God wanted human sacrifices for atonement of sin?

[American Gothic]

Isn't the tree of life mentioned in Revelation 22? And those that have the right to eat of it are those that keep the commandments?

"...But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie."

Satan lied in the Garden tho
we don't want to fall for The Lie, oh no

 

[Jewjitzu]

"...But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie."

Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Satan lied in the Garden tho
we don't want to fall for The Lie, oh no

Yep, he questioned if God really said to keep the commandment, and that we can do whatever we want and be like God.

 

[American Gothic]

Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

to what extant exactly?
and
what commandments specifically?

this obviously needs to be known!

are we to accept Revelation but ignore Matthew thru Jude?
"but now, in Christ" and all dat
???

 

[Jewjitzu]

to what extant exactly?
and
what commandments specifically?

The commandments haven't changed.

this obviously needs to be known!

If you search Tanakh, you'll see the laws are eternal.

are we to accept Revelation but ignore Matthew thru Jude?
"but now, in Christ" and all dat
???

I don't accept any of the NT as authoritative, though there are verses taken from Tanakh which haven't been altered.

I called out Rev 22 because you seemed to question a need to return to Eden, but the NT references the tree of life. Just food for thought.

 

[American Gothic]

If you search Tanakh, you'll see the laws are eternal.

but Mosaic law has never applied to me
or Abraham, or Noah, or Seth

are you trying to make us Jews?

 

[Jewjitzu]

but Mosaic law has never applied to me
or Abraham, or Noah, or Seth

What do you think the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 was all about? It was the process to get grafted into Israel, Isaiah 56:1-8. One law for the native and stranger.

are you trying to make us Jews?

No, just explaining things from a Jewish perspective. The choice is yours as countless other gentiles have done in history. Even Messiah's lineage shows gentiles. Don't you want to be like Messiah?

I've said before, my intent here is to draw back Jews who have been assimilated, cut-off. In the process, if some gentiles come along, that is great as well.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Jesus' human nature still died; so, there was a sacrifice.

He only had one nature in reality. And even at that, human sacrifices aren't kosher.

Not in those words. How about you read the passage? Three men met with Abraham, and Moses went out of his way for the next two chapters to call one of these men YHWH over and over again.

Really? Tell me where exactly Abraham addresses the angels as YHWH?

Genesis 18 and 19. Why don't you read it and deal with what Moses wrote? BTW, there are other passages, but let's just stick with the primary one.



We never claimed there was a sacrifice of God. Stop assuming things we don't say. One who was God took on flesh and died as a man.

You're contradicting yourself again. One of your god's nature died, correct?

Vacuous claims should be ignored.

So, I'll ignore you.

You are the one making the accusation; therefore, you are the one who needs to show some contradiction. It may not fit within your theological framework, but that's not the standard for a contradiction. You need to show were I said A and ~A in the say way, kind and time. That didn't happen; so, no contradiction.



Not an argument from authority. I was simply pointing out that the position your presenting isn't even universally recognized among Jews. He wrote a whole book on the subject of God taking on physical form in the tanakh. It might be a good read for one arguing like you are arguing.

I'm aware of similar arguments.

God Bless

Yep.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Genesis 18 and 19. Why don't you read it and deal with what Moses wrote? BTW, there are other passages, but let's just stick with the primary one.

I still don't see where God walked on earth in these chapters. We do see that YHWH hadn't "come" down yet in Gen 18:20-22.

Vacuous claims should be ignored.

That's why I ignore your claims.

You are the one making the accusation; therefore, you are the one who needs to show some contradiction. It may not fit within your theological framework, but that's not the standard for a contradiction. You need to show were I said A and ~A in the say way, kind and time. That didn't happen; so, no contradiction.

Let's see. You've agreed to the following.

1) God cannot die.
2) God is not a man.
3) God became a man.
4) God as a man died.

Do you see the contradictions?

 

[sk0rpi0n]

Therefore, Jesus is God, and Jesus is not God in different ways

That makes zero sense. Either Jesus is God or he isn't. If Jesus isn't "God" in some aspects, then he isn't God at all.

Look at these verses too—Genesis 18:10, 13, 17, 20, 22, 26; 19:24.

What of those verses? Please explain why you think God was one of the three men/angels who visited Abraham. I'm really curious to know why you think that.

 

[DoctrinesofGraceBapt]

Jesus' human nature still died; so, there was a sacrifice.

He only had one nature in reality. And even at that, human sacrifices aren't kosher.

"He only had one nature" is a theological claim unjustified by anything. Therefore, this response is vacuous.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Not in those words. How about you read the passage? Three men met with Abraham, and Moses went out of his way for the next two chapters to call one of these men YHWH over and over again.

Really? Tell me where exactly Abraham addresses the angels as YHWH?

I didn't say Abraham addressed anyone as YHWH. I told you that Moses called him YHWH. Try reading what I wrote next time.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
We never claimed there was a sacrifice of God. Stop assuming things we don't say. One who was God took on flesh and died as a man.

You're contradicting yourself again. One of your god's nature died, correct?

One of Jesus' nature died, but his God nature, the nature that is naturally being referred to when one says "a sacrifice of God", didn't die. How many category errors are you going to make?

Genesis 18 and 19. Why don't you read it and deal with what Moses wrote? BTW, there are other passages, but let's just stick with the primary one.

I still don't see where God walked on earth in these chapters. We do see that YHWH hadn't "come" down yet in Gen 18:20-22.

Really?

Then YHWH said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.” So the men turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before YHWH. Genesis 18:20-22​

You do realize the topography of the region? Abraham and the men, YHWH and the two angels who are to visit Lot, were in the hill country while Sodom and Gomorrah were in the valley. Coming down relates to traveling down into the valley. Even this excuse fails to take into the consideration what Moses wrote. Do you even care what Scripture says?

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
You are the one making the accusation; therefore, you are the one who needs to show some contradiction. It may not fit within your theological framework, but that's not the standard for a contradiction. You need to show were I said A and ~A in the say way, kind and time. That didn't happen; so, no contradiction.

Let's see. You've agreed to the following.

1) God cannot die.
2) God is not a man.
3) God became a man.
4) God as a man died.

Do you see the contradictions?

If you ignore the meaningful nuances of our position when allegedly pointing out contradictions, how can anyone take you seriously? We did not say God ceased to be God. We didn't say God as God died—which is what (1) is referring to. So, that he died as man doesn't imply that God's divine nature died. So, no contradiction. (2) distinguishes God's nature from man's nature. It doesn't imply God can't take up a secondary nature. So, no contradiction. Need I go on?

God Bless

 

[DoctrinesofGraceBapt]

Therefore, Jesus is God, and Jesus is not God in different ways.

That makes zero sense. Either Jesus is God or he isn't. If Jesus isn't "God" in some aspects, then he isn't God at all.

Have you ever interacted with the concept of the Hypostatic union? In Christianity, Jesus had two distinct natures: God and man. As God, he was always God and cannot die. In time, Jesus took up a secondary nature as man. As man, Jesus was not God because he was man. As God, Jesus was God. By one nature, Jesus is God; by the other nature, Jesus was man, not God. We are not talking about some blending of the two natures. One person with two natures. This may be weird to some; it might make no sense, but there is nothing illogical about this. And, this is exactly what Paul teaches in Philipians 2:6-7: "who, though he was in form God, did not count equality with God a thing to be held onto, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men."

Look at these verses too—Genesis 18:10, 13, 17, 20, 22, 26; 19:24.

What of those verses? Please explain why you think God was one of the three men/angels who visited Abraham. I'm really curious to know why you think that.

Abraham is talking with three men. One of the men does most of the talking. In each of these verses, Moses points out that this man is YHWH. Remember, the chapter starts out with

"And YHWH appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing in front of him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth and said, “O Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant." Genesis 18:1-3.​

When Moses himself says YHWH appeared to Abraham, I believe YHWH appeared before Abraham. If in context Abraham sees three men and bows before them, I take this is how YHWH appeared to Abraham. If Moses goes on to call one of these men YHWH over and over again throughout the rest of the chapter, I take this man to be YHWH as Moses says. How else am I to remain faithful to what Moses wrote? You want to call them all angels; well, two are as Moses points out in 19:1. But the third, the one who remained talking with Abraham on the hill, Moses keeps on calling YHWH. I have to take Moses at his word. I wonder why a Jew would rather reject the prophethood of Moses for the opinions of later rabbis?

God Bless

 

[Open Heart]

OH, can you repeat this post of yours and elaborate? I don't know which part Christianity doesn't teach, and don't understand your second sentence, unless you are just making a statement.

Christianity teaches that when you sin, you repent. WHEN. You can't do it in advance. You don't ask for forgiveness once and it forgives all your future sins. I know that there are a few places that teach that, but they are way out of touch with what Christians have said for thousands of years. If you think about it, it only makes sense. It is impossible to repent of something that you don't even know about.

 

[Open Heart]

That "human messenger" is called YHWH like eight times in Genesis 18 while the other two messengers are never recognized as such. You need to take what Moses wrote at face value as opposed to imposing your theological framework onto the text to determine what it can be teaching.

God Bless

No. The Malakh aka messenger is speaking on behalf of God. He is not God. He is a man.

 

[Jewjitzu]

"He only had one nature" is a theological claim unjustified by anything. Therefore, this response is vacuous.

Your response is vacuous. Even Jesus acknowledges he isn't God. Besides, if you die like a man, then you're a man.

I didn't say Abraham addressed anyone as YHWH. I told you that Moses called him YHWH. Try reading what I wrote next time.

Rotfl... Moses doesn't call anyone YHWH in these passages as he wasn't around. What we do see are the angels acting and speaking in YHWH's name. Emissaries, as these men were, have the authority to do that. That's why Abraham doesn't call any of the men YHWH.

One of Jesus' nature died, but his God nature, the nature that is naturally being referred to when one says "a sacrifice of God", didn't die.

Then God's son didn't die and no sacrifice occurred. Figures.

How many category errors are you going to make?

None. Let me ask you something. Does a son share the same nature as his father?

Really?

Then YHWH said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.” So the men turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before YHWH. Genesis 18:20-22​

Yes, so the men went away. Abraham was left standing before the LORD as we all do when we pray.

You do realize the topography of the region? Abraham and the men, YHWH and the two angels who are to visit Lot, were in the hill country while Sodom and Gomorrah were in the valley. Coming down relates to traveling down into the valley. Even this excuse fails to take into the consideration what Moses wrote. Do you even care what Scripture says?

Even with your answer, there are other cities as part of the Sodom and Gomorrah region. We aren't told where the other man went.

If you ignore the meaningful nuances

Meaningful?

of our position when allegedly pointing out contradictions, how can anyone take you seriously? We did not say God ceased to be God. We didn't say God as God died—which is what (1) is referring to. So, that he died as man doesn't imply that God's divine nature died. So, no contradiction. (2) distinguishes God's nature from man's nature. It doesn't imply God can't take up a secondary nature. So, no contradiction. Need I go on?

Where do you get God can take up another nature, which in effect changes His original perfect nature?

God Bless

Yep.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Have you ever interacted with the concept of the Hypostatic union? In Christianity, Jesus had two distinct natures: God and man. As God, he was always God and cannot die. In time, Jesus took up a secondary nature as man.

Which is false because there is no real union in this Hypostasic idea.

As man, Jesus was not God because he was man. As God, Jesus was God. By one nature, Jesus is God; by the other nature, Jesus was man, not God. We are not talking about some blending of the two natures.

So, what's interesting is that you've admitted that God's nature can't die, i.e, bleed, etc. by implication. So, neither did His nature walk on earth then.

One person with two natures. This may be weird to some; it might make no sense, but there is nothing illogical about this.

Of course it is. And the NT contradicts itself below.

And, this is exactly what Paul teaches in Philipians 2:6-7: "who, though he was in form God, did not count equality with God a thing to be held onto, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men."

This is the funny thing about your theology. You flat out point out that Jesus isn't God in these passages, ie., he's limited, etc.

If you understood Jewish thought, what is being taught was that Jesus was born king according to the gospel, and as such had certain rights associated with this. Kings are associated with God, like God, Zechariah 12:8, and Jesus set this aside to be a servant temporarily. You'll find that the terms elohim, theos, kyrioa, are associated with men, judges, angels, kings, etc., and don't imply divinity.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

He only had one nature in reality. And even at that, human sacrifices aren't kosher.

Really?? Jesus had a human nature and also a Devine nature. Its just that you have been blinded to that fact. You will see it once you are Born Again.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Really?? Jesus had a human nature and also a Devine nature. Its just that you have been blinded to that fact. You will see it once you are Born Again.

Rotfl... define born again.

BTW, where does Jesus say he has two natures, both human and God? Be very specific.

Zechariah 8:23

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Rotfl... define born again.

BTW, where does Jesus say he has two natures, both human and God? Be very specific.

Zechariah 8:23

Once you are born again you will understand it and experience. Read John 3;

John 3​

​

​

Jesus Teaches Nicodemus​

3 Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.[a]”
4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”
5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[b] gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[c] must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”[d]
9 “How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.
10 “You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? 11 Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.[e] 14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”[g]
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life One of the clearest passages in Scripture concerning the two natures of Jesus comes from John 1 (see on John 1). The Word (i.e. Jesus) "was with God, and the Word was God." Moreover, the Word took on human flesh (John 1:14). Luke's gospel also says that Jesus "increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man" (Luke 2:52).

 

[Jewjitzu]

Once you are born again you will understand it and experience. Read John 3;

John 3​

Jesus Teaches Nicodemus​

3 Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.[a]”
4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”
5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[b] gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[c] must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”[d]
9 “How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.
10 “You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? 11 Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.[e] 14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”[g]
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life

You sent this previously and I responded. Water and spirit are referring to the Torah, the commandments. A person born again follows God's laws. Post in thread 'Isaiah 41:4' https://forums.carm.org/threads/isaiah-41-4.10670/post-822850

It's pretty simple. That's why Nicodemus was asked the question.

One of the clearest passages in Scripture concerning the two natures of Jesus comes from John 1 (see on John 1). The Word (i.e. Jesus) "was with God, and the Word was God." Moreover, the Word took on human flesh (John 1:14).

What you don't understand is that Tanakh clearly spells out the Father is Creator, Deut 32:6; Malachi 2:10; Isaiah 63:16; Isaiah 63:8; etc.

Moses was God before Pharaoh, Exodus 7:1, as are judges, Exodus 21:6, 22:8-9; Psalm 82:6, angels, Psalm 8:5; Abraham as God, Genesis 23:6; the house of David like God and the angel of YHWH, Zechariah 12:8, etc.

Once the Father spoke, His words were the actions of Himself, God. His word doesn't return void, Isaiah 55:11.

Nowhere is the son identified as creating anything in Tanakh. Instead, those from the womb are identified as created, like Jesus. Isaiah 44:2

Luke's gospel also says that Jesus "increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man" (Luke 2:52).

Then he wasn't God. It's an admission he wasn't omniscient, and to increase his favor, standing, before God.

You only need to increase favor when you fall short.

BTW, when are you going to respond to what the difference in sign between a pregnant virgin and pregnant non-virgin? You seem to be wussing out on answering, but keep asking me questions. Why is that?

 

[DoctrinesofGraceBapt]

That "human messenger" is called YHWH like eight times in Genesis 18 while the other two messengers are never recognized as such. You need to take what Moses wrote at face value as opposed to imposing your theological framework onto the text to determine what it can be teaching.

No. The Malakh aka messenger is speaking on behalf of God. He is not God. He is a man.

So, you choose to ignore Scripture and assert dogma.

God Bless