Amos

Everybody that understands salvation must know that Jesus was sinless because he was set free from the law. All we have to remember here is that the laws were given to Moses to convict man of sin which now means that to be set free from the law is to be set free from the conviction of sin. Read Gal.5:1-4 on this.

This also means that sin is a mythical concept only and now means that Buddhist, for example, cannot sin against [our] God. Of course, we can all violate natural law and civil law but that has nothing to do with our concept sin. This in turn is also why the Jews and only the Jews convicted Jesus who bore the sins of his world and died for them on the cross. Who's sins were the sins of his world, you may ask? Those of Joseph the carpenter who was a carpenter because carpenters are known to make many things and since all is made in sin Joseph was a big sinner. Sin now becomes the coming together of a positive and negative in the rout of creation.

The paradox of sinful yet saved does not look good in this respect.

Amos

excreationist

Some relevant Bible verses:

2 Corinthians 5:21: "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him."

Hebrews 4:15: "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

1 Peter 2:21-22: "...because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth."

1 John 3:5: "And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin."

<a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcsi2.htm#bibl" target="_blank">More Bible verses at ReligiousTolerance.org</a>

<a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcsi1.htm" target="_blank">More statistics and information at ReligiousTolerance.org</a>

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: excreationist ]</p>

sidewinder

Amos, with all due respect, your answer doesn't make sense, at least to me, and I'm guessing to many other readers. You definitely have a unique take on various aspects of religion.

Don, as far as I understand, those non-canonical gospels which relate incidents in Jesus' childhood have been judged by most scholars to be legends. However, they make for some fascinating, and not to mention, humorous reading.

big d

First off, Jesus sinned several times, offenses he could have been stoned to death for. When he was at the Passover, he ditched his parents and stayed behind in Jerusalem without their permission. This caused them great emotional distress. Finally, after finding him at the temple, he makes a flippant comment when they question why he did this to them. The Bible says that on the way home, he became obedient to them, which obviously means he was disobedient to start with.


Luke, Chapter 2:
41
Every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover.
42
When he was twelve years old, they went up to the Feast, according to the custom.
43
After the Feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. (disrespectful of parental authority and their concern for their family)
44
Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends.
45
When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him.
46
After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.
47
Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers.
48
When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you." (Shows Jesus’ parents did not know what he was up to!)
49
"Why were you searching for me?" he asked. "Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?" (Here Jesus talks back to his parents and does not seek forgiveness or own up to what he has done.)
50
But they did not understand what he was saying to them.
51
Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them . . .
(Obviously he was not obedient to them when he snuck out of the caravan and stayed behind)

-DM-

This comment has been made by many people, including me, with regard to Amos' posts. My guess is that his posts make real sense only to Amos. For the most part, IMO he is wasting his time posting this sort of thing.

True and true. But I feel the same way about the canonical gospels except that I give them some credit for historicity.

--Don--

Amos

Thanks Don and I think the same thing about all of you. In fact, I hold the worst thing anybody can do is study the bible for whatever reason until such time as its meaning is prior to us by nature.

Let me add some of my thoughts and show you why my post should make sense.

It is true that the laws were given to Moses for the conviction of sin. It is also true the the cross of eternal salvation is for sinners only, which now means that this was the purpose of Moses' inspiration. The laws must be written upon our hearts, as if in stone, so they can serve there as an anvil to conflict with our actions so as to make sin known (Nietzsche's anvil). In this way the inner man must convict the outer hero (Gal.2:17).

It is also true that the flock is needed to make sinners known. This means that some sort of religious enforcement of morals is needed to estabilish the stream of consciousness against which sin becomes known and sheep become lost. It is these lost sheep that are called by name and to whom Jesus showed the way. This means many things but one of them is religion as a means (vehicle) to the end.

I can go on and on about this but and actually pile the entire bible in my favor but none of that will matter in the end, as you suggest.

Amos

RyanS2

On Jesus nature of sinning or not, it seems very strange to me the way he addressed his mother, calling her "Woman", an insult, when the ten commandments say, "Honor thy father and they mother".

Next, while preaching piety and self-sacrifice, he has Mary buy expensive perfume for him, washing his feet of all things, and when one of the disciples gets mad because he asserts that the poor could have been fed with that, (which begs the question, why didn't he think that Jesus could just do the fish n' bread trick? Or is that because Jesus said that this generation would see no signs?) Jesus rebukes him.

The most famous incident though would be the incident in the temple, where he makes the whip.

-DM-

On what evidence do you base that statement? What proof do you have that Moses was given the law at all?

On what evidence do you base that statement? What proof do you have that there is a "cross of eternal salvation"?

This is plain and simply a non sequitur. It doesn't necessarily follow from what precedes.

No law can be written on our hearts. This is just transcendent double-talk signifying nothing.

Or the outer hero must convict the inner man, or the outer hero must uphold the inner man, or the inner man must uphold the outer man, or none of the above.

Evidence? Proof?

Non sequitur.


Evidence? Proof?

Non sequitur.

Yes, and you already have and probably will continue to do so. If you find what you write convincing, then so be it, but it is meaningless mystical nonsense to those who are less mystically inclined.

--Don--

[Edited to correct typo. --Don--]

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: Don Morgan ]</p>

Paradisedreams2

This is a good question,

Is Jesus without Sin"?
On one account it says "He who was without sin" -perhaps in refence to his divinity (I'm only speculating) became Sin (taking on humanity). This does not make anything clear for me. Paul the appostle says (I'm not sure the verse) said he WAS PERFECTED through suffering. So does that mean he was not originally perfect but "became such" (I don't know). Then Paul goes onto say that like every other High preist he offered up sacrices for his peoples sins AS WELL AS HIS OWN. So theres an admission in the book that this is not in dispute just not understood.

Don't have an answer on this one just looking it the face and trying to reconcile it. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: Paradisedreams2 ]</p>

Amos

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Don Morgan:
[QB]

From a non believers point of view your questions may be good but a believer should know what I mean and would accept by faith that the laws were given to Moses and that the cross of eternal salvation is for sinners, etc.

Since you want to play the devils advocate I can give you the true purpose of the law and in the end the purpose of religion at large. I'll do a short version here.

The law is the heart of each and every mythology and no mythology will exist for long without any laws (taboos). These laws are always man-made to serve best in the local area and the concept sin is the inspiration behind the purpose of the law. Some proof of this is that between two different mythologies opposite laws can serve well in each of the mythologies. Examples of this are recreational "lying in Samoa" and "stealing vegetables" in Papua New Guinea.

The purpose of all mythologies is the survival of the tribe for different reason. One of them is a health issue since there is no sickness or pain in 'heaven'. Another one is wisdom for the leaders of the tribe to give long term direction to its members and another one is the artistic expression through which juniors members remain in contact with the wisdom of their ancestors which is needed for many different reasons on its own (we call this communion with the saints but may be seen as just the enjoyment of classical art).

The concept sin is just a concept and is therefore only a placebo (an illusion) needed to bring about eternal life amongst the members of the tribe (eternal life is past menopauze after the left and right brain have become one). Based on this, for example, is why the bible says that "it will be an evil age when old men have dreams" because it is impossible to dream when we are of one mind.

The law is needed for social unity and to give a sense or direction for the tribe. This sense of direction is incarante upon us and includes our conscience which is based on Judaic law (and an additional 5 in Catholicism). This "sense of direction" is wherein we are determined creatures and our conscience is to keep us in line along the path of our predestined soul nature (our soul is our subconscious mind or TOK).

The law also provides the "forbidden fruit" which is always sweeter than the rest and is especially true if some of the basic human desires are part of the social taboos. This now places human desire (TOK) opposite to the soul entrenced moral code (TOL). Through countless violations this battle must intensify and is purported to lead to a crisis moment in which the TOL (lymbic system) yields to the TOL (soul) during the mid-life crisis -- which is our Grand Inquisition when we will abandon our religion because it will have served its purpose (religion becomes enemy). Later, Plato held, many will return to religion or they can just remain in the Elysian Fields.

The concept sin now becomes the agent needed to annihilate the ego while recapturing the 'learned righteousness' of the ego (faculty of reason) and place this subservient to our omniscient mind from where we are able to go by intuition while reason prevails.

The health issue is real and in the end explains why cancer is a "societal disease."

Amos