A Question for my friend, Fenris

[rejoice44]

What kind of sin?

Accidental sin?

Requires atonement, doesn't it?

Sin where a person tries their hardest but falls short?

Take Uzzah for example. Tried to protect the ark from being tossed from the cart. His intentions were good, but they were wrong. He fell short, and the bible records this. 2 Samuel 6:7 "And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.

Sin where a person gives into their base desires?

Like David did when he had Uriah killed so he could have his wife?

Sin where a person sins in defiance of God?

Like Moses did when he wasn't allowed into the promised land?

[Fenris]

Requires atonement, doesn't it?

Does it separate man from God?

Take Uzzah for example. Tried to protect the ark from being tossed from the cart. His intentions were good, but they were wrong. He fell short, and the bible records this. 2 Samuel 6:7 "And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.

Uhh touching the ark is kind of a unique event, not sure I'd compare it to other "accidental sins". Also, Does it separate man from God?

Like David did when he had Uriah killed so he could have his wife?

Did it separate him from God?

Like Moses did when he wasn't allowed into the promised land?

Moses sinned defiantly against God, really?

You have a very low opinion of biblical figures.

And Moses punishment was that he wasn't allowed into the land of Israel. Nothing about him "being separated from God".

[rejoice44]

Does it separate man from God?

Yes, both in this life and the life to come, otherwise God would not have provided a method of atonement

Uhh touching the ark is kind of a unique event, not sure I'd compare it to other "accidental sins".

What is your definition of sin? My definition is anything that is contrary to God.

Also, Does it separate man from God?

It separated Uzzah from God.

Did it separate him from God?

It would have had he not begged for God's mercy. (Cheap grace I believe you call it.)

Moses sinned defiantly against God, really?

Yes, he struck the rock twice that represented the Son of God, when he was told to speak to the Rock.

You have a very low opinion of biblical figures.

Sinful man versus God? I will pick God's side every time. Were they greater than me? Of course they were, but sinners none the less. I am not a respecter of men.

And Moses punishment was that he wasn't allowed into the land of Israel. Nothing about him "being separated from God".

Our sin always separates us from God. It is only when our sin is atoned for that we can have a good relationship with God.

[Fenris]

Yes, both in this life and the life to come, otherwise God would not have provided a method of atonement

That's quite a jump. Maybe God requires atonement as a method of us improving. You know, I'm sorry God, I'll try to be better next time.

What is your definition of sin? My definition is anything that is contrary to God.

The bible has a specific list actually.

It separated Uzzah from God.

It separated him from life. Not God.

It would have had he not begged for God's mercy.

Ah. A shame the bible does reveal that nugget.

Yes, he struck the rock twice, that represented the Son of God, when he was told to speak to the Rock.

Ah. A shame the bible does reveal that nugget.

His sin appears to be striking the rock. Not striking the son of god or whatever.

Sinful man versus God? I will pick God's side every time. Were they greater than me? Of course they were, but sinners none the less. I am not a respecter of men.

I try not to speak ill of others, especially those who were on such a high level that they spoke to God personally.

Our sin always separates us from God.

You keep saying this, but it's really something you believe not something you know.

[LookingUp]

A religion with god incarnate as the messiah is not Judaism, sorry.

How do you think the transcendent God communicated with His prophets? If God is “beyond knowing” by definition, how did He make a way for Himself to be known by His finite creatures? What does Judaism make of these many communications between the transcendent One and mankind?

Whatever it is, it hasn't happened yet.

I never said “it happened” (full implementation of the New Covenant). When it does happen, will it render human existence pointless? Of course not! There will still be a point to human existence. It will be a bit different but certainly not pointless.

I’ll remind you of what I wrote…“I agree that the Law can transform hearts when obeyed, but not to the degree that the New Covenant will when God writes the Torah on the hearts of His people.” And I agree that we’re here to make many choices regarding right and wrong and that this is part of a process. As we agreed, the prophets do not make it clear that “the reward” (New Cov., a new heart, etc. etc.) is given as a result of Israel doing such a bang up job of obeying God. The reward is given after a time of Israel disregarding God’s commands. That’s why they are scattered and need to be gathered. They will be cleansed from “all their filthiness and from all their idols.” When God cleanses them from their filthiness, they “will remember their evil ways and evil deeds and they will loathe themselves for their iniquities.” That’s why God claims, “I am not doing this for your sake.” He rewards Israel because He is faithful and keeps His promises. Yes, it is written that they who turn from transgression will be delivered, but it sounds like it’s only after they sink to an all-time low that they turn back to God. The Law does not turn Israel into a nation with hearts full of love for the Law. God will do that FOR them. That doesn’t mean the Mosaic Law is a waste of time, but it certainly won’t transform their hearts the way God intends to. God needs to “fix” their hearts first and then they will follow all His statutes.

You're going to have to take this up with your fellow Christians. I'm not here to defend Christian doctrine.

I’m not asking you to defend Christianity, I’m asking you to defend your statement that “either one accepts Jesus as God, or they don’t.” That’s your statement; it’s not a statement from the New Testament. So, if you want to prove your statement true, do it. If you don’t want to prove it, fine, but then it’s just a groundless statement that has no value for this discussion.

The point being, we don't know what order events will take in the redemption of Zion.

Not with perfect clarity, but we can at least have a vague idea. The logical timeline is Israel goes astray, is scattered, repents, is gathered and the New Covenant is implemented. Do you see a more logical timeline?

"holy" does not mean "perfect". As I have said several times, the concept of abstract perfection does not exist in Judaism. It's a Greek idea.

OK, moving on from the whole “perfection” thing (whatever that really means). We see from the prophets that Israel is far from holy when He comes to implement the New Covenant. The Law is not capable of cleansing Israel. God says that He will cleanse Israel from all their filthiness. Why does He need to do that? Because the Law can’t completely wash Israel clean. The Law can only provide a sponge bath. God will provide a thorough cleaning from the inside (i.e. new heart) out.

I don't think Jesus "did" anything, aside from being crucified as a rebel.

I’ll reword my question. According to your understanding of Christianity, what is it that Messiah Jesus did that the Levitical priesthood with its sacrificial system couldn’t do? I’m trying to get an idea of what you know and don’t know. Even with all the time you spend here, it seems you have some misunderstandings or only partial understandings anyway.

The reward awaits us in the messianic era.

Does God reward Israel with the New Cov. (new heart that will cause them to walk in His statutes, etc.), because He finds values in being able to walk in His statutes flawlessly?

If it’s through His chosen Messiah that He makes provision for the New Covenant, how does that contradict Judaism?

These are all points of faith, not fact. Everything that Jesus "accomplished" remains unseen, in the "spiritual realm". Meanwhile, the visible effects of the "messiah" all await a "second coming".

True. But what was seen was his healing ministry (i.e. proof that he was from God) and his resurrection (i.e. proof that he was who he claimed to be—Messiah, son of the living God). Those first century eye witnesses certainly had more visible proof than most today. I, personally, think that’s why Jesus was so hard on those who witnessed his miracles. Higher expectations for those who had visible proof. Many believers today get to see miracles performed in the name of Jesus (“by his authority”), but not all believers even see those kinds of things. My take is that the healings and the casting out of demons then and now are a picture of the kingdom coming down to earth (“the kingdom is at hand”). Visible effects of the Messiah and a glimpse of all that is on the horizon.

In the messianic era.

The world will be a changed place. And we aren't there, yet.

True.

[rejoice44]

[QUOTE]

That's quite a jump. Maybe God requires atonement as a method of us improving. You know, I'm sorry God, I'll try to be better next time.

I can understand how you might look at it like that. Why did God tell Abraham to sacrifice his only son?

The bible has a specific list actually.

True, and it contains laws that we have all broken.

It separated him from life. Not God.

We don't know whether it separated him from God. When Saul sinned, God took his Spirit from him.

Ah. A shame the bible does reveal that nugget.

So some people are so good that they don't need mercy? David, King of the Jews, needed it. Isaac needed it.

Ah. A shame the bible does reveal that nugget.

His sin appears to be striking the rock. Not striking the son of god or whatever.

Moses said, "Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and has forgotten God that formed thee." (Deut. 32:18)

1 Samuel 2:2 "There is none holy as the Lord: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God."

David said, "Unto thee will I cry, O Lord my rock: be not silent to me: lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like them that go down into the pit." (Psalm 28:1)

Paul said, "And did all drink the same spiritual drink, for they drank of that Spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ."

I try not to speak ill of others, especially those who were on such a high level that they spoke to God personally.

God is no respecter of men, didn't he make them all of the dust of the earth?

You keep saying this, but it's really something you believe not something you know.

It is something the bible demonstrates to us time and time again. Where is your Temple?

[Fenris]

How do you think the transcendent God communicated with His prophets?

Not by assuming a body. When God spoke at Sinai, Deuteronomy specifically says that "you saw no form". If God could appear to millions of Jews at Sinia with no body, why couldn't He speak to a prophet the same way?

I never said “it happened” (full implementation of the New Covenant). When it does happen, will it render human existence pointless? Of course not! There will still be a point to human existence. It will be a bit different but certainly not pointless.

Ok, so it hasn't happened yet.

I’ll remind you of what I wrote…“I agree that the Law can transform hearts when obeyed, but not to the degree that the New Covenant will when God writes the Torah on the hearts of His people.” And I agree that we’re here to make many choices regarding right and wrong and that this is part of a process. As we agreed, the prophets do not make it clear that “the reward” (New Cov., a new heart, etc. etc.) is given as a result of Israel doing such a bang up job of obeying God. The reward is given after a time of Israel disregarding God’s commands. That’s why they are scattered and need to be gathered. They will be cleansed from “all their filthiness and from all their idols.” When God cleanses them from their filthiness, they “will remember their evil ways and evil deeds and they will loathe themselves for their iniquities.” That’s why God claims, “I am not doing this for your sake.” He rewards Israel because He is faithful and keeps His promises. Yes, it is written that they who turn from transgression will be delivered, but it sounds like it’s only after they sink to an all-time low that they turn back to God. The Law does not turn Israel into a nation with hearts full of love for the Law. God will do that FOR them. That doesn’t mean the Mosaic Law is a waste of time, but it certainly won’t transform their hearts the way God intends to. God needs to “fix” their hearts first and then they will follow all His statutes.

Again, the words of the prophets are unclear on the subject.

I’m not asking you to defend Christianity, I’m asking you to defend your statement that “either one accepts Jesus as God, or they don’t.” That’s your statement; it’s not a statement from the New Testament. So, if you want to prove your statement true, do it. If you don’t want to prove it, fine, but then it’s just a groundless statement that has no value for this discussion.

Since it is an essential Christian dogma for at least 1700 years, it certainly does have value for this discussion.

Not with perfect clarity, but we can at least have a vague idea. The logical timeline is Israel goes astray, is scattered, repents, is gathered and the New Covenant is implemented. Do you see a more logical timeline?

Well here you say "repents" but above you say "God gives them a new heart first". In fact, the order is not clear.

OK, moving on from the whole “perfection” thing (whatever that really means). We see from the prophets that Israel is far from holy when He comes to implement the New Covenant. The Law is not capable of cleansing Israel. God says that He will cleanse Israel from all their filthiness. Why does He need to do that? Because the Law can’t completely wash Israel clean. The Law can only provide a sponge bath. God will provide a thorough cleaning from the inside (i.e. new heart) out.

Well.. it would help if all Israel followed the law. Since most Jews are not religious, God may need to forgive their sins. But the flaw is not the law itself. And there are Jews who are religious.

I’ll reword my question. According to your understanding of Christianity, what is it that Messiah Jesus did that the Levitical priesthood with its sacrificial system couldn’t do? I’m trying to get an idea of what you know and don’t know. Even with all the time you spend here, it seems you have some misunderstandings or only partial understandings anyway.

Forgive all sins?

Does God reward Israel with the New Cov. (new heart that will cause them to walk in His statutes, etc.), because He finds values in being able to walk in His statutes flawlessly?

...not sure I understand the question

True. But what was seen was his healing ministry (i.e. proof that he was from God) and his resurrection (i.e. proof that he was who he claimed to be—Messiah, son of the living God). Those first century eye witnesses certainly had more visible proof than most today.

We don't have eyewitnesses. We have books written by believers. Not the same thing at all.

I, personally, think that’s why Jesus was so hard on those who witnessed his miracles. Higher expectations for those who had visible proof.

A false prophet can perform miracles too, according to Deuteronomy. Not accusing anyone of anything. Just saying.

[Fenris]

I can understand how you might look at it like that. Why did God tell Abraham to sacrifice his only son?

Because that was how people worshipped their gods back then. And Abraham had to prove he loved his God no less than they loved theirs.

True, and it contains laws that we have all broken.

Yes, and so? That's where forgiveness comes in. I'd rather try to do what God said and fall short than not try at all.

We don't know whether it separated him from God. When Saul sinned, God took his Spirit from him.

So now we're bouncing from person to person?

Moses said, "Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and has forgotten God that formed thee." (Deut. 32:18)

1 Samuel 2:2 "There is none holy as the Lord: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God."

David said, "Unto thee will I cry, O Lord my rock: be not silent to me: lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like them that go down into the pit." (Psalm 28:1)

Sigh. This means that God is poetically "a rock", something we can hold onto when in distress. Not that God is literally a stone.

God is no respecter of men, didn't he make them all of the dust of the earth?

What God does or doesn't do has nothing to do with man. You or I have no right to speak ill of others, especially not biblical characters.

It is something the bible demonstrates to us time and time again. Where is your Temple?

What does that have to do with "sin separating man from God"?

[ewq1938]

Not by assuming a body. When God spoke at Sinai, Deuteronomy specifically says that "you saw no form". If God could appear to millions of Jews at Sinia with no body, why couldn't He speak to a prophet the same way?

lol

The scriptures do not say he had no form, but they SAW NO FORM. They couldn't see his form because of the fire but later Moses does see some of his form, hand and back side. That alone proves God has a form because it has been seen. I believe this was done so they would not make a graven image of him.

[rejoice44]

Sigh. This means that God is poetically "a rock", something we can hold onto when in distress. Not that God is literally a stone.

I feel sure you read the fourth verse that was posted, which was from Paul, that said Christ was the spiritual Rock. The portion of the Bible that you reject is your stumblingstone, and records the details that are not given in the Old Testament.

A good liar never gives details. The New Testament is full of details concerning the Old Testament. The New Testament is not a lie.

You say grace is cheap mercy. That is true, it doesn't cost you anything, but it cost God a lot. I doubt if Abraham would have called it cheap grace when he was ready to plunge the knife into his only son. The ram in the thicket looked like cheap grace for Isaac, but then the details are in the stumblingstone. That lamb was symbolic of the lamb of God recorded in the portion of the Bible you reject. No man can make himself clean, only God can do that.

What God does or doesn't do has nothing to do with man. You or I have no right to speak ill of others, especially not biblical characters.

I love those characters in the Bible that God dealt with. God records their sins so that we don't put them on too high a pedestal.

I can honestly say that God made all his goodness to pass before me, as was done for Moses in Exodus 33:19. "And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy."

I cried out to God night after night in tears, and he did after many nights fill me with the knowledge of his goodness, and proclaimed his name, JESUS. I was a young man with no church affiliation, and no Christian parents. I know he spoke to me and it changed my life, and forever have had peace.

It was cheap grace because all I had to do was beg God. I am a beggar that doesn't want to get what I deserve, and have been shown mercy. Grace on the other hand is getting something I don't deserve, eternal life.

[LookingUp]

Not by assuming a body. When God spoke at Sinai, Deuteronomy specifically says that "you saw no form"

1) Is it true that no one has seen (or can see) the LORD?

2) Is it true that the LORD appeared to Abram? (Gen. 12:7; 17:1;18:1)?

3) What do you make of that?

If God could appear to millions of Jews at Sinia with no body, why couldn't He speak to a prophet the same way?

Of course He could. I’m not sure why that’s even in question.

Ok, so it hasn't happened yet.

I, personally, think that’s obvious.

Again, the words of the prophets are unclear on the subject.

The words of the prophets aren’t crystal clear but they certainly give enough clarity to get the gist.

Since it is an essential Christian dogma for at least 1700 years, it certainly does have value for this discussion.

Then let’s discuss it. Give me ONE Scripture that dictates you MUST believe that Jesus IS God in order for you to “go to heaven” or whatever. Just give me ONE Scripture. PLEASE! If you can’t do that, please just drop this distraction and let’s move on with things that are actually IN the Bible.

Well here you say "repents" but above you say "God gives them a new heart first". In fact, the order is not clear.

No, I didn’t say that. I said that the timeline is: Israel goes astray, is scattered, REPENTS, is gathered, and then the New Covenant is implemented (new heart, etc.).

The “new heart” is given SO THAT they will follow His Law from the heart flawlessly. 1) Repentance comes before this. Do you agree?

2) Scripture says that the New Cov. (new heart, etc.) is given at a time just after Israel goes astray. Do you agree?

3) Scripture says that those who turn from transgression will be given this new heart. Do you agree?

Well.. it would help if all Israel followed the law.

It would help, but Scripture says that it won’t accomplish what God Himself will personally accomplish. Do you agree (i.e. new heart SO THAT they will follow Law)?

Since most Jews are not religious, God may need to forgive their sins. But the flaw is not the law itself. And there are Jews who are religious.

It seems obvious, to me, that the flaw is not the Law but the HEART that God will personally have to change.

Forgive all sins?

Doesn’t the Law and God Himself already make provision for that? There is no sin that we’ve seen in the Hebrew Scriptures that God has not forgiven. Look at David, for example, who murdered a man so he could have the man’s wife that he lusted after. I think it’s safe to say that God can forgive any sin.

SO, what is it that God provided through Jesus that the Law could not provide? God ALREADY forgave sin, so that's only a partial picture. WHAT is it that needs to be changed? THE HEART (i.e. soul)!

...not sure I understand the question

Does God find value in being able to walk in His statutes flawlessly?

Let me answer. Of course He does! That’s why He will write His Law on your heart and cause you to walk in His statutes. God finds value and purpose in being able to walk in His statutes FLAWLESSLY. Obviously, not for this age, but for the next..YES! And this, by no means, renders human existence pointless. Dwell on this for just a fraction of a moment.

[ewq1938]

1) Is it true that no one has seen (or can see) the LORD?

2) Is it true that the LORD appeared to Abram? (Gen. 12:7; 17:1;18:1)?

Good verses.

Gen_35:7 And he built there an altar, and called the place Elbethel: because there God appeared unto him, when he fled from the face of his brother.

Gen_35:9 And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came out of Padanaram, and blessed him.

Also Moses saw the hand of God and the back side of God as he passed by.

[Noeb]

Then let’s discuss it. Give me ONE Scripture that dictates you MUST believe that Jesus IS God in order for you to “go to heaven” or whatever. Just give me ONE Scripture. PLEASE! If you can’t do that, please just drop this distraction and let’s move on with things that are actually IN the Bible.

I'm thrilled you pointed this out. It is essential for those that allow and use this wrong Christian doctrine to keep them from their messiah.

[ewq1938]

I'm thrilled you pointed this out. It is essential for those that allow and use this wrong Christian doctrine to keep them from their messiah.

John 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

IMO "believing on Christ" means to believe everything said about him, which includes that he is God. Do we really think it's ok to pick and choose what to believe?

If Christ is likened to a strong glass of Lemonade and you want someone to drink some, is it ok to water it down so much it barely tastes like Lemonade anymore?

[LookingUp]

John 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

IMO "believing on Christ" means to believe everything said about him, which includes that he is God. Do we really think it's ok to pick and choose what to believe?

If Christ is likened to a strong glass of Lemonade and you want someone to drink some, is it ok to water it down so much it barely tastes like Lemonade anymore?

Noeb, if you respond to ewq1938, it will distract from the flow for many pages. I recommend you guys start a new thread if you want to get into this. Thanks.

By the way, I noticed you correctly wrote "IMO." I wasn't asking Fenris for an opinion. I'm asking for ONE Scripture that states one must believe that Jesus is God in order to obtain eternal life. Such an important claim should have at least one little Scripture to back it up.