Apparently you need at least 100 posts to post on General Apologetics

[Turbulence]

Bless you for finding the truth.

G-d bless,
sc
edit: Have you read this article?

Thanks for the link...I quickly skimmed through the article and picked up a few points by Dr. Craig. He spoke of how the burden of proof is on the skeptic regarding the authenticity of the NT. I believe that the OT should line up with the NT for the NT to be inspired by God. God (in my definition) needs to not contradict Himself. Yet this happens from one document to the latter. I do not deny the existence of Jesus, but I do deny Jesus could be a man-God.

 

[rahma]

It's a good idea to cut your teeth in on other areas of the board before diving into GA. It's not a pretty place.

But then again, NCR isn't the happiest place on earth either *shivers*

 

[Turbulence]

I'm currently in graduate school studying secondary education w/concentration in social studies.

I got to sub for a math teacher a few days ago. It wasn't as hard as I thought it would be. It's nice that math is so cut and dry at the 9th grade level. At least, I thought it was.

High school can be very rewarding, yet very challenging working with teenagers. Remember that success is found in your classroom management first, and then your subject knowledge second. If you don't have control of your class, then you will not be able to teach them anything at all.

BTW, an excellent minute-to-minute lesson plan is a good classroom manager if the students are constantly engaged.

 

[Turbulence]

It's a good idea to cut your teeth in on other areas of the board before diving into GA. It's not a pretty place.

But then again, NCR isn't the happiest place on earth either *shivers*

They say that curiosity killed the cat... I suppose that I am too eager and I cannot stay away from asking questions. The general apologetics is where I have questions...

 

[Lucasinvictus]

... seek and ye shall find

 

[Turbulence]

Okay, that's alot. Let me try to break it down.

Atonement system: Blood sacrifice requirement. OT: Animal without blemish
NT: Christ without sin

Idol Worship: OT: Thou shalt have no other gods before me NT: No change. Icons and the like, I don't believe in, but regardless, they are not intended as idols, but as objects that assist the believer in worship.

Abomination: Incest and Homosexuality OT: Law of Moses NT: Blood of Christ covers it all, BUT, we are to sin no more. We can be delivered and forgiven of these things, but we are NOT to continue in these sins.

God: OT: God of Wrath NT: God of Mercy

The seeming change in God is a little tougher. I do know what you mean by this, and this was one of the things that tripped me up too. However, I think if you go back to Genesis, you will see a Holy and Just God who was equally merciful. In the NT, if you go to the very end, you will see the Merciful God who will become equally Just and full of wrathful judgement. He is the same today, yesterday, and forever.

You are on a journey. Your motivation to get to the truth for your children's sake is admirable, but it is also for you to give you peace and understanding. I will say that I questioned everything for 23 years, and I did not return because my questions were answered. Instead, I had a moment of intense clarity in which I saw myself as God saw me. I spent two days making my decision for or against God. I finally got on my knees and asked the Lord to come into my life. I told Him that I was willing to do whatever, whenever, however. I completely surrendered everything that I was and everything that I had. Believe it or not, answers came after. Not all at once, but slowly but surely, over the last year and a half, I have been given understanding to much of what caused me so much grief in the past.

Really and truly, Christianity is about faith. Once you give over to the Lord, answers will come. You will have peace and you will have knowledge. Read my signature. There is a reason that I chose this one. It bears witness to the answers that I have received once I stopped demanding that I receive answers FIRST.

I will try to help answer your questions, and there are many people here who are far more knowledgeable than I am. However, the most we can do is point you in the right direction. We can bear witness to the wonder and joy that God has given to us, but only God can give you the answers you seek, the ones that will resonate deep into your heart.

Let me tell you this. In the last 18 months, my husband has had two heart attacks, my beloved grandmother has been consumed with Alzheimers, my grandfather passed away, my husband was diagnosed with Bipolar disorder, and has lost two jobs due to his illnesses. Yet, I can say with all honesty, that I have had more peace and joy in the last 18 months than in my entire life. Without God, I would have been in a mental hospital by now because no human can endure what I have been through in recent months without the grace of God. He has been my comforter, my assurance, my hope and my joy. I feel as if all of these things have happened for a purpose and many of them, I know will benefit me in the long run. This is the short version, but I am trying to tell you that there is LIFE and hope beyond all human understanding in the Lord. When these kinds of things happen to you, and the presence of God is so near, you can go on, one foot in front of the other, knowing that God will not allow anything to happen that He cannot handle. These things have drawn me ever closer to God. I could shake my fist at Heaven and demand to know "Why!", and yet, the love of God envelops me and shelters me and I know that He is with me through it all.

I pray that you will find the same peace, joy, love and amazing grace that I have found in Christ Jesus.

Lisa

Thank you Lisa for all that great insight, but I need to respond to your post one aspect at a time! So in the next few posts I will talk about each aspect!

 

[Turbulence]

So, do you feel the need to apologize, or what?

Don't worry. A lot of the same stuff happens here, since a lot of Christians see this board as an opportunity to "witness" to us evol non-Christians.

Or re-witness as in my case?

 

[Turbulence]

Okay, that's alot. Let me try to break it down.

Atonement system: Blood sacrifice requirement. OT: Animal without blemish
NT: Christ without sin

My understanding, from what I've been reading, is that there were other ways of atoning for sin aside from a blood sacrifice. Also, weren't there really specific rules surrounding the sacrifices themselves? How do you make a leap from an animal sacrifice to a human sacrifice ... I guess that is where I'm having trouble.

Also, how does unblemished equal no sin? Maybe you can help me understand the Christian idea of sin so I can see what you mean, because what I've learned of Jesus, he was quite blemished before he got to the cross ... it seems he received quite a beating first.

Please forgive me if my questions come across as harsh or anything ... I really mean absolutely no animosity ... the Christian beliefs are just something that I have a hard time wrapping my mind around ...

 

[Turbulence]

Idol Worship: OT: Thou shalt have no other gods before me NT: No change. Icons and the like, I don't believe in, but regardless, they are not intended as idols, but as objects that assist the believer in worship.

Here's the issue I have with idol worship being forbidden in the OT and then the worship of Jesus in the NT. From my perspective, God is ONE, as stated in the OT. But, then with the NT, we also have God is Jesus? From the sounds of the Nicene Creed, there seems to be 3 Gods within one "essence". To me, that is polytheism, which would then lend itself to idol worship ... no longer are you worshipping only the one God of creation ... does that make sense from my perspective? To me, it's not just statuary and paintings that constitute idols ... it's anything that would take you from God Himself ... by making Jesus God as well, well ... that's just plain confusing how 1+1+1 = 1 (remember, I'm a math teacher ... I know that 1+1+1 = 3 ).

 

[Lisa0315]

My understanding, from what I've been reading, is that there were other ways of atoning for sin aside from a blood sacrifice. Also, weren't there really specific rules surrounding the sacrifices themselves? How do you make a leap from an animal sacrifice to a human sacrifice ... I guess that is where I'm having trouble.

Also, how does unblemished equal no sin? Maybe you can help me understand the Christian idea of sin so I can see what you mean, because what I've learned of Jesus, he was quite blemished before he got to the cross ... it seems he received quite a beating first.

Please forgive me if my questions come across as harsh or anything ... I really mean absolutely no animosity ... the Christian beliefs are just something that I have a hard time wrapping my mind around ...

The animal sacrifices were temporary and symbolic of the blood atonement required by God the Father. The first sacrifice was made in the garden of Eden when animals were slain to cover the nakedness of Adam and Eve.

God never intended that animals be THE sacrifice for the sins of man, but were a lesson to man as to the sanctity of life and the cost of sin as death. At the time of the first animal sacrifice in the garden, God promised that He would provide the final sacrifice and Jesus was the fulfilment of that promise.

Why was a blood sacrifice required at all? I do not know. This gets into the sovereignty of God. God required it, and so it was.

Further testimony and promise of the Christ: Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his son Isaac, but God provided at the last minute a ram to sacrifice in Isaac's stead. Through this act of faith, the line of Abraham through Isaac became the Holy line in which the Messiah would come. This is also a symbolic display of the love of God for man. Rather than allow us to pay the penalty ourselves, and our children pay the penalty, God provided a substitute.

Without blemish...In an animal, this meant that the dove, sheep, or bullock must have not disfiguration or blemish. You are correct that when Christ made it to the cross, he did not even resemble a human being as a result of the torture he endured before the cross. However, the disfiguration or blemish on the animals again was symbolic of the sinless nature of Christ. The animals represented perfection in an outward appearance. Christ represented perfection in His inward appearance. He was without sin, and died for a world that was bound by sin.

In the words of Christ, He admonished the pharisees for being white washed tombs. This meant that their outward appearance of righteousness hid the decay of their sinful hearts. Christ, on the other hand was beaten beyond recognition, stripped naked, and was led shamefully through the streets as a criminal. But, inwardly, he was pure and sinless.

Your questions are very respectful and are not offensive in the least, so please continue to ask away. If I do not know the answer, there will be someone here who will, or we will all say, that we just do not know.

Can I ask a first name? I would like to think of you by a real name.

Lisa

 

[MyLittleWonders]

First of all, welcome to CF Turbulence ... cool name! And on your quest to get 100 posts ... good luck!

Now on to this:

My understanding, from what I've been reading, is that there were other ways of atoning for sin aside from a blood sacrifice. Also, weren't there really specific rules surrounding the sacrifices themselves? How do you make a leap from an animal sacrifice to a human sacrifice ... I guess that is where I'm having trouble.

Also, how does unblemished equal no sin? Maybe you can help me understand the Christian idea of sin so I can see what you mean, because what I've learned of Jesus, he was quite blemished before he got to the cross ... it seems he received quite a beating first.

Please forgive me if my questions come across as harsh or anything ... I really mean absolutely no animosity ... the Christian beliefs are just something that I have a hard time wrapping my mind around ...

Christians get the idea of a need for blood atonement for remission of sins from a misquote of Leviticus 17:11 -

"For the soul of the flesh is in the blood and I have assigned it for you upon the Altar to provide atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that atones for your soul."

The problem with this verse is it's in the middle of a paragraph dealing with the consumption of blood - basically blood is forbidden to consumer and G-d is just clarifying as to why because the soul is in the blood. It is not a verse that is saying the only way to atonement is through blood.

Interestingly, there are numerous ways the Israelites atoned for sins:

Exodus 30:15-16 - "The wealthy shall not increase and the desitute shall not decrease from half a shekel - to give the portion of HaShem, to atone for your souls. You shall take the silver of the atonements from the Children of Israel and give it for the work of the Tent of Metting; and it shall be a remembrance before HaShem for the Children of Israel, to atone for your souls."

*FYI - I am quoting from the Tanakh (Jewish Bible); HaShem means literally "The Name" and is used in place of G-d.

Numbers 31:50 - "So we have brought an offering for HaShem: what any man found of gold vessels, anklet and bracelet, ring, earring, and clasp, to atone for our souls before HaShem."

Leviticus 5:11 - "But if his means are insufficient for two turtledoves or for two young doves, then he shall bring, as his guilt-offering for that which he sinned, a tenth-ephah of fine flour for a sin-offering; he shall not place oil on it nor shall he put frankincense on it, for it is a sin-offering."

Finally, though, is what I believe G-d wants most from us. This is from King Solomon's speech at the dedication of the Temple:

1 Kings 8:46-50 - "'When they sin against You - for there is no man who never sins - and You become angry with them, and You deliver them to an enemy, and their captors take them captive to the enemy's land, faraway or nearby, and they take it to heart in the land where they were taken captive and they repent and supplicate to You in the land of their captors, saying, "We have sinned; we have been iniquitous; we have been wicked," and they return to You with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their enemies who had captured them, and pray to You by way of their land that You gave to their forefathers, and [by way of] the city that You have chosen and [through] the Temple that I built for Your Name - may You hear their prayer and supplication from Heaven, the foundation of Your abode, and carry out their judgment, and forgive Your people who sinned against You, and all their transgressions that they transgressed against You, and let them inspire mercy before their captors, so that they will treat them mercifully.'"

What G-d desires most from us is a repentant heart, prayers for forgiveness ... He forgives those who call on Him regardless of a "blood atonement." A blood atonement was ONE way of making atonement, and it was only available WHILE the Temple was still standing. But, we have evidence from the Tanakh (OT) that there were other means by which one could make atonement in the Temple without need for blood.

I can address the rest of your comments that I quoted in another post.

May G-d bless you as you journey towards Him!

 

[MyLittleWonders]

Further testimony and promise of the Christ: Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his son Isaac, but God provided at the last minute a ram to sacrifice in Isaac's stead. Through this act of faith, the line of Abraham through Isaac became the Holy line in which the Messiah would come. This is also a symbolic display of the love of God for man. Rather than allow us to pay the penalty ourselves, and our children pay the penalty, God provided a substitute.
Lisa

Hey Lisa,
Can you give me a bit more background into the Christian teaching surrounding Abraham and Isaac? Does the church teach that Isaac represented some type of "offering" to G-d, that G-d later replaced with an animal? If so, doesn't it beg the question of why another life (Jesus in this case) wasn't switched with that of an animal? It's interesting, from what seems the Christian perspective, that the order of events went from animal (Garden of Eden) to man (Isaac) to animal (Temple period) back to man (Jesus).

From my perspective (not that you asked ), the events surrounding Abraham and his "sacrifice" of Isaac was more of a test of faith for Abraham. G-d had promised Abraham that his descendents would number the stars in the sky, yet for Abraham this wasn't looking too promising. Then, came Isaac (sorry for the Muslim posters that might read this ... I'm going strictly from a Judaic/Christian perspective ... not including Ishmael in this ). Suddenly Abraham could see G-d's promises coming true. Then, G-d calls Abraham to make an offering of Isaac (though it never technically says to "kill" Isaac, which is interesting as well).

Genesis 22:2 - "And He said, 'Please take your son, your only one, whom you love - Isaac - and go to the land of Moriah; bring him up there as an offering upon one of the mountains which I shall tell you.'"

Genesis 22:12 - "And He said, 'Do not stretch out your hand against the lad nor do anything to him for now I know that you are a God-fearing mand, since you have not withheld y our son, your only one, from Me.'"

What I see is G-d telling Abraham, "Listen, I'm going to make your descendents as numerous as the stars." Then, after Abraham has Isaac with Sarah, he sees G-d promise taking shape. After that G-d tested him in the sense that He wanted to see that Abraham still believed G-d even if He told Abraham to offer his son to G-d. Abraham followed through with the preparations, and G-d was pleased. He stopped Abraham from doing anything else (not lifting his hand against Isaac), and told Abraham that he had proven himself a G-d fearing man.

My confusion is the Christian use of this event to somehow give credence to the sacrifice of Jesus? Maybe I'm missing something here ... but I'd love some insight from you.

 

[Lisa0315]

Hey Lisa,
Can you give me a bit more background into the Christian teaching surrounding Abraham and Isaac? Does the church teach that Isaac represented some type of "offering" to G-d, that G-d later replaced with an animal? If so, doesn't it beg the question of why another life (Jesus in this case) wasn't switched with that of an animal? It's interesting, from what seems the Christian perspective, that the order of events went from animal (Garden of Eden) to man (Isaac) to animal (Temple period) back to man (Jesus).

From my perspective (not that you asked ), the events surrounding Abraham and his "sacrifice" of Isaac was more of a test of faith for Abraham. G-d had promised Abraham that his descendents would number the stars in the sky, yet for Abraham this wasn't looking too promising. Then, came Isaac (sorry for the Muslim posters that might read this ... I'm going strictly from a Judaic/Christian perspective ... not including Ishmael in this ). Suddenly Abraham could see G-d's promises coming true. Then, G-d calls Abraham to make an offering of Isaac (though it never technically says to "kill" Isaac, which is interesting as well).

Genesis 22:2 - "And He said, 'Please take your son, your only one, whom you love - Isaac - and go to the land of Moriah; bring him up there as an offering upon one of the mountains which I shall tell you.'"

Genesis 22:12 - "And He said, 'Do not stretch out your hand against the lad nor do anything to him for now I know that you are a God-fearing mand, since you have not withheld y our son, your only one, from Me.'"

What I see is G-d telling Abraham, "Listen, I'm going to make your descendents as numerous as the stars." Then, after Abraham has Isaac with Sarah, he sees G-d promise taking shape. After that G-d tested him in the sense that He wanted to see that Abraham still believed G-d even if He told Abraham to offer his son to G-d. Abraham followed through with the preparations, and G-d was pleased. He stopped Abraham from doing anything else (not lifting his hand against Isaac), and told Abraham that he had proven himself a G-d fearing man.

My confusion is the Christian use of this event to somehow give credence to the sacrifice of Jesus? Maybe I'm missing something here ... but I'd love some insight from you.

Well, I will try to, but honestly I don't think I can explain it any better than I already did. It is symbolic of the sacrifice that is required by God, and the substitution provided by God is symbolic of the Messianic promise.

Also, I am very uncomfortable "debating" with a you. You are God's chosen people and I do not want to do anything that will cause offense to you. You are God's and it is for Him to correct you, not me. I assure you this is no dodge of your question. I have stated this previously when Jewish people would question me. I just honestly would prefer to not debate with you. I have no calling for conversion or attempts at conversion of God's people, and I do not feel it is my place. Please understand this has been strongly placed on my heart by God. I would prefer to bow out if you do not mind.

There are certainly people here who would gladly explain the position of Christians regarding the OT prophecies regarding the Messiah. I am afraid that I am not the right person for the job. I believe that only Jews should try to convert other Jews to Christianity. It is just not my place and it is a sign of my respect for you and your position in the Kingdom of God. I did try it once, and was immediately convicted of this. This is just something that I feel very strongly about.

Lisa

 

[MyLittleWonders]

Hi Lisa,
First of all, HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!! Secondly, I'm not Jewish, though I walk next to them in that I support their beliefs and feel they have a special place with G-d. So, really you are just discussing these topics with a mere gentile. I appreciate your concern, and realize that you wouldn't know if I were Jewish or not unless I told you.

 

[Lisa0315]

Here's the issue I have with idol worship being forbidden in the OT and then the worship of Jesus in the NT. From my perspective, God is ONE, as stated in the OT. But, then with the NT, we also have God is Jesus? From the sounds of the Nicene Creed, there seems to be 3 Gods within one "essence". To me, that is polytheism, which would then lend itself to idol worship ... no longer are you worshipping only the one God of creation ... does that make sense from my perspective? To me, it's not just statuary and paintings that constitute idols ... it's anything that would take you from God Himself ... by making Jesus God as well, well ... that's just plain confusing how 1+1+1 = 1 (remember, I'm a math teacher ... I know that 1+1+1 = 3 ).

The best that I can do on the subject of the Trinity is point you to Genesis where God says, "Let us create man in our own image". This indicates a multiplicity right away. Second, since we are created in the image of God, can you see how we too are three in one? We have a mind that is independent from our emotions. We have a heart that is independent from our mind (emotions not the physical heart). We have a spirit that is independent from both mind and heart. Yet, all three must function and work together in order for a human being, well, to be human. God the Father, perhaps, acts as the center of knowledge and logic. God the Son, perhaps, acts as the merciful and loving part. God the Holy Spirit is the part that communes with sinful man and unites the two opposing essences of God, the one of justice and the one of mercy.

This is probably the hardest question in the Bible to answer. I am no expert. I can only tell you how I have come to understand it. Understand that each person is free to explore the Trinity on their own. I have heard other analogies. There is one that I particualarly like, but I can't quite remember it. It is about the three parts of an apple. Anyway, I hope this helps you. Somethings are very difficult to explain and I may have gotten it way, way wrong. This is the best I can do.

PS: Have you ever heard this old accounting joke? So, three candidate are being interviewed for an accounting position. The first guy goes in and the interviewer asks, "What does 2 + 2 equal?" The first guy answers, "Two, of course!" The next guy goes in and gets the same question and also replies, "Two". The third guy goes in and gets the same question. He replies, "Whatever you want it to be". The third guy gets the job. Yes, I am an accounting geek. I cannot help it.

 

[Turbulence]

First of all, welcome to CF Turbulence ... cool name! And on your quest to get 100 posts ... good luck!

Thanks!

 

[Lisa0315]

Hi Lisa,
First of all, HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!! Secondly, I'm not Jewish, though I walk next to them in that I support their beliefs and feel they have a special place with G-d. So, really you are just discussing these topics with a mere gentile. I appreciate your concern, and realize that you wouldn't know if I were Jewish or not unless I told you.

Thanks for the b-day wishes!

Well, I thought you were because of the flag from Israel and because of your question. It sounded as if you were Jewish asking the Christian perspective. In that case, I would not mind talking further with you about the sacrificial system. However, I have a feeling that you are more knowledgeable than I am on the subject. So, do me a favor and ask one question at a time. I get confused when there are 25 points to cover in one post, know what I mean?

What is your first name, btw?

Lisa

 

[Turbulence]

Finally, though, is what I believe G-d wants most from us. This is from King Solomon's speech at the dedication of the Temple:

1 Kings 8:46-50 - "'When they sin against You - for there is no man who never sins - and You become angry with them, and You deliver them to an enemy, and their captors take them captive to the enemy's land, faraway or nearby, and they take it to heart in the land where they were taken captive and they repent and supplicate to You in the land of their captors, saying, "We have sinned; we have been iniquitous; we have been wicked," and they return to You with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their enemies who had captured them, and pray to You by way of their land that You gave to their forefathers, and [by way of] the city that You have chosen and [through] the Temple that I built for Your Name - may You hear their prayer and supplication from Heaven, the foundation of Your abode, and carry out their judgment, and forgive Your people who sinned against You, and all their transgressions that they transgressed against You, and let them inspire mercy before their captors, so that they will treat them mercifully.'"

What G-d desires most from us is a repentant heart, prayers for forgiveness ... He forgives those who call on Him regardless of a "blood atonement." A blood atonement was ONE way of making atonement, and it was only available WHILE the Temple was still standing. But, we have evidence from the Tanakh (OT) that there were other means by which one could make atonement in the Temple without need for blood.

I can address the rest of your comments that I quoted in another post.

May G-d bless you as you journey towards Him!

Thank you Mylittlewonders for that reference. I find it very interesting that the wisest man to ever walk the face of the earth (according to the Bible) states that repentance is the way for atonement. I suppose that a blood sacrifice is not all that is needed according to the OT. But the NT requires the belief in the blood sacrifice to atone for your sins and establish forgiveness from God. This is the change that has me very concerned that God decides to change the "rules" from one document to the other.

 

[Lisa0315]

Not my question, really, but did you notice that the wisest man on earth was the one who built the temple. The temple was the center of all Jewish religious activity including animal sacrifice. If I had understood your question better, I would have replied that BOTH the blood sacrifice AND repentance of sin is required for salvation. I thought the question was only WHY was a blood sacrifice required.


Lisa

 

[Turbulence]

Abomination: Incest and Homosexuality OT: Law of Moses NT: Blood of Christ covers it all, BUT, we are to sin no more. We can be delivered and forgiven of these things, but we are NOT to continue in these sins.

From reading the OT (which can be heavy at times, to say the least), there seemed to be a great number of things that God considered abominations, including various sexual relationships, the eating of certain animals, the sacrifice of a blemished animal, among others. But what is confusing, in a way, is that when the person committed such sin (for instance, bringing a blemished animal to the Temple), and then atoned for such sin, the rule itself didn't go away. But from the Christian point of view, not only have we been forgiven of those sins and atonement made, but suddenly those rules don't apply to us, you know? It's like if you speed down the highway, you get caught, and you have to "atone" for your sin via traffic school or payment of the ticket. But, once you have made whatever atonement that's required, you are still bound by the rule. If you break it 15 times, you'll still have to make "atonement" for it. So, what is it about Jesus that suddenly we are no longer bound to these rules. Also, if sin is doing wrong in God's eyes, and Jesus told us to go sin no more (well, he told the woman caught in adultery, but we could extrapolate that to ourselves), how do we know what sin is so that we don't do it anymore? Wouldn't whatever is against God's rules still be considered sin (and whatever He used to consider an abomination STILL be considered an abomination)?