All Forums | General Discussion

If Christ died on the cross for all of humanity

Participants:
Search
Views: 256999
Posts: 5358
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1151
Seventy sevens continued...

Now, 173,880 days from February 27 - March 28, 444 BC, lands us at March 24 - April 22, AD 33. 

According to this prophecy, the Messiah would show up, present Himself as Messiah to the nation and then be “cut off” some time between March 24 and April 22, AD 33. Jesus Christ presented Himself to the nation of Israel on Palm Sunday, March 27, was crucified four days later on April 1, or “Preparation Day” (the annual day on which the Passover Lamb was slain), and rose from the dead on Sunday, April 3, AD 33, all within our 30-day range of dates.

The prophecy then goes on to say that subsequent to the Messiah being “cut off,” “the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.” Within one generation of Christ’s crucifixion, Titus razed Jerusalem and destroyed the temple.

There is some debate about the exact date of the decree that began the 483 years. There is also debate as to whether the days should be counted on our modern 365-day calendars, or the 360-day lunar calendar that was normally used in ancient times. Whichever the case, Daniel's prophecy concludes very close to the time Jesus Christ was being crucified in Jerusalem.

If we knew all the exact dates of Daniel's prophecy and timing, we would find it would land exactly on the very day of Christ's death. Through God revealing it to him, the Prophet Daniel predicted the very day of Christ's death—over 400 years before it occurred.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1152
Quantum leap,

"Why did Jesus say, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?""

The actual text states “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46). 

This cry is a fulfillment of Psalm 22:1, one of many parallels between that psalm and the specific events of the crucifixion.

It has been difficult to understand in what sense Jesus was “forsaken” by God.
It is certain that God approved His work. It is certain that He was innocent. He had done nothing to forfeit the favor of God. As His own Son - holy, harmless, undefiled, and obedient - God still loved Him.

In none of these senses could God have forsaken Him.

However, Isaiah tells us that “he bore our griefs and carried our sorrows; that he was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities; that the chastisement of our peace was laid upon him; that by his stripes we are healed” (Isaiah 53:4-5). 

He redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us (Galatians 3:13).

He was made a sin-offering, and He died in our place, on our account, that He might bring us near to God.
It was this, doubtless, which caused His intense sufferings. It was the manifestation of God’s hatred of sin, in some way which He has not explained, that Jesus experienced in that terrible hour. It was suffering endured by Him that was due to us, and suffering by which, and by which alone, we can be saved from eternal death.

In those awful moments, Jesus was expressing His feelings of abandonment as God placed the sins of the world on Him – and because of that had to “turn away” from Jesus. As Jesus was feeling that weight of sin, He was experiencing separation from God for the only time in all of eternity.

It was at this time that 2 Corinthians 5:21 occurred, “God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.” 

Jesus became sin for us, so He felt the loneliness and abandonment that sin always produces, except that in His case, it was not His sin – it was ours.


 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2010
Posts: 14521
Posted: #1153
Quote Originally Posted by Crashdavis565:

what is the big deal?

I mean he is the son of God, why does it matter that he gave his human life on the cross. What is a human life worth in the Kingdom of God?

Is this really that big of a sacrifice? Think about it. If he dies at 27 or at 77 what is the difference? If he dies in his sleep or on the cross, what is the big deal? He is the son of God for crying out loud, what would the worldly issues matter for his life when he will spend the next 10,000 years at the right hand of God?

 

Puzzling.

Your questions were great, and obviously thought provoking.

They also lead you to the answer that you are suggesting, that is perhaps also puzzling--there is no meaning at all in a sacrifice, except for those caught up in the sacrifice. It is meaningless.

Additionally, it can be argued that Jesus "the Christ" never died in a crucifixion ceremony at all. It is puzzling the ceremony transpired on Passover--a time in those days that was severely supervised by religious authorities and the general public. In all likelihood Roman guards were bribed by Jesus' wealthier cohorts, and his living body was hustled away before the law observing person woke up the next day to kill Jesus themselves.

Noticeable is the challenge to Jewish laws and authorities, but utmost respect and submission for Roman law and authority.

You are correct in your suggestion and there is not much need to dilly dally with biblical transcripts that politically left out gnostic gospels (notably the Gospel of Thomas). The religion built up around Jesus is used by men for their own gain and to keep the masses in a haze so they cannot feel the truth of the essence of being.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1154
Quantum Leap,

You said "You don't really know that you have free will, or whether there are conditions that are determining your existence.  You cannot presume you know God's intent."

If “free will” means that God gives humans the opportunity to make choices that genuinely affect their destiny, then yes, human beings do have a free will.

The world’s current sinful state is directly linked to choices made by Adam and Eve. God created mankind in His own image, and that included the ability to choose.

However, free will does not mean that mankind can do anything he pleases.

Our choices are limited to what is in keeping with our nature. 
For example, a man may choose to walk across a bridge or not to walk across it; what he may not choose is to fly over the bridge—his nature prevents him from flying. In a similar way, a man cannot choose to make himself righteous—his (sin) nature prevents him from canceling his guilt (Romans 3:23). So, free will is limited by nature.

This limitation does not mitigate our accountability. 

The Bible is clear that we not only have the ability to choose, we also have the responsibility to choose wisely. 
In the Old Testament, God chose a nation (Israel), but individuals within that nation still bore an obligation to choose obedience to God. And individuals outside of Israel were able to choose to believe and follow God as well (e.g., Ruth and Rahab). 

In the New Testament, sinners are commanded over and over to “repent” and “believe” (Matthew 3:2; 4:17; Acts 3:19; 1 John 3:23).
Every call to repent is a call to choose. 
The command to believe assumes that the hearer can choose to obey the command.

Jesus identified the problem of some unbelievers when He told them, “You refuse to come to me to have life” (John 5:40).
Clearly, they could have come if they wanted to; their problem was they chose not to. “A man reaps what he sows” (Galatians 6:7), and those who are outside of salvation are “without excuse” (Romans 1:20-21).

But how can man, limited by a sin nature, ever choose what is good? 

It is only through the grace and power of God that free will truly becomes “free” in the sense of being able to choose salvation (John 15:16). 

It is the Holy Spirit who works in and through a person’s will to regenerate that person (John 1:12-13) and give him/her a new nature “created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (Ephesians 4:24). Salvation is God’s work. 

At the same time, our motives, desires, and actions are voluntary, and we are rightly held responsible for them.
 


 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2010
Posts: 14521
Posted: #1155
Quote Originally Posted by matt4000:

Quantum Leap,
You said "Let me ask you this: What kind of father of God would hide himself in this way?"

Jehovah revealed himself over and over again throughout the Old Testament.

Then, he went above and beyond to tell the people ALL throughout the Old Testament that he was going to come as the messiah to save the world, then fulfilled every prophecy in the Old Testament in Jesus Christ.

There are many Old Testament prophecies about Jesus Christ. Some interpreters place the number of Messianic prophecies in the hundreds.

Here are a few that are considered the clearest and most important concerning the Old Testament predicting the coming of Jesus Christ?


C'mon my friend. You seem reasonable enough. You don't REALLY believe in a virgin birth; that these ancient ill advised scribes were writing anything more than documents to control the Israeli tribes from outside tribal influences (certainly NOT the "word of God); that someone was actually killed , then flew around like an angel...and so on....?

No christian for that matter REALLY believes in it. Come off it, man. Stop playing games. Come to life man. This is it. Forget the future judgement--this is what they tell you the "bad guys" will get, so that they can steal, lie and murder behind your backs (US government). Live NOW--not for tomorrow.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1156
Quantum Leap,

You said " Please lay off the rest of us--stop trying to realize your Earthly prizes--such as political power, economic power (a la Joel Osteen and his 'prosperity preaching' antics that influence millions) or territorial gains (the Catholic church is the largest landowner in the world), or influence world leaders (need I give examples throughout history of christian exploits, tortures, genocides...???)."

I agree wholeheartedly with you on this!!!
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1157

C'mon my friend. You seem reasonable enough. You don't REALLY believe in a virgin birth; that these ancient ill advised scribes were writing anything more than documents to control the Israeli tribes from outside tribal influences (certainly NOT the "word of God); that someone was actually killed , then flew around like an angel...and so on....?

No christian for that matter REALLY believes in it. Come off it, man. Stop playing games. Come to life man. This is it. Forget the future judgement--this is what they tell you the "bad guys" will get, so that they can steal, lie and murder behind your backs (US government). Live NOW--not for tomorrow.

You made me laugh on this one!!!


But yes, I do believe fully in the virgin birth.

Agree with you about the government.

And I do live for the now, but I also don't neglect the FACT that naked I came into this world and naked I will leave.

Have you ever seen a hearse carrying a u-haul?

I know that I can die at any moment in time, so I must be prepared at ALL times!!!



 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1158
Quantum Leap,

About the Virgin birth...

The doctrine of the virgin birth is crucially important (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:27, 34).

The Bible describes the event this way.
In response to Mary’s question, “How will this be?” (Luke 1:34), Gabriel says, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you” (Luke 1:35).

The angel encourages Joseph to not fear marrying Mary with these words: “What is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20).
Matthew states that the virgin “was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18).

Galatians 4:4 also teaches the Virgin Birth: “God sent His Son, born of a woman.”

From these passages, it is certainly clear that Jesus’ birth was the result of the Holy Spirit working within Mary’s body.

The immaterial (the Spirit) and the material (Mary’s womb) were both involved.
Mary, of course, could not impregnate herself, and in that sense she was simply a “vessel.” 
Only God could perform the miracle of the Incarnation.

However, denying a physical connection between Mary and Jesus would imply that Jesus was not truly human. Scripture teaches that Jesus was fully human, with a physical body like ours. This He received from Mary. 

At the same time, Jesus was fully God, with an eternal, sinless nature (John 1:14; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 2:14-17.)

Jesus was not born in sin; that is, He had no sin nature (Hebrews 7:26). It would seem that the sin nature is passed down from generation to generation through the father (Romans 5:12, 17, 19).

The Virgin Birth circumvented the transmission of the sin nature and allowed the eternal God to become a perfect man.

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 27785
Posted: #1159
Quote Originally Posted by Quantum_Leap:

C'mon my friend. You seem reasonable enough. You don't REALLY believe in a virgin birth; that these ancient ill advised scribes were writing anything more than documents to control the Israeli tribes from outside tribal influences (certainly NOT the "word of God); that someone was actually killed , then flew around like an angel...and so on....?

No christian for that matter REALLY believes in it. Come off it, man. Stop playing games. Come to life man. This is it. Forget the future judgement--this is what they tell you the "bad guys" will get, so that they can steal, lie and murder behind your backs (US government). Live NOW--not for tomorrow.

Isnt it ironic how non believers accuse believers of beliefving something of a birgin birth, yet when the non believer is forced into believing the universe popped into existence from nothing?

Explain that to me bud

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 27785
Posted: #1160
* Virgin birth
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2010
Posts: 14521
Posted: #1161

Quote Originally Posted by Rostos:

* Virgin birth

Yeah, no mixture of blood and semen. And Jesus had brothers, so Mary had to have sex to have Jesus' brothers.  But no coitus nine months prior to Jesus' birth.

To address your queston: I don't know how the universe came into being. A cosmic egg?

Your eyes can see outward (an octupus has better eyes than a human, but that was from God's intelligent design I suppose), but you cannot see behind your eyeball. Guess that's kinda what we're dealing with. The snake chasing its tail. Some say it's still creating itself endlessly.

The creation stories to explain it all are amusing anecdotes. The Bible will oneday be considered amusing--tedious but a rewarding read for those with a cultural-historical background in Near East Mythologies.

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 27785
Posted: #1162
Quote Originally Posted by Quantum_Leap:

Yeah, no mixture of blood and semen. And Jesus had brothers, so Mary had to have sex to have Jesus' brothers.  But no coitus nine months prior to Jesus' birth.

To address your queston: I don't know how the universe came into being. A cosmic egg?

Your eyes can see outward (an octupus has better eyes than a human, but that was from God's intelligent design I suppose), but you cannot see behind your eyeball. Guess that's kinda what we're dealing with. The snake chasing its tail. Some say it's still creating itself endlessly.

The creation stories to explain it all are amusing anecdotes. The Bible will oneday be considered amusing--tedious but a rewarding read for those with a cultural-historical background in Near East Mythologies.

You are ducking in between atheism and agnosticism depending on what suits your argument. It is a logically inconsistent position.

On the one hand, you state you dont believe in God, then when put into a corner, you state you dont know.

You rule out God on one hand, then say you dont know.....

Inconsistent logic

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1163
Quantum Leap,

You stated "The Bible will oneday be considered amusing--tedious but a rewarding read for those with a cultural-historical background in Near East Mythologies."

This is a false comparison!!!

There are a number of voices claiming that the accounts of Jesus as recorded in the New Testament are simply myths and were the result of the writers borrowing stories from pagan mythology, such as the stories of Osiris, Dionysus, Adonis, Attis, and Mithras. The claim is that these mythological figures are essentially the same story as what the New Testament ascribes to Jesus Christ of Nazareth. As Dan Brown claims in, The Da Vinci Code, “Nothing in Christianity is original.”

However, once the facts are examined, these claims are proven false. To discover the truth about these particular claims and others like them, it is important to: (1) unearth the history behind their assertions, (2) examine the actual historical portrayals of the false gods being compared to Christ, (3) expose the logical fallacies that the authors are making, and (4) look at why the New Testament Gospels can be trusted as accurately depicting the true and historical Jesus Christ. 


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1164
Quantum Leap continued...

First, the claims of Jesus as a myth or an exaggeration originated in the writings of 19th century liberal German theologians. Their claim was essentially that Jesus was nothing more than a copy of the widespread worship of dying and rising fertility gods in various places—Tammuz in Mesopotamia, Adonis in Syria, Attis in Asia Minor, and Osiris in Egypt.

None of these works ever advanced in the realm of academia and religious thought because their assertions were investigated by theologians and scholars and determined to be completely false and baseless. It has only been in the late twentieth and early twenty-first century that these assertions have been resurrected, primarily due to the rise of the internet and mass distribution of information that has no historical foundation or accountability.

This leads us to the next area of investigation—do the mythological gods of antiquity really mirror the person of Jesus Christ? As an example, the Zeitgeist movie makes these claims about the Egyptian god Horus:

• He was born on December 25th of a virgin - Isis Mary
• A star in the East proclaimed his arrival
• Three kings came to adore the new-born “savior”
• He became a child prodigy teacher at age 12
• At age 30 he was “baptized” and began a “ministry”
• Horus had twelve “disciples” 
• Horus was betrayed 
• He was crucified
• He was buried for three days
• He was resurrected after three days

However, when the actual writings about Horus are competently examined, this is what we find: 

• Horus was born to Isis; there is no mention in history of her being called “Mary.” Moreover, Mary is our anglicized form of her real name ‘Miryam’ or Miriam. “Mary” was not even used in the original texts of Scripture.
• Isis was not a virgin; she was the widow of Osiris and conceived Horus with Osiris.
• Horus was born during month of Khoiak (Oct/Nov), not December 25. Further, there is no mention in the Bible as to Christ’s actual birth date.
• There is no record of three kings visiting Horus at his birth. The Bible never states the actual number of magi that came to see Christ.
• Horus is not a “savior” in any shape or form; he did not die for anyone.
• There are no accounts of Horus being a teacher at the age of 12.
• Horus was not “baptized.” The only account of Horus that involves water is one story where Horus is torn to pieces, with Isis requesting the crocodile god to fish him out of the water he was placed into.
• Horus did not have a “ministry.”
• Horus did not have 12 disciples. According to the Horus accounts, Horus had four semi-gods that were followers and some indications of 16 human followers and an unknown number of blacksmiths that went into battle with him.
• There is no account of Horus being betrayed by a friend.
• Horus did not die by crucifixion. There are various accounts of Horus’ death, but none of them involve crucifixion. 
• There is no account of Horus being buried for three days.
• Horus was not resurrected. There is no account of Horus coming out of the grave with the body he went in with. Some accounts have Horus/Osiris being brought back to life by Isis and going to be the lord of the underworld.

So when compared side by side, Jesus and Horus bear little, if any, resemblance to one another. Another popular comparison done by those claiming that Jesus Christ is a myth is with Jesus and Mithras. All the above claims of Horus are applied to Mithras (e.g. born of a virgin, being crucified, rising in three days, etc.).
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1165
continued...

 But what does history say about Mithras?

• He was born out of a solid rock and not from any woman.
• He battled first with the sun and then a primeval bull, thought to be the first act of creation. Mithras killed the bull, which then became the ground of life for the human race.
• Mithras birth was celebrated on December 25, along with Winter solstice.
• There is no mention of him as being a great teacher.
• There is no mention of Mithras having 12 disciples. The idea that Mithras had 12 disciples may have come from a mural in which Mithras is surrounded by twelve signs of the Zodiac.
• Mithras had no bodily resurrection. The myth is told that Mithras completed his earthly mission then was taken to paradise in a chariot, alive and well.

The early Christian writer Tertullian did write about Mithras believers re-enacting resurrection scenes, but he wrote about this occurring well after New Testament times, so if any copycatting was done, it was the cult of Mithras copying from Christianity.

More examples can be given of Krishna, Attis, Dionysus and other mythological gods, but the result is the same.

In the end, the historical Jesus as portrayed in the Bible is thoroughly unique. The claimed similarities are greatly exaggerated. Further, while belief in Horus, Mithras, and others pre-dated Christianity, there is very little historical record of the pre-Christian beliefs of those religions.

The vast majority of the earliest writings about these religions is dated to the third and fourth centuries A.D. It is illogical and unhistorical to claim the pre-Christian beliefs in these religions (of which there is no record) were identical to the post-Christian beliefs in these groups (of which there is record). It is more historically valid to attribute any similarities between these religions and Christianity to the religions copying Christian beliefs about Jesus and placing those attributes on their own gods/saviors/founders in an attempt to stop the rapid growth of Christianity.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1166
Continued...

This leads us to the next area to examine: the logical fallacies committed by those claiming that Christianity borrowed from pagan mystery religions. 

Two fallacies in particular are obvious— the fallacy of the false cause and the terminological fallacy. If one thing precedes another, it does not mean that the first caused the second. This is the fallacy of the false cause. Even if pre-Christian accounts of mythological gods closely resembled Christ (and they do not), it does not mean they caused the gospel writers to invent a false Jesus. Claiming such a thing would be like saying the TV series Star Trek caused the NASA Space Shuttle program. 

The terminological fallacy occurs when terms are redefined to prove a point, when in fact such terms do not mean the same thing when compared to their source. So for example, the Zeitgeist movie says that Horus “began his ministry,” but Horus had no actual ministry – nothing like that of Christ’s ministry. Those claiming Mithras and Jesus are the same talk about the “baptism” that initiated prospects into the Mithras cult, but what was it actually? The Mithras priests (using a ritual also performed by followers of Attis) would suspend a bull over a pit, place those wanting to join the cult into the pit, slit the bull’s stomach, which then covered the initiates in blood. Such a thing has no resemblance whatsoever to Christian baptism—a person going under water (symbolizing the death of Christ) and then coming back out of the water (symbolizing Christ’s resurrection). But advocates of the mythological Jesus position deceptively use the same term to describe both in hopes of linking the two together.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1167
Continued...

The last issue to examine on this subject is the truthfulness of the New Testament itself.

While much has been written on this topic, no work from antiquity has more evidence with respect to historical veracity than the New Testament. The New Testament has more writers (nine), better writers, and earlier writers than any other document from that era. Further, history testifies to the fact that these writers went to their deaths for claiming that Jesus had risen from the dead. While some may die for a lie they think is true, no person dies for a lie they know to be false. Think about it—if someone was about to crucify you upside down, as happened to the Apostle Peter, and all you had to do to save your life was renounce a lie you had knowingly been living, what would you do?

In addition, history has shown that it takes at least two generations to pass before myth can enter into a historical account. Why?

Because eyewitnesses can refute error put in print. Those living at the time could refute the errors of the author and expose the work as being false. All the Gospels of the New Testament were written during the lifetime of the eyewitnesses, with some of Paul’s epistles being written as early as 50 A.D. That early dating acts as a key protective mechanism against any falsehoods being accepted and circulated. 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1168
Continued...

Finally, the New Testament attests to the fact that the portrayal of Jesus was not mistaken for that of any other god. 

When faced with Paul’s teaching, the elite thinkers of Athens said this: “He seems to be a proclaimer of strange deities,”—because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection. And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, “May we know what this new teaching is which you are proclaiming? For you are bringing some strange things to our ears; so we want to know what these things mean" (Acts 17:18-20). 

Clearly, if the accounts of Jesus were simply rehashing stories of other gods, the Athenians would not have referred to them at “new” teaching. If dying and rising gods were plentiful in the first century why, when the apostle Paul preached Jesus rising from the dead in Acts 17, did the Epicureans and Stoics not remark, “Ah, just like Horus and Mithras”?

In conclusion, the claims that Jesus is nothing more than a myth, a copy of mythological gods, originated from authors whose works have been discounted by academia, commit logical fallacies that undermine their veracity, and cannot compare to the New Testament Gospels which have withstood nearly 2,000 years of intense scrutiny. The alleged parallels disappear when they are compared with the original historical texts. Similarities between Jesus and the various mythological gods can only be argued for by employing selective and misleading descriptions.

Jesus Christ stands unique in history, with His voice rising above all false gods and continuing to ask the question that ultimately determines a person’s eternal destiny: “Who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:15)
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1169
QUOTE Originally Posted by Crashdavis565:

what is the big deal?

I mean he is the son of God, why does it matter that he gave his human life on the cross. What is a human life worth in the Kingdom of God?

Is this really that big of a sacrifice? Think about it. If he dies at 27 or at 77 what is the difference? If he dies in his sleep or on the cross, what is the big deal? He is the son of God for crying out loud, what would the worldly issues matter for his life when he will spend the next 10,000 years at the right hand of God?

Puzzling.

It was a huge deal. Here is one scripture of many as to what He did.

Philippians 2:5-11
New International Version (NIV)

 5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

 6 Who, being in very nature[a] God, 
   did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; 
7 rather, he made himself nothing 
   by taking the very nature[b] of a servant, 
   being made in human likeness. 
8 And being found in appearance as a man, 
   he humbled himself 
   by becoming obedient to death— 
      even death on a cross!

 9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place 
   and gave him the name that is above every name, 
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, 
   in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, 
   to the glory of God the Father.

There also had to be His shedding of his blood, because without it, there would be no forgiveness of sins for the individual.


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1170
Continued...

Concerning the blood of Jesus...

The phrase “blood of Christ” is used several times in the New Testament and is the expression of the sacrificial death and full atoning work of Jesus on our behalf. 
References to the Savior’s blood include the reality that He literally bled on the cross, but more significantly that He bled and died for sinners. The blood of Christ has the power to atone for an infinite number of sins committed by an infinite number of people throughout the ages, and all whose faith rests in that blood will be saved.

The reality of the blood of Christ as the means of atonement for sin has its origin in the Mosaic Law. 

Once a year, the priest was to make an offering of the blood of animals on the altar of the temple for the sins of the people. “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22). 
But this was a blood offering that was limited in its effectiveness, which is why it had to be offered again and again. This was a foreshadowing of the “once for all” sacrifice which Jesus offered on the cross (Hebrews 7:27). Once that sacrifice was made, there was no longer a need for the blood of bulls and goats. 

The blood of Christ is the basis of the New Covenant. 

On the night before He went to the cross, Jesus offered the cup of wine to His disciples and said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you” (Luke 22:20). The pouring of the wine in the cup symbolized the blood of Christ which would be poured out for all who would ever believe in Him.

When He shed His blood on the cross, He did away with the Old Covenant requirement for the continual sacrifices of animals. Their blood was not sufficient to cover the sins of the people, except on a temporary basis, because sin against a holy and infinite God requires a holy and infinite sacrifice. “But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Hebrews 10:3). 

While the blood of bulls and goats were a “reminder” of sin, “the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19) paid in full the debt of sin we owe to God, and we need no further sacrifices for sin. Jesus said, “It is finished” as He was dying, and He meant just that—the entire work of redemption was completed forever, “having obtained eternal redemption” for us (Hebrews 9:12).

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1171
Quantum Leap,

You said "Yeah, no mixture of blood and semen. And Jesus had brothers, so Mary had to have sex to have Jesus' brothers.  But no coitus nine months prior to Jesus' birth."

Yes, Jesus had brothers!!!

Jesus’ brothers are mentioned in several Bible verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see Him. 

The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). 
The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10, His brothers go on to the festival while Jesus stays behind.
In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples. Galatians 1:19 mentions that James was Jesus’ brother. The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half-siblings.

Some Roman Catholics claim that these “brothers” were actually Jesus’ cousins.

However, in each instance, the specific Greek word for “brother” is used. While the word can refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is a physical brother. 
There was a Greek word for “cousin,” and it was not used.
Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother? There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood-related, half-brothers.

A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus’ brothers and sisters were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage. 

An entire theory of Joseph's being significantly older than Mary, having been previously married, having multiple children, and then being widowed before marrying Mary is invented without any biblical basis.

The problem with this is that the Bible does not even hint that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before he married Mary, why are they not mentioned in Joseph and Mary’s trip to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4-7) or their trip to Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15) or their trip back to Nazareth (Matthew 2:20-23)?

There is no biblical reason to believe that these siblings are anything other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. 

Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half-brothers and half-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical:

 “But he (Joseph) had no union with her (Mary) until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name Jesus” (Matthew 1:25). Jesus had half-siblings, half-brothers and half-sisters, who were the children of Joseph and Mary. That is the clear and unambiguous teaching of God’s Word.




 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 14765
Posted: #1172
[Quote: Originally Posted by Rostos]  [/Q

You are ducking in between atheism and agnosticism depending on what suits your argument. It is a logically inconsistent position.

On the one hand, you state you dont believe in God, then when put into a corner, you state you dont know.

You rule out God on one hand, then say you dont know.....

Inconsistent logic

Quote]

It's called confused when someone is inconsistent, he reminds me of kk and system but I suppose all atheists have the same inherent characteristics. They are just confused and in a state of denial even when given ample evidence.

He mentions a cosmic egg...hmmm....a cosmic..... egg?

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 14765
Posted: #1173
Quote Originally Posted by matt4000:

SirJohnDrake and others,

Did you ever here about Sir Lionel Luckhoo?

Concerning Christ's resurrection...

As for His resurrection, there are several lines of evidence which make for a compelling case. Anyway, I thought this was an interesting one.

The late jurisprudential prodigy and international statesman Sir Lionel Luckhoo (of The Guinness Book of World Records fame for his unprecedented 245 consecutive defense murder trial acquittals).

He epitomized Christian enthusiasm and confidence in the strength of the case for the resurrection when he wrote, “I have spent more than 42 years as a defense trial lawyer appearing in many parts of the world and am still in active practice. I have been fortunate to secure a number of successes in jury trials and I say unequivocally the evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt.”

No, I never heard of him but thanks for your contributions matt.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 1521
Posted: #1174
wake me up when there's a conclusion to this thread
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 1104
Posted: #1175
Cave0707,

wake me up when there's a conclusion to this thread...

It may go on as long as site exists and people know that this topic is here.

This debate/topic/discussion has been going on for centuries, so this thread may never end and I for one, hope it doesn't!!!
All Forums | General Discussion
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gambling
Betting Sites
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
21+
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
Help Privacy Privacy Choices Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
Covers is verified safe by:
Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
Covers Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 Genius Sports. All Rights Reserved.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.