Krusty

I hope you all don’t mind this newbie starting another thread, but I got a lot out of the last one I started so I thought I would press my luck:

Reading through the formal debates that are going on someone pointed out that only Christianity solves the “problem of sin�?. This made me recall many years ago when I considered myself a Christian I was talking to a Jewish acquaintance. Being the idiot that I was (and some would argue nothing has changed), I asked how he could be saved from sin (and therefore hell) without Jesus. His response was that needing to be “saved from sin�? is a concept only in the NT. He said that, contrary to Christian beliefs, Jews did not think they had a “sin problem�? and that there is no notion in the OT of needing a savior to get them out of this so-called problem. I didn’t know what to say, so I just shut up – which probably made him very grateful.

My knowledge of the OT is lacking, having never been able to get through it. Is the “problem of sin�? and the need for a savior an invention of the NT only? Is there any notion in the OT of needing a sin savior?

Thanks,
--Krusty

Magus55

Makes you wonder what the purpose of animal sacrifices were, if not to cover sins/transgressions.

Doctor X

Yes and no, Magus.

In the case of child sacrifice, it appears--based on what is known of the Carthaginian practice--that it was a "giving back to" the god his power over life.

In the case of mass-sacrifice or the herem--which did not occur historically, as in there was no Conquest--it has two purposes--keep your god happy, and, for the writers, have a glorious past like others, such as the Assyrians did.

In the obviously more pervasive tradition you have a number of things going on. Between the authors of the Pentateuch, you have an "argument" over who has control over sacrifice. This is political and lucrative of course.

However, people sacrificed not simply because they are "sinners" or they "had to" they performed these duties in order to regain purity. Unfortunately, in English, we assume a negative connotation to things such as "profane." It really was not. You just were no longer "clean."

A man could not avoid becoming "unclean." Thus, purification became a necessity.

--J.D.

The Evil One

It is my understanding that only Christianity considers the Problem of Sin to be a problem. So while they do indeed have the only solution to the problem, it's not a solution you actually need unless you're a Christian already.

Atticus_Finch

My OT certainly seems to include the concept of sin and need for a savior. See Isaiah 53

Also see Daniel.

Daniel 12

[QUOTE]

Regards,

Finch

Magus55

Not necessarily. Just because you don't think you need to be saved from sin, doesn't mean you don't.

hezekiah jones

Just because you think there's a god doesn't mean there is.

WinAce

Magus, just curious--why did you take issue with a short comment from the Evil One while ignoring Dr. X's several paragraphs?

Krusty

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Atticus_Finch
My OT certainly seems to include the concept of sin and need for a savior. See Isaiah 53

Also see Daniel.

Daniel 12

Quote:

Regards, Finch

Thanks for the Isaiah 53 and Daniel post. The servant talked about in the Isaiah post it says will “bear the sin of many�?. However it doesn’t say that this sacrifice is required because there is no other way to be cleansed of sin. Is there some other passage in the OT (yours or mine) that says that the burnt offerings or whatever were indadequate and that a savior is required because of a "sin problem". If the OT makes this clear somewhere, does that mean the Jews today are looking for a savior from sin? None of the ones I have talked to are looking for it.

--Krusty

Atticus_Finch

Its late and I'm tired so I will just give you one off the top of my head. See Psalm 40 . I direct your attention to verse 6. I will think of more verses tomorrow if I have time.

Regards,

Finch