27 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYou've (once again) missed the entire point. The atonement of sin came about as a result of the work done on the Cross by the Lord Jesus Christ. Was that work blood? No. Was that work death? No. It was His ability and qualification to carry take the sin upon Himself and pay for the same within His perfection.
While the point isn't huge, it was tough enough for you to comprehend during the first go around.
No wonder you were so vague the "first go around". With such an insubstantial point, what was there for you to do but try to hide it?
Nowhere did I state my defense of Ingersoll's statements. Without clarification on the actual topic, I would unknown that they feel compelled to embrace such a concept even in this day and age?
His blood did not cleanse, nor did His death. It was while He was living that He declared the task finished--- prior to the shedding of His blood, prior to the expiration of His life.
Where's your superstition now?
27 Jan 11
Originally posted by ThinkOfOnemy point still stands, repeating your tired argument has not refuted my assertion. Doward-1---ToO-0
C'mon. Are you seriously trying to defend a straw man argument with a similar straw man? The OP did not portray Christianity based [b]solely on blood appeasement. There was no attempt in the OP to be " representative of the Christian faith." What it does is point out the absurdity of a foundational belief.
At least you were finally able to wrap yo ...[text shortened]... g dishonest it is you with your denials of fact and the making of straw man arguments.[/b]
28 Jan 11
7 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne=============================================
Since 667joe has taken to quoting Robert Ingersoll of late, I thought I'd look into him a bit and came across the following quote:
"What man, who ever thinks, can believe that blood can appease God? And yet, our entire system of religion is based upon that belief. The Jews pacified Jehovah with the blood of animals, and according to the Christian system, f the unknown that they feel compelled to embrace such a concept even in this day and age?
"What man, who ever thinks, can believe that blood can appease God? And yet, our entire system of religion is based upon that belief.
===========================================
I believe the first slain animal life used in approaching God was that of Abel and Cain. By revelation and his parents training (Gen.4:4 comp Hebrews 11:4), I hold that Abel offered a slain animal in worship, whereas Cain, inventing his own way, did not.
Expected objection: The book of Hebrews has nothing to do with the book of Genesis and visa versa.
This early practice of eraly man probably got embellished more and more by descendent humans and spread throughout ancient human cultures. I think the practice of Adam, Eve, and Abel spread, perversions and eventual inclusion of human blood entered other groups of humans
God's warning to Israel not to imitate the human sacrifices of the Canaanites reveals that these embellishments were not of God.
I will grant that the first recorded instance of what we could call worship by blood or at least involving a slain life was Abel's worship. And this was a prophetic prefigure of Christ's, God's Son's redemptive death.
========================
The Jews pacified Jehovah with the blood of animals, and according to the Christian system, the blood of Jesus softened the heart of God a little, and rendered possible the salvation of a fortunate few.
=========================
God's heart did not need to be "softened". It was God who "so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son" .
God took the initiative. The idea that "we bring blood to soften mean old God's hard heart" is wrong. It was the love of God that provided a redemtion that we all mankind might be saved, not "a fortunate few".
Not all are saved because the testament is that we must believe into Christ for substitution to occur. Mind you, the blood of Christ is not something the believer necessarily has to know about or understand.
The command is to believe into Christ. The redemption of the blood of Jesus by substitution is a by product of the sinner being now "in Christ" .
Understanding redemption certainly would make for a stronger spiritual walk. But the demand of God is to believe in the Son of God. In the Son of God, the redemption takes place whether you like it or not, whether you know about it or not.
That is how I see it. If you believe in the Son of God, the Holy Spirit and the word of God eventually will reveal this benefit of redemption to you, I believe. But the sinner is justified by faith in the Son of God.
===================================
It is hard to conceive how the human mind can give assent to such terrible ideas, or how any sane man can read the Bible and still believe in the doctrine of inspiration."
===================================
No it isn't. If God had commanded Israel to burn children and offer human blood sacrifices, then maybe I would have a harder time with inspiration and the New Testament.
That God strictly forbade them to offer slain humans for sacrifices and judged the Canaanites for doing so, makes belief in inspiration of the whole Bible very reasonable.
The critic here has made a caricature and blamed it on the God of the Bible in an erroneous way. The error could be from ignorance. But it also could be of hostility and maliciousness.
An avid animal rights advocate might have more of a complaint about blood offerngs in the Old Testament. However, he or she should see that ALL offerings regarding death were terminated in the New Testament.
In essence what we have is that there is only ONE blood shedding propitiatory act that God accepts - that of the Son of God.
What about all the tonage of blood offered from bulls and goats in the Old Testament ? Yes, they were prescribed by God. But they did nothing but act as previews, foreshadows, symbology, and precursers to the ONE and ONLY ONE effectual act of the Son of God.
All the Old Testament sacrifices (none of which called for God wanting human blood) were educating previews of what God was to one day do in Christ.
====================================
The entire conception of a god being appeased by blood is barbaric and borne of superstition.
=================================
What is abominable in the eyes of God is sin, iniquity, and transgression against the law of God. That is an abomination to God.
The offerings of blood were educators that man can be forgiven only because justice must take place for the sins against God. Forgiveness is because the dept is paid.
God's forgiveness throughout the whole Bible is the forgiveness of one whose dept has been paid. It may seem like "free forgiveness" to our side. To God's side there is no such thing.
Sins will always be judged. The redeemed of God had thier sins judged also, on the cross of Jesus. In the eyes of God it is as if they have never sinned at all. Justice was imputed on thier behalf at Calvary in the body of the Son of God.
What we should see is that sin is an abomination and "barbaric" in terms of God's eternal righteousness. A absolutely holy and perfect Almighty seems not to enter into our thought easily.
We invision a permissive and liberal God who forgives in an unrighteous way which encourages us to commit all the more transgressions. We envision a sloppy, unrighteous, sentimental God who should just save sinners ANY WAY. We have no thought of a righteous way of salvation. Any way should be okay with us and God.
We are like theives who have only an objective to obtain the money. How we get the money does not matter. The procedure, the method can be right or wrong, as long as we get the money we don't care. We feel God should be like this.
God wants to save the sinner. But God will do so in a way that upholds His righteous procedure and maintains His righteous standard. God will not relinquish His eternal righteous nature for anything.
He will forgive us. But without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. The dept of our transgression requires judgment. Christ's coming to die was God's demand of righteousness to bear the dept that was too heavy for you and I.
======================
One can see how man in various primitive cultures drew such a conclusion, but it is absurd that a variation of this concept is still so prevalent even today.
=============================
What Abel did was probably according to what God taught his parents. What primitive cultures did to embellish this act, I do not blame on God. Had He encouraged the Canaanites and idolatrous Jews rather then punished them, then my assumption would be considerably weakened.
===============================
... ...
Here we have a presumably omnipotent god (that abhors sin) that had to go to the lengths of impregnating a woman so that the child could be killed and, by virtue of the child's blood being spilled, his worshippers could be reconciled to him. No blood, no reconciliation. It's difficult to come up with something more ridiculous.
====================================
If the scoffer does not believe in the Son of God he will have a long eternity to imagine something more "ridiculous" if he wants to.
However, I am sure that he will be thinking more about how awful his sins actually were revealed to be and how self hating it was to reject the loving offer for Christ to be his Substitute and Savior.
"What was I thinking ???!!! Why have I spurned the great love of God to save me from my own sinful life ???!!! "
30 Jan 11
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne"What man, who ever thinks, can believe that blood can appease God? And yet, our entire system of religion is based upon that belief. The Jews pacified Jehovah with the blood of animals, and according to the Christian system, the blood of Jesus softened the heart of God a little, and rendered possible the salvation of a fortunate few. It is hard to conceive how the human mind can give assent to such terrible ideas, or how any sane man can read the Bible and still believe in the doctrine of inspiration."
Well, seeing as you didn't even attempt to make a meaning full post addressing the salient points of the OP, there's no reason that it would be.
Why would I need to make an attempt to dispell a lie, an untruth that does not
reflect truth in scripture, and if you only get your information from sources like this
you have no clue and it does not matter what I say to you. You have not taken the
time to learn about the scripture on your own, but you are more than willing to
spout off falsehoods about a faith you don't understand nor likely too until you
get serious and look for yourself instead of allowing another to tell you what
to think about it.
Kelly
30 Jan 11
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne"The entire conception of a god being appeased by blood is barbaric and borne of superstition."
Since 667joe has taken to quoting Robert Ingersoll of late, I thought I'd look into him a bit and came across the following quote:
"What man, who ever thinks, can believe that blood can appease God? And yet, our entire system of religion is based upon that belief. The Jews pacified Jehovah with the blood of animals, and according to the Christian system, ...[text shortened]... f the unknown that they feel compelled to embrace such a concept even in this day and age?
In your mind it is.
Jesus died a brutal death on the cross. He rose from the dead.(Bible fact)
Believe it or die in your sin and be separated from the life of God forever.(Bible fact)
01 Feb 11
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOne needn't look too hard at the OT or the NT to find it.
You've (once again) missed the entire point. The atonement of sin came about as a result of the work done on the Cross by the Lord Jesus Christ. Was that work blood? No. Was that work death? No. It was His ability and qualification to carry take the sin upon Himself and pay for the same within His perfection.
His blood did not cleanse, nor did His ...[text shortened]... shedding of His blood, prior to the expiration of His life.
Where's your superstition now?
Here are a few examples:
1 Peter 3
18For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;
1 Corinthians 15
3For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
Romans 5
6For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. 8But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.
01 Feb 11
Originally posted by DowardDid you miss the following or were you unable to comprehend it?
my point still stands, repeating your tired argument has not refuted my assertion. Doward-1---ToO-0
"The OP did not portray Christianity based solely on blood appeasement. There was no attempt in the OP to be 'representative of the Christian faith.'"
You are seriously in denial.
01 Feb 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillWhat is abominable in the eyes of God is sin, iniquity, and transgression against the law of God. That is an abomination to God.
[b]=============================================
"What man, who ever thinks, can believe that blood can appease God? And yet, our entire system of religion is based upon that belief.
===========================================
I believe the first slain animal life used in approaching God was that of Abel and Cain. By revelation and his reat love of God to save me from my own sinful life ???!!! "[/b]
The offerings of blood were educators that man can be forgiven only because justice must take place for the sins against God. Forgiveness is because the dept is paid.
In your mind it is "just" for the innocent to be sacrificed? This is an example of the twisted and barbaric thinking found in superstition.
01 Feb 11
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayOnce again:
"What man, who ever thinks, can believe that blood can appease God? And yet, our entire system of religion is based upon that belief. The Jews pacified Jehovah with the blood of animals, and according to the Christian system, the blood of Jesus softened the heart of God a little, and rendered possible the salvation of a fortunate few. It is hard to conceive and look for yourself instead of allowing another to tell you what
to think about it.
Kelly
"I imagine that if you were able to make a substantive argument you would. Instead, like a child you've chosen to hide behind making a vague and unsubstantiated accusation."
You've merely followed one child's argument with another.
01 Feb 11
Originally posted by josephwOnce again,
[b]"The entire conception of a god being appeased by blood is barbaric and borne of superstition."
In your mind it is.
Jesus died a brutal death on the cross. He rose from the dead.(Bible fact)
Believe it or die in your sin and be separated from the life of God forever.(Bible fact)[/b]
" How can so many be so enslaved by their fear of the unknown that they feel compelled to embrace such a concept even in this day and age?"
01 Feb 11
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI believe that Christ has redeemed the believer out of the curse of the law having become a curse for us as the Scripture states.
[b]What is abominable in the eyes of God is sin, iniquity, and transgression against the law of God. That is an abomination to God.
The offerings of blood were educators that man can be forgiven only because justice must take place for the sins against God. Forgiveness is because the dept is paid.
In your mind it is "just" for the innocent to be sacrificed? This is an example of the twisted and barbaric thinking found in superstition.[/b]
I have already settled with God that I believe the Gospel. You can disbelieve and condemn God that His way of redemption is below your standard and therefore you reject the Son of God and His salvation.
That is your choice.
01 Feb 11
Originally posted by jaywillJust as you can continue to place the teachings of Paul and others above those of Jesus. As a consequence of this, you embrace twisted and barbaric thinking found in superstition.
I believe that Christ has redeemed the believer out of the curse of the law having become a curse for us as the Scripture states.
I have already settled with God that I believe the Gospel. You can disbelieve and condemn God that His way of redemption is below your standard and therefore you reject the Son of God and His salvation.
That is your choice.