GeneralDae:

Try to read before replying. This is not about English because even Paul knows it makes no sense to say that a baby has committed sin. Christians do not interprete it this way, so I wonder why your logic should work this way. I have given you the surrounding context of the passage, all you have done is tell me about English. So what does Paul mean by: In Adam all die? You have not addressed the context of the passage I gave you, but you just repeat thesame thing over and over again.

In4matic:


I believe even the Bible answered this when it said, no longer shall it be said that a father shall eat sour grapes and the teeth of the children are set on edge ...

Also Proverbs advices all wise sons seeking wisdom to refrain from paying the debt of a stranger.

Put differently, no longer shall this wrong notion be said that one commits a sin, and another suffers the consequence.

This law is upheld in every other religion

Ihedinobi3:


It's not my problem what religions do. I am speaking as a Christian.

What I don't see in that passage in Ezekiel is anything to the effect that...

Yes, it is true that the book of Proverbs teaches not to stand surety for strangers, but I don't see what that has to do with the issue.

I haven't seen your answer to that question.

I think you know that your position is false.


Jesus Christ chose to do that. The very Law taught that a kinsman-redeemer has the right to redeem a debtor from debt.. The very Law taught that an animal may be killed in place of the sinner.

In4matic:


Your position above is the classic reason Christians are so far behind in the journey of their soul.

Seeking a fall guy to hinge all their failing on.

Since you are a closed book, i see no need to go ahead.
When you are ready, you'll be taught.

For the silent reader, look at the above quote on sacrifice, How does it sound, an innocent, ignorant animal you bought in the market will be made to carry your sins...

Then again did Jesus death qualify as a sacrifice in Jewish standards?

A sacrifice must be
-A kosher animal, not a pig, or camel, or human
-without spot or wrinkle
-offered by a priest who is ceremonially in a pure state
- On an alter of God
- altar must be made of 12 Uncut stones

I ask the descerning mind, do you think Jesus hung like a criminal by pagan Roman soldiers qualify as a sacrifice?

Think on this

In4matic:


Your position above is the classic reason Christians are so far behind in the journey of their soul.

Seeking a fall guy to hinge all their failing on.

Since you are a closed book, i see no need to go ahead.
When you are ready, you'll be taught.

For the silent reader, look at the above quote on sacrifice, How does it sound, an innocent, ignorant animal you bought in the market will be made to carry your sins...

Then again did Jesus death qualify as a sacrifice in Jewish standards?

A sacrifice must be
-A kosher animal, not a pig, or camel, or human
-without spot or wrinkle
-offered by a priest who is ceremonially in a pure state
- On an alter of God
- altar must be made of 12 Uncut stones

I ask the descerning mind, do you believe the death of Jesus hung by pagan Roman soldiers in a place of unclean skulls qualify as a sacrifice?

Crucifixion was reserved for only those seen as enemies of Rome.

Think on this

GeneralDae:

I wonder where they get this sacrifice thing from. What I understand is that a lamb was slain on passover and the Israelites were delivered. This is symbolic and why Jesus' disciples believed he was the lamb of God who ushered in deliverance and a new covenant by his death.

No where in the gospels do we read that jesus would be offered as a human sacrifice to God carrying all our sins.

In4matic:
Ihedinobi3

If no animal ever cleansed sin, then why will a humans?

Ihedinobi3:


Hi there.

What a wild claim you just made!

28 "...just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
Matthew 20:28 (NKJV)

51 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation...
John 11:51 (NKJV)

11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. 12 But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. 13 The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. 15 As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.
17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”
Jn 10:11 — Jn 10:18 (NKJV)

Even if we didn't have such direct quotes, the Gospels are rich with the story of how God sent His Son to come and die for our sins so that we can be saved. I can't imagine how anyone could even dream of saying what you said.

GeneralDae:

Oh my God, you are even quoting my favourite Jesus sayings from the gospels. None of these quotes mean what you think they mean.

Matthew 20v28 does not say that jesus came to be a human sacrifice bearing our sins to God. It says he came to be a ransom for many. What does ransom for many mean? What is the ransom being paid here and to whom?

John 11v51, what does it mean to die for the nation?

Again John 10 is simply saying he would lay his life down for his followers. How does this equate to a blood sacrifice for sin?

GeneralDae:

Oh my God, you are even quoting my favourite Jesus sayings from the gospels. None of these quotes mean what you think they mean.

Matthew 20v28 does not say that jesus came to be a human sacrifice bearing our sins to God. It says he came to be a ransom for many. What does ransom for many mean? What is the ransom being paid here and to whom?

John 11v51, what does it mean to die for the nation?

Again John 10 is simply saying he would lay his life down for his followers. How does this equate to a blood sacrifice for sin?

lilvicky68:

At least not everyone

Dtruthspeaker:


To give man Another Opportunity to Escape His Anger for man was and is Greatly Annoying Him!

Jman24:



I know what you are running away from
But How can you lay your life for someone and not be a sacrifice especially when that death is allegedly beneficial to that person?

Unless you are saying that death of biblical Jesus isn't beneficial to you. Then it's not a sacrifice

FatherOfJesus:
Does this mean that everyone that died before the death of Jesus will go to hell?

GeneralDae:

Sacrifice as in a faithful solider laying down his life freely (by himself) for his nation out of love, is different from saying sacrifice on a alter or a sort of sacrifice for sin to appease God's wrath. I am arguing against the latter, while I believe Jesus sacrifice was the former.

Ihedinobi3:


You want to talk about meanings? Interesting. Isn't that what everybody wants to do? What the Bible says on its surface is never what it means for people like you.

When the Lord Jesus says that He is giving His life as a ransom for many, He doesn't mean that He is?

When John the Baptist calls Him the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world, we are not to understand that in the same sense as the Lamb that is killed as a sacrifice for sins.

When we are told that He would die for the nation of Israel, it is not to be understood as a sacrifice for the sins of Israel too?

I don't think there would be any point at all in listening to anyone who wants to talk about what a thing means when the thing is as clear as daylight.

GeneralDae:

[i]Sacrifice as in a faithful solider laying down his life freely (by himself) for his nation out of love, is different from saying sacrifice on a alter or a sort of sacrifice for sin to appease God's wrath. [/i]I am arguing against the latter, while I believe Jesus sacrifice was the former.

Jman24:

English teacher.
All have sinned means you did it .
Stop twisting English language.
Which one is inherited.? Na land?

The right connotation should have been "Adam sinned and fell short of the glory, and by this, we have inherited ourselves that nature that requires a redemption."
Not
All have sinned(an act) and fall short (present future tense) of the glory etc

FirstSon01:

if the adamic sin still affects us then jesus's dieing was a waste don't ya think??

In4matic:

Exactly...
The mission of Jesus did not include death for any sins. That is unscriptural.

Even Jesus never taught so, not him, nor his disciples.

Read through the sermon of Peter after the Pentecost carefully, no such thing was taught. But repent of your evil ways and ye will be saved.

Paul taught this heresy in order to make people remain in their evil ways.

Paul deceptively taught "believe his death has washed away your sins and you're good to go".
Notice why the entire Christian religion is full of hypocrites; holy on Sunday, sinners the rest of the week.

Jman24:

Being born into something doesn't mean it was your making...

"All have sinned" is an act of which an innocent neonate is unaware of ..
The right connotation still remains.. "Adam sinned and have passed on that nature...."

Eg. The lady contracted HIV through sexual intercourse (an act)
The child got the HIV from mother (by Providence, inheritance, transmission etc)

GES 101

FirstSon01:


what sin have you seen a day old commit before??
be logical.....
just cause your bible said all have seen you want to push the agenda that day olds sin??

GeneralDae:

You are getting many things wrong.

Jesus is compared to the passover lamb taking away sin because it was believed that the passover lamb brought great deliverance and victory to Isreal. What the new testament authors argued for is that those were symbols pointing to the true hero who would be led like a lamb to the slaughter. He is dying to take away the guilt of his people in the eyes of the jews who gave him up to the Romans.

He was their scapegoat just thesame way the lamb was the scapegoat to the Angel of death threatening the birth of the new nation, so also jesus offered himself as the ransom to the Romans threatening the birth of the new jesus movement.

The jewish religious leaders feared that the Romans would come into the city and destroy the nation because of the many followers of Jesus who shouted Hosannah when he rode on a donkey declaring him king of the jews. The pharisees in order to protect the people reasoned that it was better to give jesus up ( whom they hated) and prevent investigation by the Romans that could have led to the slaughter of many.
Jesus in this way gave himself up as a ransom to the Romans for the life of his disciples and his new movement and he became the lamb that was slain for the birth of a new nation.

The people accused him of many sins, putting on their scapegoat the sins of all Isreal and the sins of the world, he became a transgressor even though he was innocent. Paul and the later day christian authors extended the meaning of this sacrificial death for the jesus followers in Isreal, to the entire world and rightly so because if Jesus did not die, there would have been no great spread of the gospel by the disciples, and in essence no kingdom of God on earth.

Ihedinobi3:


As incomplete as your discussion of the Passover Lamb is, the sacrificial lambs in the Law were not all Passover Lambs. When Jesus was called the Lamb of God, the qualification attached was "that takes away the sins of the world." Whether you understand how this applies to the Passover Lamb or not (as it appears that you don't), that makes clear that Jesus came to die just as the lambs of sacrifice in the Law died and for the sins of all mankind.

This is the most obvious truth in the Bible. Nothing else the Bible has to say gets away from this. You have absolutely no chance of making sense of the Bible if you cannot accept this fundamental truth.

GeneralDae:

These things are just symbols. God is not interested in sacrifice, whether animal or human. The sacrifices of God are a contrite heart and spirit. God desires mercy not sacrifice. Jesus already told us what to do when we sin, all we have to do is to turn a new leave and to forgive those who sinned against us as well. Jesus never said you should believe in his blood sacrifice to have your sins forgiven.
The idea of taking away the sins of the world has to do with being a scapegoat for community sin or what I call collective sin, it is not about individual sin. Collective sin led them to bondage and slavery, even the slavery and suffering of the innocent. Jesus is the lamb or scapegoat that came to take away this particular type of sin from Isreal and all men the world over who believe in him.

Ihedinobi3:


Please feel free to believe whatever you want. It is your right and responsibility to choose what you will believe.

All I have said is that I don't agree with you. I think that anyone who actually reads the Bible will instantly see that you are desperately wrong.

GeneralDae:

We are free to believe what we want, but I don't understand. How does death on a cross forgive or take away sin?

Ihedinobi3:


What a weird question! That you would even think that an animal can stand in for a human being is ridiculous in the extreme. It shows just how poor your understanding of the dynamics at play is.

It is human beings who sin against God. Therefore, it is a human being who must answer to God for them. This is the whole gist of Hebrews 2:14-17!

Do you even know what Christians believe and teach? Have you even heard the Gospel? Like, ever?!

GeneralDae:

So humans sinned against God, then an innocent human took the fall? how is that just?
Also even at that, how does this death of jesus take away all the sins? how does it solve the problems?