Blood sacrifice...

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
when I say :the issue is with a judge (God) willing to torture, humiliate and murder an innocent person to allow the guilty to go free. I should have added with your interpretation of what happened, because God did not see to the torturing, humiliation and murder of Christ, but did allow wicked people to do that. God out of empathy for Christ would have personally preferred Christ not go through the cross, but for our benefit God allowed it to happen so we could be lovingly, fairly, justly disciplined by being crucified with Christ. Those that refuse the opportunity to be disciplined will go to hell to be punished.
I don’t recall saying God didn’t actually do it. I don’t recall giving my understanding of God’s experience in the matter although I probably know more about it than you do judging by your description of his feelings at the time.
 
Upvote 0

Inkfingers

Somebody's heretic
Supporter
May 17, 2014
5,638
1,548
✟160,762.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
* It’s not so clear that it’s vicarious punishment, since poor people can offer grain. (It’s hard to see how you can punish grain.)

Which is particularly interesting in the light of Cain's sacrifice....

My reading of it is that when used with sins, it’s essentially a sacrament of repentance. It’s a visible sign of the seriousness of sin, and the seriousness with which the repentance is meant.

Yup, I get that.

I just don't see the justice of sacrificing the pure in order to cover the vile. That's the kind of thing that Genghis Kahn or Darth Vader would have done. Sacrificing the precious for the valueless. :/

I can understand sacrifice as an act saying "this is not really mine, or even its own, but yours, God". But not one that says "stuff justice and mercy, I'm going to buy the valueless with the most precious thing I can find". The latter makes a nonsense of logic...and if people say we should be going by God's definition they are discarding the ability to do ANYTHING - I mean what is God's definition of spirit, rock, truth, or heck even his definition of definition? We HAVE to act on our reasoning as that is how we see the world, so the idea of "God's definition" is nonsense because of the can of worms it opens.
 
Upvote 0

Chinchilla

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2018
2,839
1,045
29
Warsaw
✟30,919.00
Country
Poland
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
“Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him”, before leaving Is. 53. Does this mean God is blood thirsty? Was God “testing” Jesus in some way to see if Jesus could handle it? Is Jesus solving some problem God has with forgiving?

First off: the RSV might give a better translation; Is. 53: 10 Yet it was the will of the Lord to bruise him…”

God had a plan from the beginning of time to help humans fulfill their earthly human objective. That plan to be fulfilled correctly required a willing Christ to go to the cross, so Christ going to the cross is part of God’s will which is always in the best interest of man to help humans.

God was satisfied (pleased) with Christ’s crucifixion which provided the best atonement system , but we need to understand how God was dissatisfied with the atonement system prior to Christ. Paul in Romans 3:25 tells us what was wrong and what was made better:

Ro. 3: 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished

The problem prior to the cross was “…he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished” but what does this mean from the context of Paul writing to the divided Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome he was trying to unite by showing they were equal. Both the Jewish and Gentile Christians could read this and see the flaw with the Old Atonement system, because God had to pass over the sins committed by forgiven repented of former sinners without punishing them (lovingly fairly justly disciplining them [the same Greek word]) with Christ’s crucifixion the repentant sinner can be disciplined by being crucified with Christ. Paul is saying God’s satisfaction came with our ability to be disciplined (punished) by being crucified with Christ.

I don't believe you can simply change the version of bible to make it sound better or more soft .

The word used here in greek means to take delight , pleasure , desire .

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H2654&t=KJV

It is used in verses like this one

And the young man deferred not to do the thing, because he had delight H2654 in Jacob's daughter: and he was more honourable than all the house of his father.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Which is particularly interesting in the light of Cain's sacrifice....
Some interpreters apparently think sacrifice of animals was acceptable and sacrifice of grain wasn't. That's not likely the intention. It's certainly not what Hebrews understands: "By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain’s."
 
  • Agree
Reactions: mkgal1
Upvote 0

Choir Loft

Active Member
Jan 27, 2018
244
72
Tampa
✟15,480.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Much of the Bible is human speculation and congecture. It’s not God that evolves in the scripture, it’s mans understanding of God. The Old Testament is the Hebrews writing about themselves and for an Israelite audiences. That’s why they are so heavily favored in the story while everyone else (their cousins) are dogs. In doing so they appropriated Mesopotamian lore and sort of made it their own heritage.

You are correct......

in stating the Old Covenant consists of Hebrews writing about their experience with being led of God.

Similarly, many do not realize that the New Covenant is likewise written by Jews, about the Jewish encounter with Yeshuah ha-mashiach (Jesus Christ as He is called by the Greeks) and for Jews. It's estimated that between 25% and 30% of Jews who initially heard the gospel accepted Yeshuah as the Anointed One, their messiah.

As for the big picture, Colter got the horse before the cart.

The Biblical account, both Old Covenant and New Covenant, came first. It's a simple and straight forward account of Hebraic encounters with God in the Old Covenant as well as the experiences Jews and goyim had of God in the New Covenant.

Interpretations, miles and miles of them, came after these encounters.

The first of these began after the Chaldean sacking of Jerusalem in 597 BC. Jewish survivors were taken captive to Babylon where the interpretations Colter referred to got ugly......really ugly.....

During the Babylonian captivity ..... Jewish rabbis concocted an exhaustive set of rules and regulations (NOT inspired by God) which in total are called the Talmud. Even Jesus had issues with it. Colter isn't alone in sharing his opinion. (1)

During the Babylonian captivity......Jewish leaders absorbed or adopted a LOT of Babylonian pagan ideology into the Talmud just as Christians would later adopt many pagan myths into their religion. Was Jesus really born under an evergreen tree festooned with lights and glitter surrounded with cheesy imported presents? Did Jesus rise from the dead so that He could celebrate the day with multi-colored bunnies who danced in fields of chocolate, colored eggs and marshmallow peeps?

During the Babylonian captivity......Jews adopted pagan spirituality and deliberately ignored those truths previously revealed to them by God - such as prophetic clues and indicators that messiah would come to earth twice. Almost all of the prophecies God gave to Jewish prophets were ignored by Talmudic interpretive scholars.

Fast forward a few centuries.......

Jesus may have founded the church of the New Covenant, but the Roman Emperor Constantine made it legitimate and established the legal precedent of Christian priesthood and of allowing the church to own real estate, operate banks and to collect religious taxes/tithes. The new official church immediately got down to business creating its own rules, regulations, traditions and interpretations just like the Jews before them. Also just like the Jews before them, few of these new rules and interpretations were from God. (2)

Unlike other nationalities or racial groups, Jews never got the opportunity to believe they were superior to other people - that everybody else was a dog.

How could they? Christians effectively put them down. Christians forced them to become members of the church, closeted them in ghettos or just killed them outright. For most of history Jews struggled just to stay alive. They never had the luxury of elitism. That attitude was and is suggestive of those who falsely accuse a race and a people that have always been under the heel or threat of someone - usually the church, usually Christians.

Of all the persecutions Jews suffered through history, they suffered most at the hand of Christians or from Christian inspired governments.(3) Most of the lies about Jews, about the Bible and about God have been concocted by Christians or by those closely associated with Christian nations and governments.

Even Islam hasn't been as hard on Jews as Christians have......

Interpretations and conjectures came after encounters with God were recorded in the Bible. Jews were and are quite busy with spinning God's Word to their advantage, but Christians perverted scripture to an even greater degree.

Which brings us to today.....

In our present post modernist climate, interpretive ideology rules the essays, books, sermons and official statements of Christian leadership. Christian tabloid literature and movies are full of it. Most Christians have no idea what the Bible is talking about as they are addicted to quoting buzz words and repetitive illogical convoluted religious slogans.

They will tell you, for example, that salvation is free - then charge you a religious tax (tithe) for the rest of your natural life. Is it free or is it not?

Colter is right about the evils of Jewish and Christian interpretations. Its a sad story for sure.

What Colter left out (he doesn't vomit words like I do) is the real and truthful story of what happened when God revealed Himself to a tiny group of nomads wandering in the fields of the middle east......and the meaning of God's decision to die upon a cross four thousand years later.

The truth is out there as someone once said. Unfortunately God's truth must be searched for - like an old prospector in the Canadian Yukon panning for gold. It's worth the effort, though. It really is.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft.....

(1) Jesus always used the Tanakh, Law (Torah) and the Prophets, as a source for His teaching. He abhorred Talmudic ceremonies and traditions. The Talmud exceeds 15,000 pages in length.

For example, the Talmud asserts that if two or more rabbis agree on a point, their interpretation supersedes the Will of Almighty God. Thus it is said - the children rule the father.

(2) The concept of eternal punishment does not exist in scripture. Employing pagan myths of the underworld as well as the poetry of Dante Aglieri's DIVINE COMEDY, the church discovered that fear mongering was an effective goad to acquire and keep members - from the thrones of kings to the squalid huts of poor farmers.

(3) Joseph Stalin, ruthless leader of the Soviet Union, had been a Christian Russian Orthodox seminary student in his youth. Adolph Hitler, leader of German National Socialism, was a Lutheran Christian in his youth and made official contracts with the German church to support his rise to power as well as his policy to exterminate six million Jews. Good German Christians stood by and did nothing while their government slaughtered men women and children whose only crime was being born Jewish.

Although the government of the United States, which espoused itself a Christian nation, never had an official anti-semitic policy it DID have an official policy of genocide to exterminate Native Americans.

"The only good Indian is a dead Indian." - US General Phillip Sheridan

Hitler thought American genocide of Indians was a good idea and advocated the American solution be applied to European Jews. American ingenuity, right or wrong, seems to inspire everybody.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,662.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I agree with much of this posting. But I would point out that Paul doesn't actually say that with Christ God punished the sin. Nor does he specifically say that before Christ he didn't punish sin (though that would be one implication). Rather his point is that before Christ came, God didn't fully deal with sin. He simply forgave it. ("Passed over" represents a Greek word that means released, but in the context of sin often means forgave.) With Christ he can deal with it fully.

"He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; 26 it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus."

What he actually says is that with the coming of Christ he can justify the sinner by faith. Note by the way that it was one of Luther's major insights that God's righteousness isn't his commitment to punish sin, but his commitment to fix it by justifying the sinner. Righteousness when used of God refers to God's commitment to honor his covenant with his people by saving them even when they don't deserve it.

--------

"left sin unpunished" seems to be a NIVism. More and more I understand why N T Wright said that anyone who reads Paul in the NIV won't understand him. If you want a conservative translation I'd use the ESV.
I always appreciate your insight and honesty. You have thought about and studied the scripture.

First off: I never suggest God “punishes” sin, since sin has no feeling and cannot be punished, only the sinner can and should be punished with hell or punished (discipline) by being crucified with Christ.

Paul is contrasting what Jewish and Gentile Christians have today, with what the Jews had previously (before the cross) and that is the context of most of Romans (Paul is trying to unite the Jewish and Gentile Christians.

“Passed over” or the Greek word “paresis” is only used in Ro. 3:25 but from other Greek writings we have: (páresis) means "remission of punishment" in the papyri (BGU II. 624, i.e. during time of Diocletian). Thus it implies "remission of debt" (MM).] The NIV picked up on this and included "punishment".

I agree: “passed over” should include forgiving, but also contains the idea of “unpunished” and so we are talking about repentant individuals seeking and accepting God’s forgiveness prior to the cross which were forgiven without punishment.


I agree: “Paul doesn't actually say that with Christ God punished the sin.” What Paul does say: “he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished” and the before hand in context seems to be before Christ’s crucifixion, so if it is being contrasted with after Christ’s crucifixion there must be punishment (or discipline the same Greek word). This seems to be talking about individuals and not the nation of people (Jewish nation) since otherwise that would make Jews prior to the cross better off.

God was always righteous, but as a Parent obligated to discipline His children if at all possible, He could not see to the just/fair discipline of His children without killing them, so we did not see His righteousness in His lack of disciplining. After the cross children could be fairly/justly disciplined through crucifixion (being crucified with Christ).

We might also go back to the word “hilastērion” translate “a propitiation” or atonement sacrifice.

Propitiation includes at least the idea of reconciliation, but God is not needing to change in order to be reconciled to man, but man must go through a change to be reconciled to God. God was unsatisfied with the previous atonement system which, according to Paul here, could not punish (discipline) His children. Man going through the punishment discipline with Christ, being crucified with Christ, allows for a stronger closer relationship with Christ/God (a true reconciliation).
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,662.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don’t recall saying God didn’t actually do it. I don’t recall giving my understanding of God’s experience in the matter although I probably know more about it than you do judging by your description of his feelings at the time.
Do you see Christ happy about going to the cross from His pray in the Garden?
Why would God out of empathy not feel the same way?
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,662.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't believe you can simply change the version of bible to make it sound better or more soft .

The word used here in greek means to take delight , pleasure , desire .

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H2654&t=KJV

It is used in verses like this one

And the young man deferred not to do the thing, because he had delight H2654 in Jacob's daughter: and he was more honourable than all the house of his father.
Will is one of the alternative definitions of the Greek word in the lexicon you reference.
Do you see God taking pleasure in the torture, humiliation and murder of Christ?
 
Upvote 0

Chinchilla

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2018
2,839
1,045
29
Warsaw
✟30,919.00
Country
Poland
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Will is one of the alternative definitions of the Greek word in the lexicon you reference.
Do you see God taking pleasure in the torture, humiliation and murder of Christ?

I don't think that other verses containing this word would make sense if you replaced the word for pleasure for will .

I think that Jesus was made sin and God took pleasure from getting rid of the sin .
2 Corinthians 5:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.



God also said that he put him to grief .
 
Upvote 0

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Do you see Christ happy about going to the cross from His pray in the Garden?
Why would God out of empathy not feel the same way?
“Empathy” is too light a word for the experience. It’s like saying childbirth is bothersome. Some words are too slight when it comes to expressing the real emotions felt. There was so much more than mere empathy at the time.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
God wants us to be just though, so killing an innocent to protect the guilty is an odd way to lead by example.
If you insist on using words that accuse God of moral evil, He will never share with you the truth. You must believe God is good if you want understanding from Him and everyone else doesn’t know much on their own.
 
Upvote 0

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yup there are some disagreements amongst Calvinists, but Calvinism itself is solidly tied to Penal Substitution.

Personally I find myself drawn more to Christ being a martyr who went all the way for God and never backed off.
Why not stick with that? He was.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: mkgal1
Upvote 0

Inkfingers

Somebody's heretic
Supporter
May 17, 2014
5,638
1,548
✟160,762.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Faith in what?

Faith, that is trust in and fidelity towards a God I recognise as lord/master/ruler/owner of all things to which the human ego should then (in recognition of what God is) bow in submission to.

It does not mean accepting injustice as justice (no matter how many people claim that it must be done) because God gives us a mind to test actions against meanings and thus avoid being fooled by lies and errors.

God is a god of justice, who saves by mercy. Putting an innocent to death to take the punishment of the guilty is neither mercy nor justice.

But now we are just going around in circles....
 
Upvote 0

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Faith, that is trust in and fidelity towards a God I recognise as lord/master/ruler/owner of all things to which the human ego should then (in recognition of what God is) bow in submission to.

It does not mean accepting injustice as justice (no matter how many people claim that it must be done) because God gives us a mind to test actions against meanings and thus avoid being fooled by lies and errors.

God is a god of justice, who saves by mercy. Putting an innocent to death to take the punishment of the guilty is neither mercy nor justice.

But now we are just going around in circles....
I don’t think we’re gping in circles. So since you reject the sacrifice of Christ for forgiveness, and you admit God is just, how do you hope to escape his judging your wrong deeds?

My question was to see if you have faith in what He has said or faith in your own opinion, elevating that above what his true prophets have told us, including the Anounted One.

There is faith in God and there’s faith in what one has decided on ones own. They aren’t the same thing.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Inkfingers

Somebody's heretic
Supporter
May 17, 2014
5,638
1,548
✟160,762.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
So since you reject the sacrifice of Christ for forgiveness, and you admit God is just, how do you hope to escape his judging your wrong deeds?

I reject penal substitution. God saves as an act of mercy, not by injustice. If God were a god of injustice Cain would have been rewarded and the 10 Commandments would have never existed.

There is faith in God and there’s faith in what one has decided on ones own. They aren’t the same thing.

If you do not trust your mind to discern truth and reality, how do you ever tell a door from a wall?
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
You are correct......

in stating the Old Covenant consists of Hebrews writing about their experience with being led of God.

Similarly, many do not realize that the New Covenant is likewise written by Jews, about the Jewish encounter with Yeshuah ha-mashiach (Jesus Christ as He is called by the Greeks) and for Jews. It's estimated that between 25% and 30% of Jews who initially heard the gospel accepted Yeshuah as the Anointed One, their messiah.

As for the big picture, Colter got the horse before the cart.

The Biblical account, both Old Covenant and New Covenant, came first. It's a simple and straight forward account of Hebraic encounters with God in the Old Covenant as well as the experiences Jews and goyim had of God in the New Covenant.

Interpretations, miles and miles of them, came after these encounters.

The first of these began after the Chaldean sacking of Jerusalem in 597 BC. Jewish survivors were taken captive to Babylon where the interpretations Colter referred to got ugly......really ugly.....

During the Babylonian captivity ..... Jewish rabbis concocted an exhaustive set of rules and regulations (NOT inspired by God) which in total are called the Talmud. Even Jesus had issues with it. Colter isn't alone in sharing his opinion. (1)

During the Babylonian captivity......Jewish leaders absorbed or adopted a LOT of Babylonian pagan ideology into the Talmud just as Christians would later adopt many pagan myths into their religion. Was Jesus really born under an evergreen tree festooned with lights and glitter surrounded with cheesy imported presents? Did Jesus rise from the dead so that He could celebrate the day with multi-colored bunnies who danced in fields of chocolate, colored eggs and marshmallow peeps?

During the Babylonian captivity......Jews adopted pagan spirituality and deliberately ignored those truths previously revealed to them by God - such as prophetic clues and indicators that messiah would come to earth twice. Almost all of the prophecies God gave to Jewish prophets were ignored by Talmudic interpretive scholars.

Fast forward a few centuries.......

Jesus may have founded the church of the New Covenant, but the Roman Emperor Constantine made it legitimate and established the legal precedent of Christian priesthood and of allowing the church to own real estate, operate banks and to collect religious taxes/tithes. The new official church immediately got down to business creating its own rules, regulations, traditions and interpretations just like the Jews before them. Also just like the Jews before them, few of these new rules and interpretations were from God. (2)

Unlike other nationalities or racial groups, Jews never got the opportunity to believe they were superior to other people - that everybody else was a dog.

How could they? Christians effectively put them down. Christians forced them to become members of the church, closeted them in ghettos or just killed them outright. For most of history Jews struggled just to stay alive. They never had the luxury of elitism. That attitude was and is suggestive of those who falsely accuse a race and a people that have always been under the heel or threat of someone - usually the church, usually Christians.

Of all the persecutions Jews suffered through history, they suffered most at the hand of Christians or from Christian inspired governments.(3) Most of the lies about Jews, about the Bible and about God have been concocted by Christians or by those closely associated with Christian nations and governments.

Even Islam hasn't been as hard on Jews as Christians have......

Interpretations and conjectures came after encounters with God were recorded in the Bible. Jews were and are quite busy with spinning God's Word to their advantage, but Christians perverted scripture to an even greater degree.

Which brings us to today.....

In our present post modernist climate, interpretive ideology rules the essays, books, sermons and official statements of Christian leadership. Christian tabloid literature and movies are full of it. Most Christians have no idea what the Bible is talking about as they are addicted to quoting buzz words and repetitive illogical convoluted religious slogans.

They will tell you, for example, that salvation is free - then charge you a religious tax (tithe) for the rest of your natural life. Is it free or is it not?

Colter is right about the evils of Jewish and Christian interpretations. Its a sad story for sure.

What Colter left out (he doesn't vomit words like I do) is the real and truthful story of what happened when God revealed Himself to a tiny group of nomads wandering in the fields of the middle east......and the meaning of God's decision to die upon a cross four thousand years later.

The truth is out there as someone once said. Unfortunately God's truth must be searched for - like an old prospector in the Canadian Yukon panning for gold. It's worth the effort, though. It really is.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft.....

(1) Jesus always used the Tanakh, Law (Torah) and the Prophets, as a source for His teaching. He abhorred Talmudic ceremonies and traditions. The Talmud exceeds 15,000 pages in length.

For example, the Talmud asserts that if two or more rabbis agree on a point, their interpretation supersedes the Will of Almighty God. Thus it is said - the children rule the father.

(2) The concept of eternal punishment does not exist in scripture. Employing pagan myths of the underworld as well as the poetry of Dante Aglieri's DIVINE COMEDY, the church discovered that fear mongering was an effective goad to acquire and keep members - from the thrones of kings to the squalid huts of poor farmers.

(3) Joseph Stalin, ruthless leader of the Soviet Union, had been a Christian Russian Orthodox seminary student in his youth. Adolph Hitler, leader of German National Socialism, was a Lutheran Christian in his youth and made official contracts with the German church to support his rise to power as well as his policy to exterminate six million Jews. Good German Christians stood by and did nothing while their government slaughtered men women and children whose only crime was being born Jewish.

Although the government of the United States, which espoused itself a Christian nation, never had an official anti-semitic policy it DID have an official policy of genocide to exterminate Native Americans.

"The only good Indian is a dead Indian." - US General Phillip Sheridan

Hitler thought American genocide of Indians was a good idea and advocated the American solution be applied to European Jews. American ingenuity, right or wrong, seems to inspire everybody.
Good post! Thanks
 
Upvote 0

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I reject penal substitution.
So regardless of how God’s sees it, and i’m not saying He agrees with that, you prefer your understanding of justice over His. It’s clear to me that you elevate your mind over His. I know this because there is no evidence of coming to Him
in humility. Instead you outright reject what doesn’t match your concept of justice.

I also know that unless you stop making yourself the Judge of God, you will not find the understanding you seek.

God saves as an act of mercy, not by injustice. If God were a god of injustice Cain would have been rewarded and the 10 Commandments would have never existed.
Anyone can think of 1000s of things that would be if God were unjust. This gets them no where and will not induce God to share understanding. You reject that God demanded animal sacrifice for sin insisting YOU know better. He will never give the man who insists they know better truth. What’s the point? They think they already know.

If you do not trust your mind to discern truth and reality, how do you ever tell a door from a wall?
Easy. One opens and lets you through and the other doesn’t. Do you think matters of God are that simple? I assure you they are not.

Again, if you ever really want truth, you’re going to have to humble yourself and admit you do not understand.

He hides information from those who are “wise and intelligent” and reveals himself to the humble.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Ink, I’m not suggesting you jettison your mind. I’m suggesting you submit your thinking to His declared truth and ask Him for understanding. The insistence that God never demanded sacrifice for sin is the opposite of this.

Btw, you don’t mind eating innocent animals yourself, but do you mind hunters killing them for sport? Just wondered where the “now it’s morally bad to kill innocent animals” and “now it’s ok” line is. Seems to a meandering line or maybe rubber.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
So regardless of how God’s sees it, and i’m not saying He agrees with that, you prefer your understanding of justice over His. It’s clear to me that you elevate your mind over His.
That's awfully presumptuous of you, don't you think?

It's not that he's elevating his mind over God's.....he's merely disagreeing with your understanding. At-one-ment theories are just that. Theories. No one KNOWS truly the mind of God.
 
Upvote 0