could not gain audience to Jehovah.
An example of required sacrifice is Le 5:11.
According to Christ's words, mankind today (Jews and gentiles alike) can exclusively gain audience to God through Jesus Christ.
John 14:6 "no one comes to the Father except through me".
Directly speaking to God without an intercessor was and still is (for now) out of the question. [Ga 3:19,1Tim 2:5]
However there were exceptions: Adam, Abraham, Moses and Jesus.
Bu2: There was (and is) direct contact between each Jew and his or her God,
This view whilst popular contradicts following statement from Christ: Matt 23 " Jerusalem killer of prophets...stoner of those sent forth to her...how often I wanted to gather your children together...But you did not want it...Look your house is abandoned to you... you will by no means see me ...until you say [quote from Ps 118:26] Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah's name"
Blu2: For a start, free will is not discussed anywhere in the bible that I'm aware of.
Lev 1:3 "present (offerings) of his own free will"
Phil 14 "I (God) do not want anything under compulsion, but of your own free will:.
Deut 30:19 I have put life and death before you...the blessing and the malediction, you must choose life in order that you keep alive..."
Isa 7:6 "...before the boy will know how to reject the bad and choose the good...:
Vlu2: No, the snake spoke truly all the time ─ you will not die [the same day as you eat of the fruit], he said, and he was exactly right.
Since the term day in the Bible is relative an understanding that a day for Jehovah is as a thousand years(2 Pet 3:8), Satan lied because they died before that day ended. Satan is attempting to perpetuate that lie by claiming that the dead are still somehow alive in a spirit realm.
I appreciate your comments Cheers.
Bu2: Even if I accept that (and in fact I know of no rule, then or now, that prevents anyone of the Jewish faith from directly addressing their God ...
According to the Bible:
Ex 19:5 "...if you will strictly obey ...and keep my covenant" What follows is a set of rules (around 600) outlining strict conditions that had to be followed to the letter before petitions or prayers were accepted by Jehovah. The response was: Ex 24z;3 "All that Jehovah has spoken we are willing to do and be obedient"
An Israelite or a proselyte that refused to follow these rule could not gain audience to Jehovah.
An example of required sacrifice is Le 5:11.
According to Christ's words, mankind today (Jews and gentiles alike) can exclusively gain audience to God through Jesus Christ.
John 14:6 "no one comes to the Father except through me".
Directly speaking to God without an intercessor was and still is (for now) out of the question. [Ga 3:19,1Tim 2:5]
However there were exceptions: Adam, Abraham, Moses and Jesus.
Bu2: There was (and is) direct contact between each Jew and his or her God,
This view whilst popular contradicts following statement from Christ: Matt 23 " Jerusalem killer of prophets...stoner of those sent forth to her...how often I wanted to gather your children together...But you did not want it...Look your house is abandoned to you... you will by no means see me ...until you say [quote from Ps 118:26] Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah's name"
Blu2: For a start, free will is not discussed anywhere in the bible that I'm aware of.
Lev 1:3 "present (offerings) of his own free will"
Phil 14 "I (God) do not want anything under compulsion, but of your own free will:.
Deut 30:19 I have put life and death before you...the blessing and the malediction, you must choose life in order that you keep alive..."
Isa 7:6 "...before the boy will know how to reject the bad and choose the good...:
Vlu2: No, the snake spoke truly all the time ─ you will not die [the same day as you eat of the fruit], he said, and he was exactly right.
Since the term day in the Bible is relative an understanding that a day for Jehovah is as a thousand years(2 Pet 3:8), Satan lied because they died before that day ended. Satan is attempting to perpetuate that lie by claiming that the dead are still somehow alive in a spirit realm.
I appreciate your comments Cheers.
A bit late in the thread for me not to mind, but we'll see ...
I know that's the story. The question is, is any of it true, and if so, how much of it is true?
As someone with an interest in history, I want to see what can be said about the books of the bible, in this case the NT, and about an historical Jesus, if there was one. I see no reason to exempt the stories from the totally normal enquiries and procedures as for other ancient documents. No question of discrimination is involved: I have no interest or desire that they should say or not say this thing or that thing. The aim is to get as close to historical truth as we can.
Who am I to argue? All the best!
Colt
Well-Known Member
Fair enough.
For what it’s worth this is what the Urantia Book revelation of 1934 says about the origin of the four gospels.
The Times of Michael's Bestowal: Paper 121, The Urantia Book
I can find nothing to inhibit directly approaching God in any of that.
On the contrary, eg Exodus 22:27 says, "And if he ["your neighbor"] cries to me [God], I will hear, for I am compassionate."
No mediator required.
This is why I ask how come a mediator is required in the 1st century when none was required before.
My apologies if I was unclear. I meant there is no discussion of the meaning of free will that I'm aware of. The phrase "of their own free will" simply means "without external compulsion", no?
I have several difficulties with that view. First, I don't accept that the NT's view of the Tanakh is the correct reading of the Tanakh ─ which on theological questions was and is a Jewish book, and on historical questions is a set of ancient documents to be examined, assessed and as far as possible understood by historical method.
Second, a thousand years is not a day in the story, and no one ever suggests in the story that the snake lied or misrepresented ─ on the contrary everything he said turns out to be correct. Not till Psalm 90:4 do we come to that idea:
For a thousand years in thy sight
Are but as yesterday when it is past,
And as a watch in the night.
Are but as yesterday when it is past,
And as a watch in the night.
which is clearly a simile , not an identification. Nor does the idea recur in the Tanakh that I'm aware of.
Third, there's no mention of sin at all in the Garden story.
Thanks for your reply.
He had to be perfect to satisfy God. He had to suffer everything we did anyway to satisfy us and God. Except for having a period... women are on their own.
Ah, the Urantia book. I looked (briefly) into it in the early part of this century, but it's not the case that I was persuaded.
Thanks for your reply.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It does not matter if God could have achieved the same thing that Jesus achieved with a snap of the fingers because it was Jesus who chose to give His life, according to my beliefs. Baha’u’llah wrote that Jesus besought the one true God the honor of sacrificing himself as a ransom for the sins and iniquities of all the peoples of the earth. Notably, Jesus never said anything about an original sin committed by Adam and Eve as the reason for his sacrifice.
Briefly, the purpose of the cross sacrifice was to free us from the imperfections of our physical nature.
Question.—In verse 22 of chapter 15 of 1 Corinthians it is written: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” What is the meaning of these words?
Answer.—Know that there are two natures in man: the physical nature and the spiritual nature. The physical nature is inherited from Adam, and the spiritual nature is inherited from the Reality of the Word of God, which is the spirituality of Christ. The physical nature is born of Adam, but the spiritual nature is born from the bounty of the Holy Spirit. The first is the source of all imperfection; the second is the source of all perfection.
The Christ sacrificed Himself so that men might be freed from the imperfections of the physical nature and might become possessed of the virtues of the spiritual nature. This spiritual nature, which came into existence through the bounty of the Divine Reality, is the union of all perfections and appears through the breath of the Holy Spirit. It is the divine perfections; it is light, spirituality, guidance, exaltation, high aspiration, justice, love, grace, kindness to all, philanthropy, the essence of life. It is the reflection of the splendor of the Sun of Reality…..
The second meaning of sacrifice is this: Christ was like a seed, and this seed sacrificed its own form so that the tree might grow and develop. Although the form of the seed was destroyed, its reality became apparent in perfect majesty and beauty in the form of a tree. Some Answered Questions, p. 118, 121
On order to understand the full scope of the reasons for the cross sacrifice I suggest that you read the whole chapter:
29: EXPLANATION OF VERSE TWENTY-TWO, CHAPTER FIFTEEN, OF THE FIRST EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS
According to my beliefs God did have an intermediary before Jesus, and the intermediary for the Jewish people was Moses. I believe there were also other intermediaries before and after Jesus and I call them Messengers of God or Manifestations of God.
In short, Jesus was not the only intermediary that ever existed. The New Testament says there is only mediator between God and man:
1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
But the New Testament was only referring to a given period of time, the Dispensation of Jesus (the Christian dispensation). I believe that verse has been misinterpreted by Christians to mean Jesus was the only mediator that would ever exist. Another verse I believe has been widely misinterpreted is the following verse:
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Christians interpreted that to mean that no man could ever come to the Father but by Him. However, please note that the word "ever" is not in that verse. Again, when Jesus said that He was referring to His Dispensation, He was not referring to all of time. When Muhammad appeared He was another Way to the Father and then after that the Bab and Baha'u'llah were a Way.
But why? How can an omniscient God not know all that already, and better than we do? (Including the menstrual cycle?)
This thread is now a couple of hundred posts long and no one has offered me a persuasive reason why Jesus had to die, why his vile death was better than a fraction of a second of God's omnipotence ─ oops, mustn't whine!
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I only just saw your thread and quickly added my two cents worth, from a Baha'i perspective.
#211 Trailblazer, 8 minutes ago
It's not an easy answer.
God is perfect and when we sin we cant be in His place, so Jesus was perfect and suffered so that He could plead for us to God.
When you say you trust God what exactly is it you are trusting?
How do you know God is perfect? Would you know what an imperfect God looks like?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Jesus did no die on the Cross so the questions pointed by one are irrelevant, please. Right?
Regards
But WHY was it necessary for anyone to die, let alone a god sacrificing [his] son to [him]self?
Should not God have replied, "Don't be a dingbat, son! What good would that do?"
Credit where credit is due.
What other methods of freeing us from the imperfections of our physical nature were considered? Why were they all rejected?
Let's say that's correct. Why would a human sacrifice make any difference? What would it change? Why? How else could that change have been effected?
So human sacrifice is a terrific idea, and we should be seeking to expand and normalize its uses, right? Wow, the US could get rid of its national debt down overnight! Or at least by lunchtime Sunday!
How on earth (or elsewhere, for that matter) could a perfect God think it's a terrific idea to have [his] son crucified?
Or is there some back story, Jesus' eagle at the 18th cleaning out all the skins?