The Verdict... Guilty.

[brakelite]

Which chapter and verse in Isaiah is that quote from? I'm having difficulty finding it.

I think @bbyrd009 was thinking of this...
22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

 

[4Jesus]

I think @bbyrd009 was thinking of this...
22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

Not the verse on "desiring mercy and not sacrifice". The verse(s) I can't find in Isaiah is "no Son of Man shall die for antoher's sins".

I wanted to be sure I have what he's talking about correct before I comment, just to not assume.

 

[Naomi25]

I was thinking this very thing. I tend to over-explain and the result is a dissertation...which forces any respondent, in this case yourself, to write a treatise in order to critique my overly long drawn out thesis. And we get lost in a maze of confusing points and we both end up losing interest. So yeah, I also appreciate your contributions to this forum, particularly as one who emotes balance and common sense. Even though you are doctrinally totally wayward. Kidding.

The thing is, brakelite...I appreciate you too much to get into a really big argument with you. And I think perhaps we would if we really threw down. Because, yeah...we both like to go there, theologically, and yeah...we're quite different where we end up. I think we need to continue to tip-toe around the big stuff, and be happy to dabble with the other stuff. Because I like the other stuff. I don't think there's another person I've bumped into on here that challenges me to think as much as you. So...let's sit there!

 

[bbyrd009]

i just think naomis are generally smokin hot :)

That was what made Jesus' sacrifice necessary.

"like" down to here; No Son of Man my die for another's sins... tells me at least that we broadly misunderstand Jesus' (Joshua really, the most common name then, their "John Doe" i guess) role in our salvation, by which i do not mean the possibility of our going up to a place we call "heaven" after we have died, in defiance or ignorance of Scripture, or both, imo

Or we'd all still be expected to sacrifice animals for our sins.

I desire mercy, not sacrifice

the laws were given to a hard-hearted ppl to show them that it was insufficient?
Iow not to appease a vengeful and capricious God? The Catholic god iow? imo

For the sins we have committed, and since God-the-Father sent Jesus to end the sacrificial method to forgive sins/law-breaking, once and for all.

No Son of Man may die for another's sins has not changed, imo

God didn't need it at all. God's fine, He's perfect in His laws. God needs nothing, especially from us. Jesus' sacrifice was for us.

i categorically agree, although your use of "Jesus" over Christ tells me we are still speaking at odds for the most part. Jesus did not die for our sins imo, at least not in the manner that we are taught by Paul's wolves

I will cancel the bargain you made to cheat death...

These verses you mentioned, are old testament, when sacrificing of animals for transgressions was the way God-the-Father setup the sacrificial method to absolve us of the punishment do us when we break the law.

so you say, yes

Which chapter and verse in Isaiah is that quote from? I'm having difficulty finding it.

Ezekiel 18:20
i often confuse the two prophets, my bad

I think it boils down to - have I transgressed God's laws: yes, therefore I need Jesus' sacrifice since God-the-Father sent God-the-Son to pay for my law-breaking if I repent (admit, recognize, and apologize for) of course.

change your mind, imo. Forgive, and you will be forgiven requires no repentance. Jesus forgave unrepentant sinners. Law-keepers require "repentance," which is a Catholic, warped term to use v the original, wherein no penance is required or wanted. Dont get me wrong, i used to believe all tht myself, and much of this is still new to me.

"The best cure for Christianity is reading the Bible"
SClemens

Na, he had nothing to lose at that point. I'm not trying to diminish what he did with the kneeling, but as far as his career, it was going down fast. He was backup material at best at that point, possibly into coaching high school/college instead. It happens - happened to RGIII too - he could've been a great one as far as stats go, but injuries brought him down quick.

i recall hearing this a couple times, but after the fact, after the kneeling thing got advertized; before all i heard was about his potential? So as i dont follow competitive sports any more--except Christian forumizing lol--i'll take your word there

 

[bbyrd009]

I think @bbyrd009 was thinking of this...
22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

also a pertinent v imo however, yeh

 

[4Jesus]

i just think naomis are generally smokin hot :)

"like" down to here; No Son of Man my die for another's sins... tells me at least that we broadly misunderstand Jesus' (Joshua really, the most common name then, their "John Doe" i guess) role in our salvation, by which i do not mean the possibility of our going up to a place we call "heaven" after we have died, in defiance or ignorance of Scripture, or both, imo

I'm trying to understand your position; I'm not attempting to be argumentative just for argument's sake.

The "no Son of Man may die for another's sins" sounds off to me, but I can't find the scripture. Where in the scripture is this verse located?

Are you sure it's not "no son of man may die for another's sins", because if "son of man" is not capitalized, then that's a huge difference in meaning - "Son of Man" is Jesus, while "son of man" is us humans.

Wasn't His name actually more like Yeshua (which is the Hebrew version of Joshua I guess, because there is no 'j' in Hebrew)?

I desire mercy, not sacrifice

the laws were given to a hard-hearted ppl to show them that it was insufficient?
Iow not to appease a vengeful and capricious God? The Catholic god iow? imo
No Son of Man may die for another's sins has not changed, imo

To me, the "I desire mercy, not sacrifice" was a foretelling of Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua ending the method for law-breakers.

I think I remember hard-hearted and "stiff-necked" being used by God-the-Father when OT Jews would turn their back on God and follow non-Jewish ways and traditions and idolization.

I use Jesus to personalize Him as in His human form, rather than his "title" of Christ (means "anointed one" if I remember right).

i categorically agree, although your use of "Jesus" over Christ tells me we are still speaking at odds for the most part. Jesus did not die for our sins imo, at least not in the manner that we are taught by Paul's wolves

I'm not understanding your perspective; sorry for my confusion. How do you mean that Jesus Christ "did not die for our sins"? Why was He sacrificed and who was He sacrificed for if not?

I will cancel the bargain you made to cheat death...

The KJV of that verse, in Isaiah 28:18 is "And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it."

Earlier in Isaiah 28:15, scriptures says "Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:"

This was a foretelling/prophecy of Jesus Christ, as noted in Isaiah 28:16-17 "
16Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
17Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place."

Jesus Christ is the "precious corner stone", by which we were set free from death and hell.

so you say, yes
Ezekiel 18:20
i often confuse the two prophets, my bad

I'm sorry, I'm still no seeing "no Son of Man can die for another's sins", even in Ezekiel 18:20.

As to Ezekiel 18:20, my reading of the verse is that one human, fully human only, cannot take the place of another fully human's responsibility for their actions in sin. This is speaking to humans who are only human; not Jesus Christ, who is God in human form.

change your mind, imo. Forgive, and you will be forgiven requires no repentance. Jesus forgave unrepentant sinners. Law-keepers require "repentance," which is a Catholic, warped term to use v the original, wherein no penance is required or wanted. Dont get me wrong, i used to believe all tht myself, and much of this is still new to me.

Asking to be forgiven inherently means one is repenting; one is recognizing their wrong, and are admitting it, and are sorry for it.

Which unrepentant sinners did Jesus forgive? The thief on the cross, the adulterous woman? To me, their belief in Him was enough for Him to forgive their sins, to repent of what they did. Did they say the words fully? Scripture doesn't say so, and maybe I'm assuming so. I take scripture in 2 Peter 3:9 "9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." to include asking for forgiveness and repentance to be linked.

"The best cure for Christianity is reading the Bible"
SClemens

lol

i recall hearing this a couple times, but after the fact, after the kneeling thing got advertized; before all i heard was about his potential? So as i dont follow competitive sports any more--except Christian forumizing lol--i'll take your word there

From what I remember, he was fizzling out - a couple of teams passed on him to be the starter once SF replaced him. He did have huge potential - and perhaps some of that "fizzling out" was the coaches who looked to replace him for whatever reason. Then the kneeling thing happened; then he was sidelined from the NFL.

 

[bbyrd009]

Where in the scripture is this verse located?

still Ezekiel 18:20

Are you sure it's not "no son of man may die for another's sins", because if "son of man" is not capitalized, then that's a huge difference in meaning - "Son of Man" is Jesus, while "son of man" is us humans.

i'm not aware of whether Jesus used Capitalization in His pronunciation or not, but my guess based upon His humility and other factors--chiefly surrounding the state of Nazareth in 1st Century AD--leads me to believe that the capitalization was made by scribes,
"Meet John Doe"
can anything good come from Nazareth?

Wasn't His name actually more like Yeshua (which is the Hebrew version of Joshua I guess, because there is no 'j' in Hebrew)?

imo the pertinent point is likely that in the original, however it was pronounced, it was the most common male name there/then?

 

[4Jesus]

still Ezekiel 18:20

Right, but I don't see "no Son of Man can die for another's sins" in that verse, verbatim of course. So are you saying "no Son of Man can die for another's sins" as an interpretation of that verse? This is where my confusion is at right now.

i'm not aware of whether Jesus used Capitalization in His pronunciation or not, but my guess based upon His humility and other factors--chiefly surrounding the state of Nazareth in 1st Century AD--leads me to believe that the capitalization was made by scribes,
"Meet John Doe"
can anything good come from Nazareth?

Right, but that phrasing you're using didn't occur in the Old Testament, unless I'm missing it.

In the NT, we do see "Son of Man" capitalized, in reference to Jesus Christ. As in John 5:26-27 "For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, 27 and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man."

imo the pertinent point is likely that in the original, however it was pronounced, it was the most common male name there/then?

Right, no argument here from me. Jesus was a commoner, so why not the most common name? It's fitting, to me.

 

[bbyrd009]

To me, the "I desire mercy, not sacrifice" was a foretelling of Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua ending the method for law-breakers.

i started there too, and i guess Jesus did certainly do that for some. Of course Jews and US still actively sacrifice for sins, in fact under the law almost everything requires blood. Our system actively seeks to affix blame, and sacrifices many innocents along with the guilty, whether they confess and rebound ("repent," in your lexicon) or not, yes? And from experience, these "convictions" follow one pretty much for life, whether they were committed or not, innocents "pleading" to get out of the legal maze notwithstanding, etc

I think I remember hard-hearted and "stiff-necked" being used by God-the-Father when OT Jews would turn their back on God and follow non-Jewish ways and traditions and idolization.

yes, and? I almost get you here, but i will be prolly arguing that this is a diff subject, or i might edit this reply after review: ah, yes, well, imo we should recall here that the law was given to prove its inadequacy, and after all the Bible is the record of the failure of a Theocracy, yeh?

I use Jesus to personalize Him as in His human form, rather than his "title" of Christ (means "anointed one" if I remember right).

as do we all, i spose, but the titles "Anointed One, Messiah, Son of God, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Savior..." these were all titles that belonged to Pharaohs and Caesars! That we should also note Jesus never applied to Himself. Jesus did not write anything. Jesus was Word
(must be heard)
imo

I'm not understanding your perspective; sorry for my confusion. How do you mean that Jesus Christ "did not die for our sins"? Why was He sacrificed and who was He sacrificed for if not?

it was Caiaphas who said that it would be better that one man die for all

but dont get me wrong, i killed Christ "for" my sins, iow when i founded the world and sinned i killed Emmanuel, certainly. The diff in a literal v a spiritual understanding, to allow for Ezekiel, bc no son of man may die for another's sins; the soul that sins will die. right then, imo.

unfort we have mixed our metals now, and have come to believe that Jesus came for death, more abundantly, yeh? Jesus (as Apollo) "returning" to take us all to the Elysian Fields, etc. So iow now "saved" means something diff now

 

[bbyrd009]

knowledge brings sorrow
your sorrow will turn to joy

 

[bbyrd009]

I'm sorry, I'm still no seeing "no Son of Man can die for another's sins", even in Ezekiel 18:20.

scribes
google has no probs with it tho; for now

As to Ezekiel 18:20, my reading of the verse is that one human, fully human only, cannot take the place of another fully human's responsibility for their actions in sin. This is speaking to humans who are only human; not Jesus Christ, who is God in human form.

go with that, then :)
i do not know. anything.
best to figger that i am even prolly lying to you on purpose, at least until verified?

Asking to be forgiven inherently means one is repenting; one is recognizing their wrong, and are admitting it, and are sorry for it.

lol, good one. I ask for forgiveness when i am caught, usually, dunno about you,
Bible Search: ask for forgiveness !
Bible Search: ask God for forgiveness !!!
dont be deceived imo!
asking for forgiveness is for chumps!
confess your sins, and forgive those who do not confess even!
imo

Which unrepentant sinners did Jesus forgive?

ah, kidding right? Father forgive them, for they know not what they do
?

 

[bbyrd009]

Right, but I don't see "no Son of Man can die for another's sins" in that verse, verbatim of course.

english, what cn i tell ya. theyre where our notion of hell came from, you know...

So are you saying "no Son of Man can die for another's sins" as an interpretation of that verse? This is where my confusion is at right now.

ah, my bad; lets ask Lex imo... Ezekiel 18:20 Lexicon: "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself. now imo just ignore that english there, and them wordy-words in column 1, and just kinda absorb columns 234, if you will, and decide for yourself what the intent of the v was. is. always will be. until it changes lol
youll note how you might be quite at odds with the english at times, no so much here tho imo, i mean bam there it is whaddya want
Jesus would be a (spiritual) "Father" to us itc yeh?

Right, but that phrasing you're using didn't occur in the Old Testament, unless I'm missing it.

when you type it into google it takes you right to it

 

[bbyrd009]

In the NT, we do see "Son of Man" capitalized, in reference to Jesus Christ. As in John 5:26-27 "For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, 27 and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man."

and what are you?
if not a priest to a Priest?
arent you a son of man?
funny that He acshelly dint have a man in His line at all huh
lol

knowledge is sorrow

 

[bbyrd009]

to most people, the Bible is lying, right out in the open

 

[FollowHim]

A youth pastor rented a family member an uninspected house that had dangerous problems. The family member was left with permanent injuries. Our family tried to follow the "not take a brother to court" - it was WRONG. The family member incurred exorbitant bills with no way to pay for them. He couldn't get needed surgery because we let the youth pastor off.

I think we applied the wrong Scripture at the wrong time. It still hurts. That corrupt youth pastor walked off - he's a millionaire by the way. His family lost their business and he was shamed nationwide but he still never paid for the injury and the family member still has no money to pay for needed surgery.

I learned just what jerks "Christians" can be. In some cases I've found them to be worse than those in Satan's camp.

That is a sad story.
It also highlights separate issues, personal forgiveness and civil responsibility. House insurance and professional indemnity insurance cover civil liability. You pursue civil damages for failures while forgiving the individuals.
Different societies have also different views on health cover, so this makes things further complicated.
Lack of support and care is not the same as abusive and violent acts. Each individual is responsible for looking out for danger, and being wise. God bless you.
I have known many get freely in a bad place,, and not see what they should have done differently, rather than blindly trust others.

 

[Soverign Grace]

That is a sad story.
It also highlights separate issues, personal forgiveness and civil responsibility. House insurance and professional indemnity insurance cover civil liability. You pursue civil damages for failures while forgiving the individuals.
Different societies have also different views on health cover, so this makes things further complicated.
Lack of support and care is not the same as abusive and violent acts. Each individual is responsible for looking out for danger, and being wise. God bless you.
I have known many get freely in a bad place,, and not see what they should have done differently, rather than blindly trust others.

Yes it is a sad story. I felt that God showed us justice but we still should have held that jerk accountable - and he is a jerk. His family lost their business but he still owns part of a golf course. His wife left him I heard, so what he didn't pay in money he paid in life hurts. He ran into a woman and killed her and got off because he allegedly knows a lot of people. And his corrupt family still runs a church. I suspect that they're skimming money from it. You have a point - it highlights personal forgiveness and civil responsibility. I wanted to see a lawyer but my husband was hoodwinked by the patriarch who was a BIBLE TEACHER - my husband learned too late that someone can sit and teach the bible - quite eloquently - and be a cheat. The pastor called us over and cut loose about the corrupt family and told us they ruined a lot of lives - he left. I don't know why God continues to allow them to own a church. A woman i know who left their business told me she's afraid they're misleading many people. The pastor left but they found another pastor willing to sell his soul.

There is a lot of sin in the Christian world, sad to say. I remember listening to Wayne Monbleau and he said right on the air: "someChristians you can't turn your back on."

A family member became friends with a nice young man who told us that he was raised without a father and he used to get beat up every day on the way home from school - by the kids from a Catholic school.

 

[brakelite]

I don't know why God continues to allow them to own a church.

Because he allows the devil enough rope to hang himself. God, if He started to judge the devil now by squashing everything he accomplishes, He would be merely confirming the devil's accusations regarding His fitness to reign. Similar to Trump's silly tweets and no holds barred approach to his enemies. All he is doing is confirming in the minds of those who oppose him that he's a tyrant and not fit for the presidency. Best to let others go...if they are in the wrong, eventually your way will be vindicated, and theirs will perish. The devil boasts, by his rebellious attitude, that he can do better. All God is doing is allowing him to prove it. And the further we move on into history, the more evidence mounts up that he is failing, and failing abysmally. Unfortunately, not everyone is convinced as yet. But one day, prophecy tells us, the devil's works will be made wholly manifest and then every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that God was absolutely right to deal with the insurrection in the manner He has. To let things play out and finally and forever prove beyond a shadow of doubt that God is love.

 

[FollowHim]

Yes it is a sad story. I felt that God showed us justice but we still should have held that jerk accountable - and he is a jerk. His family lost their business but he still owns part of a golf course. His wife left him I heard, so what he didn't pay in money he paid in life hurts. He ran into a woman and killed her and got off because he allegedly knows a lot of people. And his corrupt family still runs a church. I suspect that they're skimming money from it. You have a point - it highlights personal forgiveness and civil responsibility. I wanted to see a lawyer but my husband was hoodwinked by the patriarch who was a BIBLE TEACHER - my husband learned too late that someone can sit and teach the bible - quite eloquently - and be a cheat. The pastor called us over and cut loose about the corrupt family and told us they ruined a lot of lives - he left. I don't know why God continues to allow them to own a church. A woman i know who left their business told me she's afraid they're misleading many people. The pastor left but they found another pastor willing to sell his soul.

There is a lot of sin in the Christian world, sad to say. I remember listening to Wayne Monbleau and he said right on the air: "someChristians you can't turn your back on."

A family member became friends with a nice young man who told us that he was raised without a father and he used to get beat up every day on the way home from school - by the kids from a Catholic school.

You raise an important point. We are either filled with the Holy Spirit, and walk in His ways or we do not.
Because people claim much on the surface does not mean they have the reality within. By their fruits you will know them.
In fellowships there is trust of the leaders, but this is down to the believers to discern sin and bring it out into the open if unrepentented of.

Eternity is framed by those who follow Jesus. We are called to shine like lights, no matter how people behave around us. And judgement will fall in time on all, some sooner than others. Looking to Jesus and learning to love sinners and saints alike is always hard to follow. Jesus loved Judas, but he also knew him. So likewise preachers can learn how to stir up congregations, but this does not mean they know the Lord of all and are alive.

What I have always found hard, is I am only responsible for myself and stand before the Lord. I cannot blame others or even be judgemental but only look to encourage and help the poor and needy to find the life that is in Jesus and His ways. Sinful people will come and go, claim great things and yet their lives fall apart as the sin they dwell in becomes clear and plain. Our teacher is Jesus and we listen to Him. I just want to serve and bring praise to Him, and if others to likewise, amen.

 

[brakelite]

In fellowships there is trust of the leaders, but this is down to the believers to discern sin and bring it out into the open if unrepentented of.

Which raises another issue. How many true concerned Christians have raised issues within their fellowships, only to be rebuffed, rebuked, ignored, or told not to "stir the pot". The entire reformation was born in an atmosphere of refusal to repent. It is a very rare and miraculous occurrence for any church to wholly turn away from a false doctrine...sin...and to walk in another direction. Churches are renowned for getting too blasé and comfortable. The creation of numerous independent churches after the reformation was inevitable. And it continues for the same reason. Division and separation is often the only viable solution to keeping oneself clean.
Which I think explains why God calls those true people to come out...because the time will come when He does indeed judge those wayward churches and if you are still clinging to them, you are deemed as partaking of the sins and thus will also partake of her judgement. (Revelation 18)

 

[Grailhunter]

Right, but I don't see "no Son of Man can die for another's sins" in that verse, verbatim of course. So are you saying "no Son of Man can die for another's sins" as an interpretation of that verse? This is where my confusion is at right now.



Right, but that phrasing you're using didn't occur in the Old Testament, unless I'm missing it.

In the NT, we do see "Son of Man" capitalized, in reference to Jesus Christ. As in John 5:26-27 "For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, 27 and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man."



Right, no argument here from me. Jesus was a commoner, so why not the most common name? It's fitting, to me.

AAAAHHHH! Riddle me this, Why did Christ refer to Himself as the Son of Man? You might start by looking at how long this question has been debated. Good Luck.