Why is Christianity so focused on Sin?

[Stranger]

Lev. 17:11 is talking about not consuming the blood of ANIMALS because the life of the animal is is the blood.
That doesn't mean that if you drained all of the blood of a baboon into a bowl - you would have a bowl of baboon. All you would have is the BLOOD.

The "LIFE" this verse is referring to is NOT the WHOLE being. Jesus wasn't simply blood - and neither are YOU.
We are blood and flesh and SPIRIT. Without any ONE of these elements, you don't have a person.

I really can't believe that I'm having to explain this to you . . .

Hurts doesn't it.

(EX.12:13) "...and when I see the blood, I will pass over you...."

(Lev. 17:11) "...the life of the flesh is in the blood...for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."

(Acts 28:20) "...the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood."

See post #101. Unanswered Scriptures and questions, answer a lot.

Stranger

 

[mjrhealth]

Another dodge.
Every time I point to your online cult and your little "Generals" over at aggressivechristianity.net - you dance around the issue . . .

Im not the one with the "aggressive" fascination, why do you have such a problem, is it because you cant burn people ate the stake anymore so you just take to dragging them through the mud. You are the son of your church, Truly.

Blaming the Church for the Protestant Revolt is like blaming a wife for a divorce because her husband left her for another woman.
Only, in the case of Protestantism, it's more like 50,000 different women and counting . . .

Cant blame God your church doesnt belong to Him.I guess its a problem that teh so called "protestants" thought murder was too much for them.

Still you insist that Jesus is a cult, really should think that through....

 

[BreadOfLife]

Hurts doesn't it.

(EX.12:13) "...and when I see the blood, I will pass over you...."

(Lev. 17:11) "...the life of the flesh is in the blood...for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."

(Acts 28:20) "...the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood."

See post #101. Unanswered Scriptures and questions, answer a lot.

Stranger

Why do you keep referring me to post #101?? I've answered it - repeatedly.

The point YOU keep failing to grasp is that Jesus is not simply a bucket of blood. If He were - then you would have a point.
However, He is also flesh and spirit. Oh - and He's also GOD, in case you forgot.

No - Jesus wasn't the price for sin. The price for sin is DEATH.
Jesus PAID the price.

Keep studying your Bible. It'll come to you . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Im not the one with the "aggressive" fascination, why do you have such a problem, is it because you cant burn people ate the stake anymore so you just take to dragging them through the mud. You are the son of your church, Truly.
Cant blame God your church doesnt belong to Him.I guess its a problem that teh so called "protestants" thought murder was too much for them.

Still you insist that Jesus is a cult, really should think that through....

Jesus equated Himself with His Church - not the cult of aggressivechsirstianity.net established in 1980 - nor their "Generals."
No - HIS Church was around during the 1st century. It didn't come about during the 16th century when your Protestant sects were born. Nor did it come about in 1980.

Remember - He only established ONE Church - and that Church is 2000 years old.

 

[Stranger]

Why do you keep referring me to post #101?? I've answered it - repeatedly.

The point YOU keep failing to grasp is that Jesus is not simply a bucket of blood. If He were - then you would have a point.
However, He is also flesh and spirit. Oh - and He's also GOD, in case you forgot.

No - Jesus wasn't the price for sin. The price for sin is DEATH.
Jesus PAID the price.

Keep studying your Bible. It'll come to you . . .

No, you didn't answer my questions in post #101.

But (Acts 20:28) says Jesus has purchased with his own blood. Do you agree that Jesus has purchased us with His own blood? Or was (Acts 20:28) mistaken?

'Purchase' speaks of 'price'.

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

No, you didn't answer my questions in post #101.

But (Acts 20:28) says Jesus has purchased with his own blood. Do you agree that Jesus has purchased us with His own blood? Or was (Acts 20:28) mistaken?

'Purchase' speaks of 'price'.

Stranger

Sure I did - I answered your question.
Like I said - YOUR problem is that you like to argue - but you just don't know the Bible very well.

Jesus is MORE than just blood.
He's MORE than just flesh.
He MORE than just spirit.

He's GOD.

 

[Wormwood]

Jesus equated Himself with His Church - not the cult of aggressivechsirstianity.net established in 1980 - nor their "Generals."
No - HIS Church was around during the 1st century. It didn't come about during the 16th century when your Protestant sects were born. Nor did it come about in 1980.

Remember - He only established ONE Church - and that Church is 2000 years old.

Is it possible that "His Church" can consist of both Protestants and Catholics?

 

[Stranger]

Sure I did - I answered your question.
Like I said - YOUR problem is that you like to argue - but you just don't know the Bible very well.

Jesus is MORE than just blood.
He's MORE than just flesh.
He MORE than just spirit.

He's GOD.

Do you agree that Jesus has purchased us with His own blood? Or was (Acts 20:28) mistaken?

Stranger

 

[epostle1]

Is it possible that "His Church" can consist of both Protestants and Catholics?

Yes, as as it is taught here 817-820 and here
Who separated from whom is always a hot topic.

Do you agree that Jesus has purchased us with His own blood? Or was (Acts 20:28) mistaken?

Stranger

He would not disagree and your reply has nothing to do with his quote. Acts 20:28 in isolation does not give the whole theology of salvation/redemption. I don't think any one verse can do that.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Is it possible that "His Church" can consist of both Protestants and Catholics?

As Kepha31 already linked to the Catechism – yes.
Here is the Church’s teaching on this topic:

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

 

[BreadOfLife]

Do you agree that Jesus has purchased us with His own blood? Or was (Acts 20:28) mistaken?

Stranger

I'm not sure how many times I need to answer this question before you understand.
It was His blood.

YOUR blunder is in trying to show that Jesus is ONLY blood - and this is a gargantuan falsehood.

 

[Stranger]

I'm not sure how many times I need to answer this question before you understand.
It was His blood.

YOUR blunder is in trying to show that Jesus is ONLY blood - and this is a gargantuan falsehood.

You haven't answered it yet. That it was His blood is not the question.

Do you believe Jesus has purchased us with His blood. Is (Acts 20:28) mistaken?

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

You haven't answered it yet. That it was His blood is not the question.

Do you believe Jesus has purchased us with His blood. Is (Acts 20:28) mistaken?

Stranger

Absolutely.
I ALSO know that He is more than just blood.

It's a shame that YOU don't.

 

[Stranger]

Absolutely.
I ALSO know that He is more than just blood.

It's a shame that YOU don't.

Good. You agree that Jesus has purchased us with His blood. And (Lev. 17:11) says the 'life of the flesh is in the blood'. And (Heb.9:22) says, "...without shedding of blood is no remission." And Heb.(10:18) says, "...where remission of these us, there is no more offering for sin."

Thus, Jesus gave the price for sin. His life was represented in the blood for 'the life of the flesh is in the blood'. Which means Jesus was the price. Jesus is not only 'prophet, priest, and king, but He also is the Sacrifice. And if He is the Sacrifice, He is the price.

Jesus paid the price, and He is the price.

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

Good. You agree that Jesus has purchased us with His blood. And (Lev. 17:11) says the 'life of the flesh is in the blood'. And (Heb.9:22) says, "...without shedding of blood is no remission." And Heb.(10:18) says, "...where remission of these us, there is no more offering for sin."

Thus, Jesus gave the price for sin. His life was represented in the blood for 'the life of the flesh is in the blood'. Which means Jesus was the price. Jesus is not only 'prophet, priest, and king, but He also is the Sacrifice. And if He is the Sacrifice, He is the price.

Jesus paid the price, and He is the price.

Stranger

If you believe that Jesus was the price and you believe that He is God - then you have to come to the conclusion that GOD died.
The only way you can side-step this is to reject His deity.

Jesus is FAR more than just blood . . .

 

[Stranger]

If you believe that Jesus was the price and you believe that He is God - then you have to come to the conclusion that GOD died.
The only way you can side-step this is to reject His deity.

Jesus is FAR more than just blood . . .

How could Jesus purchase the Church with His own blood and not die? How then could Jesus not be the price?

Jesus is the Second Person of the Godhead. And He did die. His blood represented His life because the life of the flesh is in the blood. This does not reject His Deity.

In post #82 you said the price of sin is death and that Jesus paid the price. How then are 'you' not saying that God died? Or, are you saying Jesus is not God?

You say Jesus is far more than blood. So? Blood is what is required. As you have already agreed.

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

How could Jesus purchase the Church with His own blood and not die? How then could Jesus not be the price?

Jesus is the Second Person of the Godhead. And He did die. His blood represented His life because the life of the flesh is in the blood. This does not reject His Deity.

In post #82 you said the price of sin is death and that Jesus paid the price. How then are 'you' not saying that God died? Or, are you saying Jesus is not God?

You say Jesus is far more than blood. So? Blood is what is required. As you have already agreed.

Stranger

My point is that Jesus is MORE than just His blood.

He is also GOD. The Bible tells us that God is spirit.
However, in the 2nd Person of the Trinity, we have the hypostasis of his humanity and His divinity.

Was His divinity the price for sin??
Did his divinity die??

 

[Stranger]

My point is that Jesus is MORE than just His blood.

He is also GOD. The Bible tells us that God is spirit.
However, in the 2nd Person of the Trinity, we have the hypostasis of his humanity and His divinity.

Was His divinity the price for sin??
Did his divinity die??

If you answer the questions I just asked you, you would have the answer to your questions. So, answer mine first. Don't copy.

Stranger

 

[Wormwood]

If you believe that Jesus was the price and you believe that He is God - then you have to come to the conclusion that GOD died.
The only way you can side-step this is to reject His deity.

Jesus is FAR more than just blood . . .

This doesn't make sense to me. I dont see how accepting the fact that Jesus is both fully man and fully God as the only one able to satisfy the requirements of our justification through his death means a person must reject his deity. Are you trying to suggest that somehow Jesus was separated from his divinity when he died?

 

[Mungo]

Good. You agree that Jesus has purchased us with His blood. And (Lev. 17:11) says the 'life of the flesh is in the blood'. And (Heb.9:22) says, "...without shedding of blood is no remission." And Heb.(10:18) says, "...where remission of these us, there is no more offering for sin."

Thus, Jesus gave the price for sin. His life was represented in the blood for 'the life of the flesh is in the blood'. Which means Jesus was the price. Jesus is not only 'prophet, priest, and king, but He also is the Sacrifice. And if He is the Sacrifice, He is the price.

Jesus paid the price, and He is the price.

Stranger

Purchase, Price. These are metaphors. You seem to be arguing as though they are literal.