Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does God accept bribes, ransoms, indulgences and sacrifice of Jesus?
Eze 18 20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Psa 49 7
None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]
Man has worked hard to try to put in place a system of justice where the guilty pay for their crimes/sin and the innocent go free. This actually seems to follow the scriptures above and if you are doing unto others what you would like done to you, then you will applaud our present legal forms.
God on the other hand, and those theists that want to ride their scapegoat Jesus as a sacrifice for their sins and not step up to their responsibilities, seem to prefer to have the innocent punished and let the guilty walk.
Scripture says that God cannot be bribed and will not accept a ransom of an innocent party to redeem another. Yet that is exactly what God is said to have done when he intentionally had his son murdered. Some call it a sacrifice. God wanting or needing a blood sacrifice also goes completely against scriptures but he and his followers don‘t seem to know that.
The other bribes or ransoms that God seems to accept are indulgences given by the church and were ironically what created the reformation movement and sects that now somehow embrace that immoral notion. Martin Luther must be spinning in his grave. I will grant that that practice is not as widespread as it once was, but to me, the idea that a man can sin against another man, and by just placing a few $$$ in a church strong box without even having to seek forgiveness from his victim, and expect with church guarantee a shorter stay in purgatory, is just too immoral for me.
All these bribes, ransoms and indulgences are for the forgiveness of sins.
His murder or sacrifice of his son is for the same reason and also has the innocent being punished while the guilty go free.
As the great law maker and executor of justice, do you think it moral for God to accept and demand such instead of making the guilty pay and letting the innocent live?
Secular law generally follows the bible’s idea of justice, in many cases, as shown in the verses above. Should secular law reverse itself and follow God’s ideas of justice instead in accepting bribes, ransoms and sacrifices of innocent men?
Since you don't have the aid of the Holy Spirit in your life, trying to understand scripture through an unrepented mind and heart is like explaining color to a man blind from birth. Therefore, you're spiritually incapable of understanding scripture. Should the greatest theologian explain it to you in a third grade vernacular, you still wouldn't get it, because, according to the bible, you are spiritually dead. Like the idols mentioned in Psalm 115:
Does God accept bribes, ransoms, indulgences and sacrifice of Jesus?
Eze 18 20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
L
Ezekiel 18: 20-23
20The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. 21 “But if a wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; because of the righteousness which he has done, he shall live. 23 Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord GOD, “and not that he should turn from his ways and live?
Psalm 49-your section in context:
5 Why should I fear in the days of evil, When the iniquity at my heels surrounds me? 6 Those who trust in their wealth
And boast in the multitude of their riches, 7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother,
Nor give to God a ransom for him— 8 For the redemption of their souls is costly,
And it shall cease forever— 9 That he should continue to live eternally, And not see the Pit.
I don't see what your point is based on what scripture says in context.
I don't see what your point is based on what scripture says in context.
I am not the only person who will get something different from scriptures. After all they can be made to say almost anything.
Proof is in all the various Christian sects.
How many wives are allowed in yours. One or many.
Are Gays embraced or abominations in your particular cult?
It really is a loving kindness to explain to you why you can't grasp scripture. Before I was saved, I couln't truly fathom the impact and meaning of the Bible because I didn't have the spiritual tools to understand it. Head knowledge is one-dimensional -- the Bible requires head, heart, and spiritual revelation that can only be imparted by the Holy Spirit. Moderator cut: orphaned reference
Since you don't have the aid of the Holy Spirit in your life, trying to understand scripture through an unrepented mind and heart is like explaining color to a man blind from birth. Therefore, you're spiritually incapable of understanding scripture. Should the greatest theologian explain it to you in a third grade vernacular, you still wouldn't get it, because, according to the bible, you are spiritually dead. Like the idols mentioned in Psalm 115:
How can a God(swt) of love allow an Innocent carry the burden of the Evil ones? What need would an All Powerful God(swt) have of sacrifices or offerings?
Can it not be seen that God(swt) need only say you are forgiven and you are forgiven. All we need do is be truly sorry and repentant of our evil acts, we all can ask God(swt) directly for forgiveness and accept the consequences of our own choices.
We all are responsible for our actions we all carry the responsibility of doing our best to correct our faults and do what we can to make amends.
It is all about personal acceptance of our actions and not trying to escape by finding a scapegoat.
I do not want nor expect any innocent person pay the price for my wrong doings. If I can not be sincere enough to ask for forgiveness, I fully deserve what I get.
I have faith in the Judgement and Mercy of God(swt) alone and do not see where he has provided a prepaid "Get out of Jail" ticket.
God(swt) is not a god of terror who requires the blood of an innocent sacrifice.
I didn't know this was a poll thread, folks but it seems that The Greatest's points were simply ignored on the supposed basis that he 'didn't understand scripture'.
The One dimensional view of approaching it critically is nothing compared to the none - dimensional faith - based approach where whatever it says is true, wonderful, inspired and totally sound because the believer refuses to look at any arguments that it isn't.
However, apart from pointing up flawed thinking (especially biased accusations of bias) by Theist apologists, what about the actual argument made?
Jewish theology has always been that man can atone for transgressions by showing repentance. Just saying so wasn't enough, you had to put a shekel in the trumpet, too. With human restitution, repentance might help a bit but restitution was what was wanted. You don't really want their blasted tooth, so some money would be acceptable. Why shouldn't the same sort of restitution be made to God. It isn't a bribe so much as showing practical repentance.
As to the money, in the words of the old joke, collect it and throw it into the air. God takes what he wants and what comes down...
That's sensible enough in terms of divine justice created in our own image but what about this Jesus sacrifice thing?
It makes some sense if Jesus is a man who of his own volition, offers himself as a sacrifice for all mankind's sins. While it is arguable whether one man's death no matter how horrible could wash out the sins of all mankind, if God accepts the sacrifice then that is that.
But, if God had any part in pushing the man Jesus into sacrificing himself let alone making him specifically for that purpose, I'd say that was a worthless sacrifice. True, the lamb doesn't want to be sacrificed but the man is using an animal body of his own volition to appease God.
If God makes a man sacrifice himself, who is that appeasing?
It is even more problematical if the dead man gets up and walks and resumes living after the death. That's like someone offering some shekels as repentance and going and fishing them back out of the treasury. Not only nullifies the sacrifice but should be something the fellow owes repentance for.
It seems that God has arranged a sacrifice that really wasn't one in order to appease himself for some old transgression (not even looking at who set that up) and wash out that old transgression original sin.
Still, if that's the game he wants to play - so long as we have been all absolved of that old sin...what's that? We are still all sinners? Has it or hasn't it absolved mankind of that old sin?
Well, it seems that there are conditions. We have the option of taking up the freedom from sin but we have to show willing.
By being good persons? Nope. That won't do by itself. We apparently have to believe. If we don't believe that the sacrifice was pretty much the sacrificer in person and the sacrifice was taken back after three days, then we can't get the benefits of the sacrifice.
I should have thought that NOT believing that the sacrifice was actually the sacrificer himself and that it stayed good and sacrificed would have been the arbiter but then...God is making the rules...so Ok say I believe - now I am ok for being freed from sin? Well only if I am a good person..yes, yes, I know that being a good person won't earn one the benefits of the sacrifice but you can lose the benefits of the sacrifice by not being a good person.
Makes perfect sense. The release from sin is only potential. One has to do a little dance to get it but it's pretty easy to lose it again.
But don't despair believers. If you do, provided that you still have that faith that sacrifice wasn't a real sacrifice, then you can show your repentance by putting shekels in the trumpet.
Which is where we came in.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-05-2011 at 06:31 AM..
Does God accept bribes, ransoms, indulgences and sacrifice of Jesus?
Eze 18 20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Psa 49 7
None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]
Man has worked hard to try to put in place a system of justice where the guilty pay for their crimes/sin and the innocent go free. This actually seems to follow the scriptures above and if you are doing unto others what you would like done to you, then you will applaud our present legal forms.
God on the other hand, and those theists that want to ride their scapegoat Jesus as a sacrifice for their sins and not step up to their responsibilities, seem to prefer to have the innocent punished and let the guilty walk.
Scripture says that God cannot be bribed and will not accept a ransom of an innocent party to redeem another. Yet that is exactly what God is said to have done when he intentionally had his son murdered. Some call it a sacrifice. God wanting or needing a blood sacrifice also goes completely against scriptures but he and his followers don‘t seem to know that.
The other bribes or ransoms that God seems to accept are indulgences given by the church and were ironically what created the reformation movement and sects that now somehow embrace that immoral notion. Martin Luther must be spinning in his grave. I will grant that that practice is not as widespread as it once was, but to me, the idea that a man can sin against another man, and by just placing a few $$$ in a church strong box without even having to seek forgiveness from his victim, and expect with church guarantee a shorter stay in purgatory, is just too immoral for me.
All these bribes, ransoms and indulgences are for the forgiveness of sins.
His murder or sacrifice of his son is for the same reason and also has the innocent being punished while the guilty go free.
As the great law maker and executor of justice, do you think it moral for God to accept and demand such instead of making the guilty pay and letting the innocent live?
Secular law generally follows the bible’s idea of justice, in many cases, as shown in the verses above. Should secular law reverse itself and follow God’s ideas of justice instead in accepting bribes, ransoms and sacrifices of innocent men?
Regards
DL
Many good points, DL.
I also believe that Jesus is used as a scapegoat, which limits spiritual progress... & true repentance (correcting thinking & related feeling & behavior).
Many, especially Constatine, boxed up religion to favor political power. For so long, in many places, the church and state were one.
King James also had the bible written to support King's power.
That doesn't mean we should dismiss all scriptures, but to use our brain, along with spirit to discern what is of God & what isn't.
I believe God is love, & scriptures indicate this.
We are not punished FOR our sins but BY them. The natural consequence. If I run full force at a brick wall, I'll get hurt. God won't stop me. Yet God won't punish me on top of the pain I'd feel of hitting that brick wall. If God is love, He/She would not kick us when we're down, requiring the need of a Savior. If God is love, God would want us to LEARN & develop LOVE (which is wanting & striving for what is best through trial & error - faith).
Initially, like a belief in Santa, we may need to believe in a Savior, to resonate better with Personification of Spirituality imagined in Jesus. Yet, Christ is not Jesus' last name, but what he (or authors) became & encouraged us to become. To put Jesus up on a pedastal, believing He arrived at perfection, kindof lets us off the hook - We think, "I could never be that good! It's a good thing someone's paying for my lack." That's not love, or what's best.
What's best is giving our all, but also humbly realizing we're never going to "arrive" at perfections and that's ok. Infact, that's what God's design is... for us to be imperfect strivers... & what matters is that we "finish strong" - doing our personal human best.
"The kingdom (experience) of God is within you." (Luke 17) Belief is powerful, whether true or false. Belief's influence is real. So a belief in a Savior, may help when life seems difficult. And I do think we have saviors - those who help us in body & spirit. Yet, nobody's going to think, feel or act for us. That's up to us. And to believe otherwise gives up our needed power & spirituality.
Last edited by SuperSoul; 09-05-2011 at 11:55 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
