JDS, What Does It Mean?

[dollarsbill]

Look man, if you want to reject what the bible says because you can't reason it out that's cool. Taking the literal translation says HE BECAME SIN. How? God put it on Him (it pleased Him to bruise Him). Do we understand it all? No one does. God said it and His thoughts and ways are more superior than ours.

It's all about the Blood sacrifice. I see no difference in saying 'Jesus died spiritually" and 'Jesus was a sinner'. That's what God was teaching in the OT sacrifices. Jesus was our substitute. He died for us. Some of the English translators understood. Many did not. It's a horrible translation to say that Jesus became sin/sinner.

Romans 8:3 (NASB)
3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,

And your comment is uncalled for.

"Look man, if you want to reject what the bible says because you can't reason it out that's cool."

 

[importunity]

It's all about the Blood sacrifice. I see no difference in saying 'Jesus died spiritually" and 'Jesus was a sinner'. That's what God was teaching in the OT sacrifices. Jesus was our substitute. He died for us. Some of the English translators understood. Many did not. It's a horrible translation to say that Jesus became sin/sinner.

Romans 8:3 (NASB)
3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,

And your comment is uncalled for.

"Look man, if you want to reject what the bible says because you can't reason it out that's cool."

Look, if you are taking offense it wasn't meant in that manor so it seems to me that we are at an impasse. So have fun, and I pray you have a very blessed day.

 

[dollarsbill]

Look, if you are taking offense it wasn't meant in that manor so it seems to me that we are at an impasse. So have fun, and I pray you have a very blessed day.

Fair enough. Thanks.

 

[Tallen]

The Bible says he became sin.

How did He "become sin", what would be the basis for that?

 

[Tallen]

Look man, if you want to reject what the bible says because you can't reason it out that's cool. Taking the literal translation says HE BECAME SIN. How? God put it on Him (it pleased Him to bruise Him).

What would stop YHWH from making sin on anyone else then? I mean, you have YHWH doing an unrighteous act of taking a righteous man a making him unrighteous, what would stop Him from doing that to anyone else who has believed on His Son?

Bruising Him, doesn't mean to make Him sin, it means that He took a beating on our behalf and was physically bruised. Hence, by His strips we were healed. YHWH was pleased to offer His Only Begotten Son on our behalf, in order to gain a harvest of millions of children as a result. To read bruised as made Him sin, is quite a twist on scripture.

Do we understand it all? No one does. God said it and His thoughts and ways are more superior than ours.

This is an absolute cop out in order to say that your view can't answer the questions put to it. The fact of the matter is that our sin was imputed to Yeshua, that is, our sin is reckoned to His account, which is one of righteousness and obedience. This fits the teaching of the scriptures, and the types of the OT sacrifices. The bulls, goats and sheep that were sacrifices didn't "become sin", they were the means to atone for those under the Levitical system. Their life and blood was what was required, not that the became sin themselves. This is a matter of reckoning, not a matter of changing the nature of living creatures in something other than what they are. Yeshua's nature never changed, He didn't "become sin", He was the means to reckon righteousness His people that would believe on Him.

 

[RhemaWarrior]

`

 

[dollarsbill]

Being sinless prior to the bruising, Jesus was the only one that was at least equal or greater in value.

Are you saying He wasn't sinless afterward?

 

[RhemaWarrior]

`

 

[dollarsbill]

It would no longer make Him sinless.

Yep, that sounds like JDS. Pretty scary.

 

[Simon Peter]

It would no longer make Him sinless.

So who died or paid the price for Jesus' 'sins'?


The truth is that Jesus took upon His body the sins of the world, and He voluntarily let His physical body die to pay the price for our sins.

Jesus descended into Hell, but the demons could not touch Him because of His innocence; and because He was innocent death had no hold over Him and God lifted Him out and raised His body from death.

peace,
Simon

 

[Tallen]

The Word stripes in Peter is literally bruises. When the bible refers to it pleasing the Lord to Bruise Him in Isaiah, this is the same bruising of that in Peter. This was nothing the Romans could have done to Him. It was totally supernatural. That's why it says He made Him to be sin Who knew no sin. That was the stripes (bruising).

I am not in anyway shape or form denying that the Romans beat Him. They beat everybody, this bruising was something that could only be done by God Himself. The price had to be paid by one who was equal or greater value than Adam. Being sinless prior to the bruising, Jesus was the only one that was at least equal or greater in value.

You are simply importing an idea to read into the scripture. The Isaiah passage, which is the one that sets the meaning, is about the physical abuse Messiah endured on the behalf of the sinner.

(Isa 53:5 [KJV])
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

This all speaks of the physical and mental nature of what Messiah endured. What He suffered was both mentally and physically a hardship for His people. He was atoning for their sin, which requires a physical being to shed it's blood and give up the life in that flesh. All of the physical types of the Levitical sacrifices show this.​

(Isa 53:10 [KJV])
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
　
This continues to tell us of the physical and mental aspect of the suffering of the Messiah, which is all related to the incarnation of the Redeemer. The Hebrew is very clear, it sets a comparasion between the idea that YHWH was pleased to bruise Him. How did He bruise Him? By putting Him through the grief of His task. Not only was His body put through this affair, but He also carried the weight of this mentally. For His soul was an offering for sin. It doesn't suggest in anyway that He died spiritually or that you should important any idea out of the context to make a strange doctrine. Also, it wasn't just the Roman's that bruised Him, it was the cup that He was carrying for the redemption of His people. This can be seen in the garden, as He prayed, and the mental anguish He had endured His whole life as the unique only begotton Son of YHWH.​

What you've done above RW, is import out of context ideas into the text to construct a teaching to satisfy your presupposition. You're theology is forcing you to take this belief and construct a means to allow it to exist. This means that you are willing to use out of context verses to try and create a meaning in these verses that is not in them, nor does it help explain them in any way.​

Blessings.​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

[RhemaWarrior]

`

 

[RhemaWarrior]

`

 

[RhemaWarrior]

-

 

[Tallen]

Not the Roman Soldiers. It was NOT the physical beatings.

The Roman soldiers were just one of the means that YHWH used to bruise His Son. He did not beat Him, but used various means that His Son edured throughout His entire life. Did you notice the great drops of blood He sweated in the garden? This to was part of the bruising. The bruises that the soldiers put on him, were physical bruises, part of His grief.

BTW, you are simply importing and idea to read into the scripture, your next statement shows it.

Did you notice it was His soul that was the offering for sin?

Yeah, THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED IT IN MY LAST POST! I accounted that His soul was his mind, which endured a great burden on behalf of His people. You are making this to mean that He died spiritually, when the Hebrew clearly states that His bruising was not only physically, but mentally. Did you note that it says his soul was offered for sin? It does not mention anything about His Spirit being offered. Where does it say that His Spirit was offered for sin? The soul in this context is associated with the suffering of His body, and the mental anguish of His life.

Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put

​

​

him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. (Isa 53:10)​

Why do you not read the rest of the verse but stop at what you think is confirming your theology? This verse speaks of the entire incarnation, which YHWH used as a means to put Him to grief. After all, we are talking about the only begotten Son, who left His position in heaven, and came into this world to identify with His brethren. Also, note how YHWH bruised Him by putting Him through grief. Grief is something that a person's mind bears. It is a feeling, an emotion, which bore this grief. Note it was these things that was in His soul that YHWH was pleased for His Son to bear.​

Blessings.​

 

[Tallen]

-

HUH!?!

 

[Tallen]

Why you deleting your posts?

 

[TasManOfGod]

So who died or paid the price for Jesus' 'sins'?


The truth is that Jesus took upon His body the sins of the world, and He voluntarily let His physical body die to pay the price for our sins.

Jesus descended into Hell, but the demons could not touch Him because of His innocence; and because He was innocent death had no hold over Him and God lifted Him out and raised His body from death.

peace,
Simon

If (as it is written) Jesus became sin for us and God did forsake Him so there is no reason to doubt that demons did "touch" him -and probably more so than we could imagine.

 

[Faulty]

If (as it is written) Jesus became sin for us and God did forsake Him so there is no reason to doubt that demons did "touch" him -and probably more so than we could imagine.

There's great reason to doubt it, starting with the idea that the demons are tormenting anyone in Hades right now, and then going from there. The one man we have information about in that place said his torment came from the flames.

 

[dollarsbill]

There's great reason to doubt it, starting with the idea that the demons are tormenting anyone in Hades right now, and then going from there. The one man we have information about in that place said his torment came from the flames.

I'm sure the Devil and his followers will have problems of their own in Hell to worry about, without tormenting others .