mrsonic

"...What shall I approach Adonai and bow myself before the Supreme God with? Should I approach Him with olah-sacrifices or calves in their first year? Will Adonai be pleased by thousands of rams, or tens of thousands of rivers of oil? Should I give my own first-born child [in payment] for my rebellion or the fruit of my own body [in payment] for my soul's errors? Man, He has already told you what is 'good', what it is that Adonai wants of you - only to act justly, to love kindness, and to walk modestly with your God" (Michah 6:6-8).


"What use to Me is the huge number of your sacrifices?" Adonai says - "I am fed up with olah-offerings of rams and the offals of fattened calves, and the blood of oxen, lambs and goats does not give Me pleasure. When you come to appear before Me - who asked this of you, to come trampling through My courtyards? Do not bring your meaningless min'ḥah-offerings any more - I find it a disgusting stench... Rosh Ḥodesh, Shabbat, even the Festival assemblies - I cannot tolerate crookedness mixed with 'service'. My soul detests your Rosh Ḥodesh and Festival observances, they have become tedious to Me; I can no longer put up with them. When you hold up your hands I will hide My eyes from you; I will not hear you no matter how many 'prayers' you say - because your hands are covered with blood! Wash, purify yourselves, remove the badness of your deeds from before My eyes, stop doing wrong! Learn to do right, seek justice, protect victims, treat orphans justly, support the claims of widows.

"Come, please, let's discuss this rationally," Adonai says - "even if your sins are like bright crimson, I will bleach them as white as snow: even if they are as red as tola I will make them like [the colour of] wool!" (Y'shayahu 1:11-18).

one minuite god is impressed by the blood he created , next minuite he is sick and tired of it and wants to be appeased by deeds of men. your god is a god of confusion.

sotto voce

But their cavils and disputations are being kept under wraps? Oh, fol-de-rol. "Open!" says me!

'In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding.' Eph 1:7-8 NIV

'Whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.' Jas 2:10 NIV

'You know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.' 1 Pe 1:18-19 NIV

'If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.' 1 Jn 1:7 NIV

Church fathers? "You are all brothers."

Later writers of the Bible. The Word of God, not the words of men.

Because, at that stage, the only blood used to serve was that of animals— and 'it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins'. The only literal blood was that of animals. The only abstract blood was in promise and prophecy, later fulfilled (in the view of many, Jews and Gentiles) by the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

So are we now saying that this actually occurred?

Orthodox Jews being those who recognise Jesus as the Messiah. Perhaps. Let's not indulge petitio principii.

Or the Old Testament. Let's not indulge petitio principii.

No. Christianity uses only the Hebrew OT, exactly the same source used by others who also call themselves Jews.

(There are organisms that profess to believe the LXX, true, but the philosophy of Bugs Bunny is worth far more consideration than the practical principles of those egregiously depraved sociopaths.)

mrsonic

there is no prophecy about jesus ' abstract blood in the torah. there is no prophecy about jesus' literal blood in the torah or about his flesh.

"To obey is better than sacrifice"
this is what god wants and prefers obediance /GOOD works OVER sacrifice, how is this anyway related to jesus' abstract blood?

mrsonic

but your god was appeased by animal blood he created, and all the jewish sinners turned the temple into pools of blood by slaughtering animals, because animal blood appeased yhwh.

la70119

Then who told the Galatians, "I withstood Peter to his face, because he stood condemned?" And you know why he "stood condemned," too. Hardly kept under wraps!

I already have shown in I Corinthians 15 where Paul told the congregants that if it weren't for the Resurrection, they would still be in their sins. Is Paul sending different messages to different congregations, or is Ephesians or at least this line of it a forgery?

Show me in James where the writer believes in the message of the 'blood'. Here he is talking about the TORAH.

Proven by modern scholars to be forged. Not just this line, but both epistles of "Peter". See Ehrman et al.

Same for all three Johannine "Catholic" epistles as for the two epistles of Peter.

I see you are a Protestant.

Okay then, Church Grandfathers, Uninspired Clods or Outright Heretics.

Those "later writers," that is, unauthorized ghost writers, who wrote stuff and attributed it to Apostles or earlier Evangelists? That you claim to be stenographers for God like the Muslims claim for Mohammed?

2 Peter 1:21
And the Bible seems to be chock-full of failed prophecies from these men. :huh:

I'm still waiting for the heavens to disappear with a roar, and the elements to melt with fervent heat.

Abstract blood? You mean blood that doesn't have to exist? So why teach an actual crucifixion, then? Why not make that allegorical too?

You guys used to say that he shed his blood quite literally on the cross; now that we know crucifixion is a relatively bloodless affair, you guys now have him shedding his blood all over town!

You were the one who comes off as believeing in that nonsense. I just threw it out there to show what the writers believed.

And yet you're doing the same thing, and using a blatant falsehood to do it. Argumentum ad absurdum.

Since Christianity is so obviously made up and cobbled together, I think Tanakh is the better name for it. I guess I should just drop it and bow down to Your Holiness instead! :notworthy:


You mean Protestant Christianity and since 1943, Catholic Christianity. The Eastern Orthodoxies still use the LXX. The NT quotes the LXX exclusively.

Congratulations. You just smeared the writers of the New Testament, including the forgers. You get a big cigar.

sotto voce

And surely we both know that Peter's offence was nothing to do with his teaching?

To make a serious negative allegation and fail to support it immediately can be reckoned as mendacity; as 'hit and run'.

It's not hard to understand. Had Jesus not been raised, his crucifixion would have been meaningless. The mental state of the disciples immediately after that event demonstrates this.

I have done.

Indeed he is, but the gospel is implied in everything he wrote. He wrote to people who 'took it for granted', and needed correction.

Hot Ehrman?

Whoever wrote 'Peter' agreed with the whole Bible from beginning to end.

Whoever wrote 'John' agreed with the whole Bible from beginning to end.

Authorship is immaterial. Content is material. And content is unassailable. Unless there are much better objections than are presented here.

Just literate. Academically respectable. Morally uncompromised by murderous acts backed by 'fathers'.

la70119

DO i HAVE TO BE CAPTAIN OBVIOUS AND WRITE A WHOLE DISSERTATION!?

Apparently so.

And of course it has to do with his teaching, because he was following James's teaching.

Galatians 2

Notice he didn't move until certain men came from James. You know, the one who's supposed to be leading the whole movement? Why was Peter compelled to move only AFTER the Jerusalem party showed up? Of course, what is unsaid here is once he gets back to headquarters, James will be demanding, "Why are you eating with the goyi'im? It's against the Torah!"

Just before, Paul says of the triumvirate at headquarters:

Of course, he lies about what they asked him to do:

Acts 15

Paul was SUPPOSED to give the non-Jewish believers instructions on keeping themselves undefiled enough so they could qualify to join a synagogue as a ger: righteous Gentile. "For Moses... is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath." And what does Paul do? Nothing of the sort. Just "continue to remember the poor (or The Poor - Evyonim - Ebionites)."

la70119

You seem to think that he rose physically, as written in the "gospels." Such a thing is CLEARLY impossible, unless the person in question did not actually die on the cross. Discrepancies in the "gospels" STRONGLY suggest this. Not to gullible second-centuryers, but to us who know more than they did.

But what does Paul say happened after the so-called resurrection?


Do you know what the Greek for "appeared" is? ὤφθη (ōphthē) is 3rd person singular aoritive indicative passive of ὁράω (horaó).

Strong's 3708 (HELPS Word-Studies)

In other words, was seen in an appearance. A vision. An apparition. And there is zero difference between the appearance to Paul and the others, according to Paul.

la70119

You have done no such thing.

I have read the whole epistle of James, and to me, it comes off as a letter from a rabbi to other Jews in a distant synagogue. Except for that first line, of course.

:banghead:

They're later writers trying to tie loose ends together, to try to unify a bunch of disparate messages, it seems.

And you are stating your opinions as though they were facts.

So I have to go by your say-so that you're "literate" and "academically respectable"?

And it wasn't just 'fathers' who gave murderous acts moral sanction. All manner of Christian men of the cloth did this over the centuries.

AdamWho

It is pretty simple:

Jew sacrificed animals to atone for sin. In the Christian mythology Christ was to be the final sacrifice, so that people didn't need to go to the temple and sacrifice animals anymore.

It has the function of eliminating the need for animal sacrifice and it removes the temple and priesthood from the center of the nascent religion.

The added benefit was marketing the new religion to the wider region. Most other groups already had the concept of the hero/god sacrificing himself to self/help humanity.

Of course in reality is was probably the other way around: Paul used the mythology common in the region to craft a god-sacrifice story as a way to reform Judaism.