fanaticbuckeye;1390504; said:
I simply was making a point to expand upon the concept that Jesus' teachings were expanding upon the laws of the Old Testament.
Okay. So, in your opinion, Jesus never offered anything new except insights. Correct?
fanatic said:
If you sin, the payment is death. If you die without forgiveness you go to hell. So if I were to sin without receiving God's forgiveness and then die, I would go to hell. There is destination after death, heaven or hell. Whether you have been saved determines your eternal lifes destination.
Okay. So the payment of death is insufficient then. Correct? You believe there has to be more (i.e. the confession/acceptance of Jesus as your savior). Correct?
fanatic said:
Yes, back to the original statement of the consequences for sin.
Alrighty. I will openly admit that I used to believe this as well. Since my beliefs have changed, it just seems so unproportional.
fanatic said:
My intention wasnt that I asked you and you avoided, merely stating my question again regarding the afterlife for Jews that I had asked previously in that post.
So what are the consequences for not upholding the laws?
The curses in the Torah (in Deuteronomy specifically).
fanatic said:
This is obviously a point of differentiation in our beliefs. No efforts, no matter how great, are worthy of God's glory. Trying to earn my way into heaven is placing greater glory on myself and my actions, not God's grace.
Who said anything about "earning" something? I was talking about your map analogy, and why it was deficient. The Torah in itself is sufficient for understanding. Whereas, you're saying that you need the Christian testament in order to understand it. The proof's in the pudding though as millions of Jews throughout time have had no need of further illumination/interpretation of the Torah in order to act in compliance with the desires of G-d.
fanatic said:
In my limited understanding, I would say absolutely it is the foundation. Assuming that the Old Testament is the Torah, no additions or subtractions.
And with this, you would expect complete harmony. Would you not?
fanatic said:
What have I not addressed directly? How is this an attempt to change the discussion?
I specifically asked you, "IF the Jews NEEDED a savior as your claim; THEN wouldn't you expect to find the substantiation within THE HISTORY of the JEWS?" Where in the Jewish Bible does it say that the Jews needed a savior?
fanatic said:
No, God (the Son) sacrificed his flesh for our sins. Since God (Trinity) is all one, Jesus is direct, not a mediary.
Well then, this changes things since... G-d accepts repentance, prayer and good works in the Tanakh for forgiveness. The acceptance of the crucifixion would be an "addition" to that which is laid out in the Torah. Correct?
fanatic said:
What relevance would that hold?
A tremendous amount of relevance. Allow me to tell you what I mean via the Suffering Servant passage.
Isaiah 53
4. Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains-he carried them, yet we accounted him as plagued, smitten by God and oppressed.
5. But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed.
This is the passage that you referenced beforehand.
Now, if this is literal; then, obviously, it's not a metaphorical discussion in the sense that Jesus, on the cross, was inundated with illnesses, pain, crushing, sins, etc.
If this is taken as literal; then Jesus was an impure/blemished sacrifice. Thus, he would not have been accepted by G-d. I'll continue on below with one more example:
10. And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution,
he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand.
If taken literally; then Jesus had chidren. Do you believe that Jesus had children via intercourse?
The literal/metaphorical discussion has huge ramifications when interpreting a passage. The exegesis/eisegesis really comes to the forefront.
fanatic said:
Was the point of sacrifice to the Jews for forgiveness: Leviticus 4:35?
Yes, the purpose of sacrifice in Leviticus 4 is a matter of forgiveness through the act. Yet, it should be noted that there are a number of underlying issues that must be kept in mind. I will return to the Leviticus passage after showing you this:
1 Samuel 15
22. And Samuel said, "Has the Lord (as much) desire in burnt offerings and peace-offerings, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than a peace-offering; to hearken (is better) than the fat of rams.
Obedience outweights the act of a sacrifice. To do as the L-rd says is what is important with regard to the commandments and other things designated by G-d as important.
Now, to return to Leviticus 4...
Leviticus 4
27. If one person of the people of the land commits a sin unintentionally, by his committing one of the commandments of the Lord which may not be committed, incurring guilt;
28. if his sin that he committed is made known to him, he shall bring his sacrifice: an unblemished female goat, for his sin that he committed.
29. And he shall lean his hand [forcefully] on the head of the sin offering, and he shall slaughter the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering.
30. And the kohen shall take some of its blood with his finger, and place [it] on the horns of the altar [used] for burnt offerings. And then he shall pour all of its [remaining] blood at the base of the altar.
31. And he shall remove all of its fat, just as the fat was removed from the peace offering. The kohen shall then cause it to [go up in] smoke on the altar, as a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. Thus the kohen shall make atonement for him, and he will be forgiven.
32. If he brings a sheep for his sin offering, he shall bring an unblemished female.
33. He shall lean his hand [forcefully] upon the head of the sin offering and slaughter it as a sin offering in the place where he slaughters the burnt offering.
34. And the kohen shall take some of the blood of the sin offering with his finger and place [it] on the horns of the altar [used] for burnt offerings. And then he shall pour all of its blood onto the base of the altar.
35. And he shall remove all its fat, just as the sheep's fat is removed from the peace offering. The kohen shall then cause them to [go up in] smoke on the altar, upon the fires for the Lord. Thus the kohen shall make atonement for him, for his sin which he committed, and he will be forgiven.
What are some of the key characteristics of this particular sin offering?
1) This sin offering covers UNintentional sins.
2) The committed sin must be made known to the individual.
3) Once known, the sinner brings an unblemished female goat or female sheep.
4) The sinner places his hand upon the goat/sheep.
5) The sinner slaughters the offering.
6) The kohen (priest) takes blood and places it on the altar.
7) The kohen takes the fat and places it upon the altar.
8) Forgiveness/atonement is achieved.
It should become evident that this does not describe the Akedah (the offering of Isaac by Abraham) nor the crucifixion.
fanatic said:
Abraham was to sacrifice his son to God before being told to stop. He then sacrificed the ram instead.
Abraham's act of sacrificing his son was a TEST by G-d; not a sin offering. Furthermore, it should not be lost on the situation that Abraham did NOT sacrifice Isaac. G-d established a pattern that differed from Abraham's contemporaries who WERE sacrificing their children.
fanatic said:
Physically, He did and then was resurrected.
What other way would there be to die?
fanatic said:
English. I get the translation issues, so my only way to combat this short of learning Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew is viewing the different english versions. I realize that is even short of direct translation.
The reason I asked is because of the differences between the Christian texts and even a Jewish Bible that are in the same language. There are nuances, and sometimes outright differences that significantly impact the meaning of a verse or passage. If at any time you wish to garner a deeper understanding of the Jewish Bible; then I would suggest that you pick up a Tanakh. Furthermore, I would suggest that you make acquaintances with those that are fluent in Hebrew. The amount of sharing that can be gleaned is unending. Thus, when you learn from G-d through the Bible, you will have taken a step closer to the initial meanings.
