The Verdict... Guilty.

[4Jesus]

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.

I don't think Jews, in the U.S. or Israel, are sacrificing animals for sins. If it is, it's not a common practice. In Israel, they don't even have an offical temple to execute the sacrificing.

They do still celebrate, or at least recognize, the Day of Atonement, or at least those who believe in God-the-Father do so.

If you meant this in a non-literal sense, in that we have a "justice" system and penal system, then I'd agree, but that's only to satisfy human "justice" and human law.

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

Oh yeah, totally agree. It's a money-maker for sure, in the least. Human justice falls so far short of divine justice (and mercy) that it's almost uncomparable except for some spelling of words.

I think this is one of God's overall points too, with this time period - justice, true justice, cannot flow from unjust beings...only God is just.

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?

Depends on which definition of Theocracy you mean. If you mean a "government ruled by a religious authority", then yes, I agree, because that does not remove humans from the governing body. If you mean a "a form of government in which God is recognized as the supreme civil ruler of the state, and his laws are taken as the statute-book of the kingdom", with the added meaning of "in person", then no, I'd disagree, because God hasn't ruled on Earth in person.

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

Pharaohs and Casesars may have wanted them to mean it was them, their followers may have wanted them to mean it was them...even satan wants it to mean him. That does not make it true though. Beings can and do counterfeit what God says and does, but that doesn't make it true.

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

Eh, antichrists say a lot of things. :)

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

I guess what I'm aruging is that you're mixing up "no son of man can die for another's sins" with "no Son of Man can die for another's sins", which aren't comparable, because Jesus Christ, the Son of Man, isn't only a "son of man" human. So the "no son of man can die for another's sins" doesn't apply to Jesus Christ's death for our sins. Therefore, the statement "no son of man can die for another's sins" does not negate Jesus' sacrifice for humans' sins.

 

[4Jesus]

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

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?

I think I'm understanding it; of course I could be wrong. It means each human is responsible for his/her own sins, and no other human can take the place of a human to "pay" for their sins.

God can curse humans, and does, even generational curses. But no human (fully and only, human) can take the place of another human (fully and only, human) in payment of sin. This is the precise reason of why Jesus is the only one who could pay the Father for sins committed by humans (fully and only, human).

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

I see the spelling you're using to form the basis of your argument, and I see the spelling of the verse(s) you're referencing, and they are not the same. In fact, you're blurring the meaning with the slight spelling changes, in my opinion. So your basis for your argument is off.

 

[4Jesus]

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

Me, I'm a sinful human (fully and only, human); not good enough to teach, I can say that ;)

Am I a "son of man", yes, I am. But I am not the "Son of Man". Huge difference between "son of man" and "Son of Man". One is a human (fully and only, human), the other is Jesus Christ.

Jesud did have a man in His line, many men actually, from the line of Mary, as stated in Matthew - generations upon generations of men He (half, or 3/4) came from. Even Joseph's line in Luke (I think it was Luke, I'd have to go and check) was stated.

 

[4Jesus]

I missed this post, sorry about the order of replies.

scribes
google has no probs with it tho; for now

All hail google, eh?

go with that, then :)
i do not know. anything.

lol, yes you do. At least 1 thing ;)

best to figger that i am even prolly lying to you on purpose, at least until verified?

Ooh, now this is fun. So many possibilities...Are you not bbyrd009 now? Are you not a Christian now? Are you really a Christian and just testing convictions to test others or just yourself?

lol

lol, good one. I ask for forgiveness when i am caught, usually, dunno about you,

It wasn't funny to me. No, I don't ask forgiveness when I'm caught. I ask for forgiveness after I've recognized how I messed up, nothing to do with "being caught", by either humans or God.

If you're saying it's funny because why would one do something that they know is wrong and not do it, then sure, that's not repenting nor not knowing you messed up - that's purposeful. Can one repent after and ask for forgiveness for something done purposefully? I think so. That's part of repenting and asking forgiveness too - it's not just sins we don't know we've committed; it's also for what we do know, and have come to a point where one can say "I was wrong".

Bible Search: ask for forgiveness !
Bible Search: ask God for forgiveness !!!
dont be deceived imo!
asking for forgiveness is for chumps!

Thinking you're perfect and never not wrong as an angel or human is for chumps. That's arrogance too. Plus, it is antichrist if one is to believe in Jesus at all.

confess your sins, and forgive those who do not confess even!
imo

Agreed, between one and another human. That's different than to Jesus Christ though. Jesus Christ is not the same as a human, thus the same cannot be applied to Jesus as to the "fully and only human level".

You seem to be saying, and I could be wrong here, that Jesus Christ is the same as a human...

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

For this verse, do you agree that you cannot say they were forgiven definitively just as much as I cannot say they weren't forgiven, agreed? That verse does not state definitively what occurred, unlike with the thief on the cross and the positive confirmation of "you will be with me in Paradise today".

Additionally, I don't know that Jesus was stating they were to be forgiven overall, moreso for their acts of treatment of him - the unnecessary treatment of him like the scourging, mocking, spitting on him, etc.

To me, this doesn't mean they are forgiven for the disbelief in Him. If that were the case, there wouldn't need to be almost all of the New Testament, nor any of Jesus' teachings and ways followed, nor even belief in Jesus. For that verse to have the meaning you are saying it does, it pretty much throws out Jesus' sacrifice, and belief in Him, and almost all of the NT. Do you really think all of the NT, including Jesus death and belief in Him is all thrown out because of one request/statement to His Father? If so, then Jesus could just take whoever He wants, for any reason, and none of Christianity is even needed, nor is belief in God-the-Father, nor is God-the-Father's commandments, etc.

So if Jesus didn't undo everything we know about God-the-Father and God-the-Son in that one verse, what else could it mean? To me, it meant Jesus was asking the Father to forgive them for their treatment of him (could've just crucified Him without the torture and mocking) in His sacrifice, but does not absolve them for their disbelief in Him.

Are you suggesting that all of Christianity, God-the-Son Jesus, and God-the-Father Himself, are all negated because of that one statement to God-the-Father as God-the-Son Jesus was dying?

To me, that verse is another way of saying 1 Timothy 2:3-4 "3For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."

and Luke 13:5 “But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”

 

[brakelite]

The reason no man can die for another's sins is because his death can only be the inevitable conclusion to his own sins. What Jesus was able to do by living a sinless life, He was able to take upon Himself the sins of the world, then gave His life as an atonement.

 

[brakelite]

Why did Christ refer to Himself as the Son of Man?

Phil.2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

In other words, Jesus's humility motivated Him to be identified as a man rather than as divine. He "took the lower room". In Jesus with all His dealings with others, there was never a hint of superiority or anything to suggest that He thought of Himself as deserving recognition or honour due to His station.

 

[bbyrd009]

I don't think Jews, in the U.S. or Israel, are sacrificing animals for sins. If it is, it's not a common practice. In Israel, they don't even have an offical temple to execute the sacrificing.

no, they pretty much do it literally in secret, although both countries are waaay involved in Molech sacrifice spiritually speaking anyway. but yes, Jews are literally sacrificing in Israel as we speak, couple diff Zionist sects in Jerusalem doing it even, who strangely do not seem to get along with each other? lol
lot of searching for literal Red Heifers goin on, lotta trying to husband one, apparently "Red Heifer" has to meet certain very specific quals that i guess are unobtanium, dont really know much there myself though. But lotta freaky Jewish Splinters now, some quite violent even, which is so weird bc Orthos do not even have to "serve" in their military! The hypocrisy is thick lol

They do still celebrate, or at least recognize, the Day of Atonement, or at least those who believe in God-the-Father do so.

i guess most Jews are lapsed now, pretty much like us, esp the younger gen. (Many even protesting the apartheid there now)

If you meant this in a non-literal sense, in that we have a "justice" system and penal system, then I'd agree, but that's only to satisfy human "justice" and human law.

if someone stole your car or broke into your homeor raped your daughter, who would you call?

Why would you call them?
i know, its like "well who the heck else would i call," huh?
lol

If you mean a "a form of government in which God is recognized as the supreme civil ruler of the state, and his laws are taken as the statute-book of the kingdom", with the added meaning of "in person", then no, I'd disagree, because God hasn't ruled on Earth in person.

"in person," lol. sorry. No persons in God at all, see? God does not "exist?"
God rules me on earth "in person" just great bro, fwiw. When i let Him anyway
1 Samuel 8

Pharaohs and Casesars may have wanted them to mean it was them, their followers may have wanted them to mean it was them...even satan wants it to mean him. That does not make it true though. Beings can and do counterfeit what God says and does, but that doesn't make it true.

not disagreeing, either. But the point was that that nation (the ppl) thought of them and referred to them in that way, and Jesus (vicariously, via others) assumed those titles directly from them, those specific titles, on purpose, a point likely being "even though something like 'Master of the Universe' or whatever, some over-arching end-all Title would have gotten the same point across" perhaps

Eh, antichrists say a lot of things. :)

but they arent recorded in Scripture? And i dunno if it is right to call Caiaphas antichrist, either, tbh. Imagine being in those shoes lol, nation coming apart at the seams etc

So the "no son of man can die for another's sins" doesn't apply to Jesus Christ's death for our sins. Therefore, the statement "no son of man can die for another's sins" does not negate Jesus' sacrifice for humans' sins.

sure, sure, ok, maybe Jesus calling Himself by that very specific phrase was just a coincidence, yeh?
i do not know

So the "no son of man can die for another's sins" doesn't apply to Jesus Christ's death for our sins. Therefore, the statement "no son of man can die for another's sins" does not negate Jesus' sacrifice for humans' sins.

sure, sure, ok, maybe Jesus calling Himself by that very specific phrase was just a coincidence, yeh
i do not know

I think I'm understanding it; of course I could be wrong. It means each human is responsible for his/her own sins, and no other human can take the place of a human to "pay" for their sins.

be perfect, as I am perfect i guess.
also vastly missed imo. Not perfectionism at all. Plenty of missing the mark, at times.
confession. confession, confession, imo. Ima go miss the mark right now, just bc!
wont be intentional, but a step in a new direction involves less than perfection the first time.
go and miss the mark today, and if you inadvertently step on some toes which you will in any new undertaking, like spreading the Gospel you are going to step on some idol-carvers toes oh well, confess and apologize and dont even ask for forgiveness imo, unless you can Quote it to me from Scripture! Ah jeez you got me started lol, liable to get all funky up in herenow

 

[bbyrd009]

i do not need Jesus as a sacrifice to appease God for my sins; i need to learn how to grow a pair when the cannons are levelled at me, and i am about to die for something i believe in
imo

 

[bbyrd009]

Me, I'm a sinful human (fully and only, human)

so you say, yes

not good enough to teach, I can say that

oh god dont get me started on those who would teach lol. Thank you Yah, for those who presume to teach :)

Am I a "son of man", yes, I am. But I am not the "Son of Man". Huge difference between "son of man" and "Son of Man". One is a human (fully and only, human), the other is Jesus Christ.

ok

(pick up your cross and follow Me)
but in your case why do that right?
even greater things will you do...
nah, pass

Jesud did have a man in His line, many men actually, from the line of Mary

ha, ok. Dont think it works like that, but obv the daughters of men have male progenitors, yes

So many possibilities

chiefly that i might likely be wrong on some detail or whatever

I ask for forgiveness after I've recognized how I messed up, nothing to do with "being caught", by either humans or God.

well, fwiw i suggest that you stop doing that pagan thing asap. It will actually have a profound effect on people, for the better, i think you will agree. You might even assume forgiveness, i guess
Bible Search: ask God for forgiveness
Bible Search: ask for forgiveness
:)
Scripture is a trip huh

Can one repent after and ask for forgiveness for something done purposefully?

imo the Unforgivable Sin is the one you are about to commit on purpose, knowing better; but i have just come to this perspective, still trying it out. No, i dont think it means that we cant ever be forgiven again or "saved," imo it is written dialectically, to mean...something closer to maybe what i just said. But i dont know for sure.

Thinking you're perfect and never not wrong as an angel or human is for chumps. That's arrogance too. Plus, it is antichrist if one is to believe in Jesus at all.

?
dont get me wrong, i meant
"confess and rebound" (repent)

That's different than to Jesus Christ though. Jesus Christ is not the same as a human, thus the same cannot be applied to Jesus as to the "fully and only human level".

of course we are vastly encouraged to worship Jesus now, and after all the Son of Man must be raised up like a snake on a pole in order to draw all men to Himself right, but i suggest that a change of mind must occur for one to pick up their cross and follow--which is obv irrelevant if Jesus is one sget-out-of-jail-free-card--or to do greater things.

when i was a child i spoke like a child and etc, milk v meat and all that.
briefly, if you still agree with any Org that has a Cross on their roof, well, pause and reflect imo. Great place to start, sure. Not finish. imo

 

[bbyrd009]

 

[bbyrd009]

For this verse, do you agree that you cannot say they were forgiven definitively just as much as I cannot say they weren't forgiven, agreed?

who told you that you were naked?
God is love

To me, this doesn't mean they are forgiven for the disbelief in Him. If that were the case, there wouldn't need to be almost all of the New Testament, nor any of Jesus' teachings and ways followed, nor even belief in Jesus.

when you go look, all of those "belief" turn into pistis though bro...five ways to express "belief" in the original, only one way to say "have faith" tho!
dem scribes, i tell ya
no judgement for "beliefs" in Scripture, that i can find

So if Jesus didn't undo everything we know about God-the-Father and God-the-Son in that one verse, what else could it mean? To me, it meant Jesus was asking the Father to forgive them for their treatment of him (could've just crucified Him without the torture and mocking) in His sacrifice, but does not absolve them for their disbelief in Him.

prepare to be undone, imo. Completely and irreversibly undone. Jesus did not come here to die as a sacrifice to God for your sins, as all was forgiven already? Need that v? Those vv? I know this is a hard step, goes against everything we are taught, yes

Are you suggesting that all of Christianity, God-the-Son Jesus, and God-the-Father Himself, are all negated because of that one statement to God-the-Father as God-the-Son Jesus was dying?

yes. Well, hardly only that v, but yes.
you and your sons will be here with me
Return to Me and I will return to you
No Son of Man may die for another's sins
No one has ever gone up to heaven
There is only One Immortal
that they may be one as We are One
Apollos watered
ha, a little watering going on there, hmm

and Luke 13:5 “But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”

so then rebound, and skip the penance imo, or you will perish, sure
not disagreeing there!
Only see "saved" means something diff to you than to me, ok
I came that you might have life, more abundantly

 

[bbyrd009]

The reason no man can die for another's sins is because his death can only be the inevitable conclusion to his own sins. What Jesus was able to do by living a sinless life, He was able to take upon Himself the sins of the world, then gave His life as an atonement.

Jesus wanted to live, not die, and the sales brochure is a lie bro, a total fabrication to draw us to Christ, to get us started on the path, imo. How will you be motivated to do greater things than the person you find yourself "worshipping," may i ask? Who could do that? Think about it imo

the heir is under servants until he inherits, and is no better than a slave, even though he is the master of all

Phil.2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

In other words, Jesus's humility motivated Him to be identified as a man rather than as divine. He "took the lower room". In Jesus with all His dealings with others, there was never a hint of superiority or anything to suggest that He thought of Himself as deserving recognition or honour due to His station.

"meet john doe"

daughters of Jerusalem, do not find love until you are ready
count the cost

no kidding there. Stay in your cong until you are ready
to walk out that front door, ok.
strange town, no friends, no money.
think about it.
bc leaving the world, for real, is not an easy or pleasant thing

 

[brakelite]

Jesus wanted to live, not die, and the sales brochure is a lie bro, a total fabrication to draw us to Christ, to get us started on the path, imo. How will you be motivated to do greater things than the person you find yourself "worshipping," may i ask? Who could do that? Think about it imo

As the Father in Christ did the works, so Christ in us, does the 'greater' works. Jesus started with 12 disciples to lay the foundation, but He continues to be the builder of the house...temple...Himself being the chief cornerstone. Without Him we can do nothing. The apostles, with the Spirit of Christ within, did greater works...3000 then 5000 converted in a day. The miracles in Acts were just as significant as when Jesus was there in the flesh.
I have no problem worshiping the Son of God, through Whom the Father created all things. Being the Son, begotten(not created) of the Father Jesus/Yeshua (not His name before His incarnation) was every bit as divine as His Father, thus worthy of worship.

no kidding there. Stay in your cong until you are ready
to walk out that front door, ok.
strange town, no friends, no money.
think about it.
bc leaving the world, for real, is not an easy or pleasant thing

I have friends who have done that...and yes, the time is coming when we will all have to follow that dictum.

 

[bbyrd009]

Jesus started with 12 disciples to lay the foundation

did anyone ever reveal the last 9 foundations in that thread? Any approach to The Pearl there?

Without Him we can do nothing.

Word

I have no problem worshiping the Son of God

ha well i guess maybe it depends on what is meant by worship there, and prolly even Son of God as many as do the will of God, these are the sons of God right

 

[amadeus]

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.

"And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." Phil 2:8

 

[amadeus]

The reason no man can die for another's sins is because his death can only be the inevitable conclusion to his own sins. What Jesus was able to do by living a sinless life, He was able to take upon Himself the sins of the world, then gave His life as an atonement.

Perhaps Jesus made it possible for the rest of us die a death that qualified us for Life. We have to die to sin and without the sacrifice of Jesus who could do that? For those who accept it, Jesus cleared the slate for us and opened the Way for us through the power of the Holy Spirit to travel with God to the end of our course.

 

[brakelite]

ha well i guess maybe it depends on what is meant by worship there,

IMO The ultimate expression of worship is full surrender....akin to what you suggested elsewhere, leaving the world.

and prolly even Son of God as many as do the will of God, these are the sons of God right

The Son begotten before creation is the one I speak of.

 

[bbyrd009]

IMO The ultimate expression of worship is full surrender....akin to what you suggested elsewhere, leaving the world.

The Son begotten before creation is the one I speak of.

ah, yes, death, more abundantly, i forget myself here sorry

 

[shnarkle]

we can act our way into a new way of feeling much quicker than we can feel ourselves into a new way of acting. Worship is an act that develops feelings for God, not a feeling for God that is expressed in an act of worship.”

This is what the Old Testament teaches. The Mosaic law is a "learn by doing" methodology. One doesn't understand why they are doing what God tells them. They must exercise obedience in faith in order to understand. This is faith seeking understanding. This is why so many Christians will never understand the wisdom of God's law. Disobedience is the only way to justify one's own ways to God.

So, after having read the above, how would YOU defend God when looking into a pit of burning children?

God does not descend to the roundtable of morality. Abraham does not question God's request to sacrifice his own son because the same God who is asking him to do this is the same God who gave Abraham his sense of moral revulsion for this request in the first place.

When looking into a pit of burning children, we see the depravity of humanity. We see the deceit and desperate wickedness within the heart of fallen humanity. The veneer of civilization is so thin, it is practically transparent, and yet what else can the hopelessly depraved heart do, except blame God? '

Without the gift of repentance, the wickedness of humanity will die cursing God.

 

[brakelite]

This is what the Old Testament teaches. The Mosaic law is a "learn by doing" methodology. One doesn't understand why they are doing what God tells them. They must exercise obedience in faith in order to understand. This is faith seeking understanding. This is why so many Christians will never understand the wisdom of God's law. Disobedience is the only way to justify one's own ways to God.



God does not descend to the roundtable of morality. Abraham does not question God's request to sacrifice his own son because the same God who is asking him to do this is the same God who gave Abraham his sense of moral revulsion for this request in the first place.

When looking into a pit of burning children, we see the depravity of humanity. We see the deceit and desperate wickedness within the heart of fallen humanity. The veneer of civilization is so thin, it is practically transparent, and yet what else can the hopelessly depraved heart do, except blame God? '

Without the gift of repentance, the wickedness of humanity will die cursing God.

How then do you answer those who use as an excuse for their unbelief, the preponderance of evil? Why, in your view/opinion, does God allow continuing suffering even upon the innocent?