NOGO

Radorth

Hi Radorth,
I will take you up on your offer to discuss any issue. The issue I describe below runs rather high on my list of "why I am not a Christian?". For this reason I am sure that you will want to straighten me out.
The story goes something like this. Somewhere in Genesis man made a great sin and God promised us a saviour. Jesus was the sacrificial lamb whose blood would allow God to forgive humanity.

Hebrews 9:22
And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
We can look back at the OT note the bold text

Lev 4
24 "He shall lay his hand on the head of the male goat and slay it in the place where they slay the burnt offering before the LORD; it is a sin offering.
25 "Then the priest is to take some of the blood of the sin offering with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar of burnt offering; and the rest of its blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar of burnt offering.
26 All its fat he shall offer up in smoke on the altar as in the case of the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings. Thus the priest shall make atonement for him in regard to his sin, and he will be forgiven.

Lev 5
5 "So it shall be when he becomes guilty in one of these, that he shall confess that in which he has sinned.
6 "He shall also bring his guilt offering to the LORD for his sin which he has committed, a female from the flock, a lamb or a goat as a sin offering. So the priest shall make atonement on his behalf for his sin.
7 "But if he cannot afford a lamb, then he shall bring to the LORD his guilt offering for that in which he has sinned, two turtledoves or two young pigeons, one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering.
8 "He shall bring them to the priest, who shall offer first that which is for the sin offering and shall nip its head at the front of its neck, but he shall not sever it.
9 "He shall also sprinkle some of the blood of the sin offering on the side of the altar, while the rest of the blood shall be drained out at the base of the altar: it is a sin offering.
10 "The second he shall then prepare as a burnt offering according to the ordinance. So the priest shall make atonement on his behalf for his sin which he has committed, and it will be forgiven him.

There are many more examples.
Basically to have their sin's forgiven the Hebrews shed animal blood to Yahweh ... and He forgave them.
Jesus was suppose to be a sacrificial lamb for forginess of sins.
But hopefully not ordinary sins since they had ordinary lambs and other animals for that. This is the way Hebrews 9 puts it.

Hebrew 9:13-14
For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

So Jesus' blood was much more effective than animal blood but surely Jesus did not die for ordinary sins alone. Romans 5 explains Jesus' main mission.

Romans 5
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned--
13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.

Romans 5:10
For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

A read of Romans 5 shows that Jesus' main mission was, in a nutshell, to undo Adam's sin and reconcile humanity to God.
This is then God's plan for humanity. After man sinned God promised a saviour who would fix man`s error and give him that which he has lost, eternal life.
I hope, Radorth, that I have stated the essence of Christianity without offending your Christian ears or, in this case, your Christian eyes.
Here are my thoughts on the above which I shall call "God`s plan".
I have read all of the Old Testament.
In Genesis I don't really see that God promised a saviour but I will continue assuming that it is there and it is just me who cannot see it.
Where in the rest of the OT do any of God`s prophets speak of "God`s plan" ?
I have not found a single word on the subject. So please Radorth if you know of a place in the OT that speaks of the need to undo what Adam did in order to reconciled humanity with God and have eternal life, let me know.
Here is a good place where I would have expected a word or two.

Ecclesiastes 9
2 It is the same for all. There is one fate for the righteous and for the wicked; for the good, for the clean and for the unclean; for the man who offers a sacrifice and for the one who does not sacrifice. As the good man is, so is the sinner; as the swearer is, so is the one who is afraid to swear.
3 This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that there is one fate for all men. Furthermore, the hearts of the sons of men are full of evil and insanity is in their hearts throughout their lives. Afterwards they go to the dead.
4 For whoever is joined with all the living, there is hope; surely a live dog is better than a dead lion.
5 For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything, nor have they any longer a reward, for their memory is forgotten.
6 Indeed their love, their hate and their zeal have already perished, and they will no longer have a share in all that is done under the sun.
7 Go then, eat your bread in happiness and drink your wine with a cheerful heart; for God has already approved your works.
8 Let your clothes be white all the time, and let not oil be lacking on your head.
9 Enjoy life with the woman whom you love all the days of your fleeting life which He has given to you under the sun; for this is your reward in life and in your toil in which you have labored under the sun.
10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might; for there is no activity or planning or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol where you are going.

The author of Ecc 9 is saying that there is one fate for all men, good or bad. All are going to Sheol. What is Sheol? Verse 4,5 and 10 give you some information. There is hope for the living but not for the dead (verse 4). The living know that they will die but the dead know nothing (verse 5). There is no activity, planning, knowledge or wisdom in Sheol (verse 10).
So this would have been the perfect place for this author to tell us that God actually promised humanity a way out. Redemption and eternal life through a saviour. But this author like all of the OT says nothing about "God's plan".

Where did Jesus state his mission as being related to "God's plan"?
That is where does Jesus say that he is there to undo what Adam did and reconcile humanity to God. Please Radorth let me know I simply have not found any.

Jesus does state what his mission is about in Matthew 15

Matthew 15
22 And a Canaanite woman from that region came out and began to cry out, saying, "Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is cruelly demon-possessed."
23 But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples came and implored Him, saying, "Send her away, because she keeps shouting at us."
24 But He answered and said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
25 But she came and began to bow down before Him, saying, "Lord, help me!"
26 And He answered and said, "It is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs."

"I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel"
You can't have a clearer statement than that. Now people usually say but he granted the woman what she wanted. Yes he did but it does not matter much. Jesus says very plainly that he is not there for all of humanity but only for the people of Israel. How could this be the one to save the world from the fall of mankind. Jesus seems to be unaware of "God's plan".
So what Romans 5 says is contradicted by Matthew 15.

Next...
This is Luke 1, John the baptist's father is speaking.

68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,
69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;
70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;
72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;
73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,
74 That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life.
76 And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,

Where is the fall of humanity?
Verses 74 and 75 stated the purpose of salvation.
Note "all the days of our life" but where is eternal life given by Jesus' sacrifice as opposed to death brought by Adam's sin (according to Romans 5). Where is God's promise to redeem humanity?
If mankind fell
If God promised a saviour to redeem humanity
THEN
a) This theme would have been present throughout the old testament
b) the prophets would have spoken about this very import revelation from God
c) Jesus would have stated THIS as his mission

INSTEAD
We have a vague reference in Genesis and we have Romans 5 and a BIG BIG HOLE in between.
Please explain where I have erred.

[ September 28, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

Radorth

I thought Isaiah 53 was in the OT. My mistake.

Jesus' revelation was unfolding and he was not omniscient while on earth. If he was omiscient, he would not have been so emotional about the sad turn of events here and there.

So ah, you're saying that all John's statements about Jesus' purpose were directed toward Jews alone?

Your question is based on the assumption that God's plan was fully revealed in the OT. It was not. Your question reminds me of a pink herring I once caught. I do not take your questions as especially sincere, but I have tried to answer them sincerely.

Radorth

"They are like children in the marketplace saying 'We piped for you and you did not dance.'"

[ September 28, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>

Sojourner553

Not only was Jesus not omiscient on events --

Jesus also did not seem to have modern medical knowledge of the causes of mental illnesses...

unless you also think this is always caused by demons.

Radorth,

If the Scriptures are divine, they should be consistent. Are you saying God is not all powerful now?

Think of it this way: If you knew a person who believed that Zeus was god -- both you and I would now be "the skeptics" whether Zeus is god; ie we would be on the same team. Would we not ask this individual to carefully review all his sacred texts? Would we not argue to this individual that errors are indicative that Zeus is NOT a god, or at a minimum this was not a holy text?

How else can one objectively "test" a claim that a book is divine...

Radorth you do strike me as sincere -- but by that I mean sincere that you want it to be true.

But NOGO is also sincere. Can you explain to us where he is INsincere? (Other than the fact he is winning... )

So they should follow EVERY Pied Piper that comes into town?? How are they supposed to know which piper they should REALLY dance to. After all the biblical texts appear full of holes when examined scientifically.

That is why there are so many, many sects and religions (plus a few skeptics around like us.)

*** But, let me also acknowledge here.*** We are really just trying to show you the biblical texts ARE full of holes. This is the reason why some of the American Founding Fathers -- including Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln-- were deists! That is, they still believed in God, perhaps even tying in Jesus symbolically to this. But they recognized that much evil was done in the "name" of religion -- usually by holding up the Bible as an authority for destroying individual freedom and creativity.

Best Wishes! Sorry to punch holes in your dream... I was very upset when I discovered much if not all of CONVENTIONAL religion was based on superstition. But I have never been sorry to have had my eyes opened, for it explains what we see in the world today. To me FUNDAMENTALIST religion and superstition is the cause of much of the world's major problems. I am glad not to be a part of it, and help other people where I can.

You see, I was brought up a fundamentalist Baptist. And (despite what one is taught) I am far more compassionate now for the poor and underpriviledged than before when I was religious: For then I thought this was ultimately "God's problem!


Sojourner

[ September 29, 2002: Message edited by: Sojourner553 ]</p>

Radorth

Huh? Jesus was talking about insincere people- not that I expect you to grasp his incomparable metaphors.

Yes, they recognized people abused it of course. So do I. The difference between you and they is their ability to see nascent Christianity as "the friendliest to liberty, science and the freest expansion of the human mind."

The same person who said that also said he hoped nascent Christianity with "nothing added" would be widely preached in America.

Do you? And do you even know who said those things?

How ironic that 3 deists did more than anybody to insure the pure Gospel could be freely preached here as it is almost nowhere else in the world. They helped keep the government from tampering with the Gospel.

QUOTE] You see, I was brought up a fundamentalist Baptist. [/QUOTE]

No wonder you feel as you do.

Well I'll try to answer a few more posts today, but I'm going out of town on business. Not sure if I'll have much access to the site yet, so hopefully you will be able to restore any thoughtful agnostics I have ruined to the fold.

Radorth

NOGO

Yes indeed and so is Isaiah 52 and 49. And how about Job 38?

You have failed to tell the relevance of Is 53.
Is 53 refers to someone in the PAST.
Is 53 does not say a single word about man's downfall in the garden of Eden.
Is 53 does not say anything saving all of humanity.

Radorth

But a zillion Messianic Jews have not failed to see it's relevance. Call it a difference of opinion instead of making gratuitous claims which amount to "If it was there, I'd know it."

Radorth

Plebe

NOGO and Radorth, Here's some stuff to help you both out..
<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html</a> The Truth about Jesus

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/forgery_in_christianity/index.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/forgery_in_christianity/index.shtml</a> Forgery in Christianity

<a href="http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/maccoby.htm" target="_blank">http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/maccoby.htm</a> Jesus and the Jewish Resistance

<a href="http://www.christianism.com/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.christianism.com/index.html</a> Years of Research and Scholarship

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/index.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/index.shtml</a> Did Jesus really Live? And “The Heart of the Bible.”

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/critbias.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/critbias.html</a> Critique of New Testament Reliability and “Bias” in NT development

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/index.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/index.shtml</a> More from James Still

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/index.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/index.shtml</a> A number of articles re: Theology both Old and New Testament

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gerald_larue/index.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gerald_larue/index.shtml</a> Old Testament Life and Literature

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/index.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/index.shtml</a> Robert Price

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/Chapter13.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/Chapter13.html</a> Miracles to Medicine a small history of medicine.

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/larry_taylor/messiahgate.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/larry_taylor/messiahgate.html</a> Messiahgate a Tale of Murder and Deception

NOGO

Radorth:
Jesus' revelation was unfolding and he was not omniscient while on earth. If he was omiscient, he would not have been so emotional about the sad turn of events here and there.

NOGO:
What are you saying here. Jesus stated that he was sent ONLY for the children of Israel. Are you saying that he

a) lied
b) was in error on such an important issue
c) was showing prejudice in order to give us all an example to follow

Radorth:
So ah, you're saying that all John's statements about Jesus' purpose were directed toward Jews alone?

NOGO:
Please specify which ones.

Radorth:
Your question is based on the assumption that God's plan was fully revealed in the OT. It was not. Your question reminds me of a pink herring I once caught.

NOGO:
No, I stated quite clearly that Jesus had nothing to say about the fall of mankind in the Garden of Eden and did not state that he had come to rectify this. The I gave Matthew 15 and Luke 1 to show that in fact the mission as stated was in direct contradiction which the salvation of huanity.

Radorth:
I do not take your questions as especially sincere, but I have tried to answer them sincerely.

NOGO:
Right, Radorth, only believers are sincere.
You seem to believer that your belief in salvation for all of humanity is on such firm ground that it is ridiculous to even question it.

My challenge is exactly that.

Christianity started as a Jewish thing and only later was extended to include everybody. That is a fact. Do you dispute this?

NOGO

Irrelevant! You missed my point.
You are right that I do not see any Messianic claims in the Bible. But this is not the point.

Jews are still looking for a messiah. In the OT there many messaiahs so it is not surprizing to see references to messiahs. To whom it refers to is debatable.

My point is that they do not refer to the fall of mankind and do not refer to saving all of humanity. These two things are linked because all the Messiahs in the OT were there to save the Jewish people against a particular threat.

So to prove you case you need to show that the messiah in question is in response to the fall of mankind and is for all of humanity.

[ September 29, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

Radorth

It is ridiculous to one who counts GJohn and the letters of Paul as scripture. And it is ridiculous IMO to dismiss them as you do. You are presuming I should make assumptions which are completely unproven and in fact require an extraordinary faith to accept. What's ridiculous is what you require I do by faith so we can have a discussion on your terms, and then you complain that you are playing the flute and I'm not dancing. You further presume to tell me what Genesis says even though you yourself can't find it.

"all men" and "whosoever believes" etc means what it says. I would go so far as to say it means you.

Rad