Truth is not relative

[amadeus]

wadr--"what a dumb revelation"?

wadr = with all due respect

 

[justbyfaith]

ok, ty

(No son of man may die for another's sins;)

Yet Jesus died for us...I think you must be misinterpreting the verse in question.

Can you give the reference so that we can look at it in its context?

 

[justbyfaith]

wadr = with all due respect

Knew that, I was just making a funny.

 

[amadeus]

Yes, the Lord Jesus did go to hell on our behalf (in our place, if we believe in Him).

but you didnt Quote that, wadr bc it is surely not true, and believing will not make it so.
You might note the level of certainty you are exhibiting? See someone who can hear knows what that means right off ok

Has someone misplaced hell?

Did Jesus simply come "down" to hell when he was born of Mary in Bethlehem? According to the scriptures, did he not live here on planet Earth about 33½ years. Was it not time spent in hell? Why is that few people consider that this place where are now in the flesh might be hell? Have they, we, misplaced hell?

"Jesus wept" John 11:35

Did Jesus come down from the glory that He had with His Father to be born in Bethlehem... to be born in hell? He certainly did come to where the dead dwelt, the realm of the natural man: hell. Everyone here who has not been born again or born from above [John 3:3] is blind to the things of God and remains "dead", remains in hell, does he not? As Jesus put it:

"... Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead." Matt 8:22

Anyone who could see none of the Truth of God was effectively dead, were they not? Are they not? Jesus came down to this death, this hell, Himself, but He overcame everything that stood between Him and His place with His Father. This included His corruptible body. He made it possible for those who are in sin and death and hell to take hold of the Life he brought, did he not?

"I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." John 10:10

Of course, we may ask, how many are pursuing a better death instead or a more comfortable hell? What is Life? What is a better death? Is there someplace worse than man's present place of death... his present hell?

 

[justbyfaith]

Hell is defined as the heart of the earth in the verse in question.

 

[amadeus]

Yet Jesus died for us...I think you must be misinterpreting the verse in question.

Can you give the reference so that we can look at it in its context?

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." Ezek 18:20

 

[amadeus]

Hell is defined as the heart of the earth in the verse in question.

And man is just a bit of earth is he not, a dead bit of earth unless or until he has received the Life which Jesus brought? So then is not hell in the heart of the man?

 

[justbyfaith]

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." Ezek 18:20

In context, this is talking about the fact that the son does not bear the iniquity of his father; it does not say there that Jesus cannot die in our place as a substitutionary atonement.

Using scripture to attempt to contradict other scripture will be a fruitless exercise; since scripture interprets scripture and therefore it is to be taken in the understanding wherein it does not contradict the other verse in question.

Therefore Ezekiel 18:20 cannot be taken to mean that 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 is invalid.

 

[justbyfaith]

And man is just a bit of earth is he not, a dead bit of earth unless or until he has received the Life which Jesus brought? So then is not hell in the heart of the man?

I believe that the scripture is to be taken more literally than that.

While your interpretation may be valid, it does not nullify the traditional one.

 

[bbyrd009]

Yet Jesus died for us...I think you must be misinterpreting the verse in question.

yet you cannot Quote that either, as unbelievable as that maybe sounds, Bible Search: Jesus died for our sins, so i dunno (as i have given no interpretation wadr) but maybe not?

Can you give the reference so that we can look at it in its context?

well google can, it's in a couple places i guess, Ezekiel and Chronicles i think? Btw "Christ died for our sins" we can find that, so i guess some sleight of hand or whatever going on

 

[justbyfaith]

yet you cannot Quote that either, as unbelievable as that maybe sounds, Bible Search: Jesus died for our sins, so i dunno (as i have given no interpretation wadr) but maybe not?

Try "Christ died for our sins"

 

[justbyfaith]

Isa 42:19, Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD'S servant?

 

[bbyrd009]

it does not say there that Jesus cannot die in our place as a substitutionary atonement.

ah i guess not, for that Yah felt it better to state that Himself, right
I desire mercy, not sacrifice

 

[bbyrd009]

doesnt matter though i guess, ppl who are determined to go up to heaven after they have died to become immortals invariably speak as if they know stuff, right? Their "beliefs" are invariably--as in without exception--Absolute Truths, that we all must believe or be condemned--sound fam?--and we have the Roman Centurion's speech habits available for review too i guess. And his "beliefs" did not condemn him either, right?

So imo no one who "believes" Jesus died for their sins is condemned; Edom was condemned for a diff reason eh

 

[justbyfaith]

ah i guess not, for that Yah felt it better to state that Himself, right
I desire mercy, not sacrifice

It also says, to obey is better than sacrifice...

I think that these simply mean that sacrifice is less desired than some other, better things.

 

[marks]

In context, this is talking about the fact that the son does not bear the iniquity of his father; it does not say there that Jesus cannot die in our place as a substitutionary atonement.

Using scripture to attempt to contradict other scripture will be a fruitless exercise; since scripture interprets scripture and therefore it is to be taken in the understanding wherein it does not contradict the other verse in question.

Therefore Ezekiel 18:20 cannot be taken to mean that 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 is invalid.

Jesus is in fact neither our son or our father. So just on the face of it, there is no application. And the point of the passage is to say that each will die for their own sin, and that is completely true.

But there is no prohibition to our dying through another's death. Through one who can survive death, and back into life, so we can go with Him, through death, but back into life, eternal life now.

Much love!

 

[justbyfaith]

and we have the Roman Centurion's speech habits available for review too i guess. And his "beliefs" did not condemn him either, right?

The Centurion (Cornelius) was not saved merely by his almsgivings. He had to call for Peter and have the gospel preached to him, before he actually believed and received the Holy Ghost with his friends; and was thereby saved.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus is in fact neither our son or our father.

I think that if you look at Hebrews 2:11-13 and Malachi 2:10 you might change your mind.

But He is certainly not our father biologically.

 

[bbyrd009]

It also says, to obey is better than sacrifice...

I think that these simply mean that sacrifice is less desired than some other, better things.

ok, so i dont know, ok, but imo it might be the diff in how we interpret the "for" in Christ died for our sins

 

[bbyrd009]

Jesus is in fact neither our son or our father.

well, you say that, but Jesus would fit the Scriptural def of a "father" to us right