The Parable of the Landowner and Blood Atonement

[Stravinsk]

One's gotta wonder...

Why God etched "Do not Murder" on tablets of stone as one of the super commands of all commands....

but then plans man's whole salvation on a per-meditated murder.

Marvel at the mysteries of God I guess....

 

[Albion]

One's gotta wonder...

Why God etched "Do not Murder" on tablets of stone as one of the super commands of all commands....

but then plans man's whole salvation on a per-meditated murder.

Marvel at the mysteries of God I guess....

No marveling necessary. There is nothing positive about crucifixions, and Christians have generally felt that Christ submitted to this form of execution for the reason that this was almost the supreme injustice, considering that he was innocent of any wrongdoing.

Had he merely been run through with a sword by a Roman soldier, for instance, that would not have impressed us throughout the ages with how horrible and unjust Christ's death really was and, in addition, the extent to which God would go in order to redeem us.

 

[atpollard]

Which parts mate?

Would that be Isaiah 1st chapter....no..

Would that be "I desire MERCY NOT SACRIFICE".....no...

But I know....the Christ says He does NOT desire sacrifice but mercy....but it's really a trick! He desires mercy through sacrifice, contradicting His words! Only Christians can see the super mysteriousness of it, making them all-wise! lol

• 1 Peter 1:17-21 [NKJV] 17 And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay [here] in fear; 18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, [like] silver or gold, from your aimless conduct [received] by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. 20 He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you 21 who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

According to the Apostle Peter, with what are we redeemed?

 

[atpollard]

Which parts mate?

Would that be Isaiah 1st chapter....no..

Would that be "I desire MERCY NOT SACRIFICE".....no...

But I know....the Christ says He does NOT desire sacrifice but mercy....but it's really a trick! He desires mercy through sacrifice, contradicting His words! Only Christians can see the super mysteriousness of it, making them all-wise! lol

• 1 John 1:5-7 [NKJV] 5 This is the message which we have heard from Him and declare to you, that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
• Revelation 1:4-6 [NKJV] 4 John, to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, 6 and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him [be] glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

According to the Apostle John, what cleanses us from all sin?

 

[Stravinsk]

• 1 John 1:5-7 [NKJV] 5 This is the message which we have heard from Him and declare to you, that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
• Revelation 1:4-6 [NKJV] 4 John, to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, 6 and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him [be] glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

According to the Apostle John, what cleanses us from all sin?

His blood. But how do you wash yourself in it? It can't be done literally. Communion is a wafer of bread and some juice/wine done in a ceremony of remembrance. For some, some magical transubstantiation takes place, others, it's symbolic.

Perhaps it is both symbolic and literal. Perhaps being "washed in the blood" means multiple things, but it can't mean being washed in blood - as a murderer is washed in blood as he commits a murder.

But Christ said in clear terms one must "eat His flesh" and "drink His blood" to have life in them. The only point during His ministry this was ever offered was at the last supper - where He called bread His flesh and juice His blood. Not at the cross.

I don't think non-vegans are ever going to get this. Because of their habits and beliefs about murdering and consuming animals, naturally they transfer this to what Christ said, instead seeing the clear meaning.

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

A death needed to happen to atone for sins,

This death that needed to happen, was it required by God or by someone else?

 

[Stravinsk]

This death that needed to happen, was it required by God or by someone else?

I know you asked Lamb this question, not me, but any Torah citations can be countered by several prophets and even some psalms and proverbs. All without leaving the bible. It's easy to point to sacrificial law and dismiss what the prophets, psalms, proverbs and even Genesis actually said about it (including what was said to Noah post flood).

Didn't want to be rude...felt like I had to say this though.

 

[Messy]

The Parable of the Landowner can be found in Matthew 21:33-46. Please review it before answering the following question:

If the husbandman and his fellow men are wicked for murdering first the servants (the prophets of the old testament) then the Son (Christ) in order to attempt to "seize the inheritance for themselves" - then how are you different from them if you believe that the murder of the Son was necessary to receive your inheritance (entry into Heaven, forgiveness, redemption etc)?

I already know that this argument will come up: "But Christ predicted His suffering and death". Yes, that's true. Does that fact lesson the notion that one is still guilty of wickedness by agreeing that it was somehow necessary in order to gain the inheritance (salvation, redemption, forgiveness etc)?

If you can answer these questions without quoting any murderers (cough Saul/Paul cough) that would be good.

How am I different from them? How are Peter and John different from the pharisees who got Him killed? The ones who killed Him and later repented are different from the pharisees, who saw He was raised from the dead and did not convert, cause they were wicked. Sinful is not the same as wicked.
Zecharia 12:10
then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.

How is it wicked to accept His offer? He laid down His life Himself.

John 10
17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”

 

[Stravinsk]

How am I different from them? How are Peter and John different from the pharisees who got Him killed? The ones who killed Him and later repented are different from the pharisees, who saw He was raised from the dead and did not convert, cause they were wicked. Sinful is not the same as wicked.
Zecharia 12:10
then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.

How is it wicked to accept His offer? He laid down His life Himself.

John 10
17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”

I don't see how it is possible to repent of a deed when it's still believed that the deed was necessary. It's like saying one did X bad deed to another person and is sorry for/mourning the deed, but in the next instant say that they would do it again.

 

[Messy]

I don't see how it is possible to repent of a deed when it's still believed that the deed was necessary. It's like saying one did X bad deed to another person and is sorry for/mourning the deed, but in the next instant say that they would do it again.

They would not do it again. They did it cause they were blind. John and Peter and His other followers didn't kill Jesus.

 

[Stravinsk]

They would not do it again. They did it cause they were blind. John and Peter and His other followers didn't kill Jesus.

And neither did you or I. However in the theology you believe, Christ's death was necessary. That belief necessarily means if it hadn't been done, the believer would wish it to be done.

 

[Messy]

And neither did you or I. However in the theology you believe, Christ's death was necessary. That belief necessarily means if it hadn't been done, the believer would wish it to be done.

Ah yes that's true. You mean it's a bit hypocrit, like: I don't kill animals, but hey do get me a nice peace of steak please. Yeah ehh I didn't kill that cow. Yeah well so be it. My ego is horrible and it had to get killed and Jesus was so kind to die for me and have my ego killed, so I can become like Him and the evil ones were used to do that job.

 

[Messy]

His blood. But how do you wash yourself in it? It can't be done literally. Communion is a wafer of bread and some juice/wine done in a ceremony of remembrance. For some, some magical transubstantiation takes place, others, it's symbolic.

Perhaps it is both symbolic and literal. Perhaps being "washed in the blood" means multiple things, but it can't mean being washed in blood - as a murderer is washed in blood as he commits a murder.

But Christ said in clear terms one must "eat His flesh" and "drink His blood" to have life in them. The only point during His ministry this was ever offered was at the last supper - where He called bread His flesh and juice His blood. Not at the cross.

I don't think non-vegans are ever going to get this. Because of their habits and beliefs about murdering and consuming animals, naturally they transfer this to what Christ said, instead seeing the clear meaning.

I used to believe that Jesus was vegetarian. I'm raised vegetarian. But nope:
Luke 24:42 So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. And He took it and ate in their presence.

 

[Messy]

I was just thinking. Jesus even rebuked Peter for not wanting Him to get killed.

From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.

22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, [a]“Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!”

23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are [b]an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men

 

[Stravinsk]

I used to believe that Jesus was vegetarian. I'm raised vegetarian. But nope:
Luke 24:42 So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. And He took it and ate in their presence.

There are some compelling reasons why I think these stories were added later. As stated in the video, history records James as a vegetarian, and raised a vegetarian. All the early disciples are recorded to be as well, and the Ebionites. That doesn't make a lot of sense if their gospel account had Christ eating fish or multiplying fish for people to eat.

 

[Stravinsk]

I was just thinking. Jesus even rebuked Peter for not wanting Him to get killed.

From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.

22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, [a]“Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!”

23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are [b]an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men

Christ rebuked Peter for saying is was not going to happen. That is much different from rebuking Peter for *not wanting* it to happen.

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Christ rebuked Peter for saying is was not going to happen. That is much different from rebuking Peter for *not wanting* it to happen.

To be fair, it does sound like He's rebuking Peter for not wanting it to happen.

I think that Jesus had to die, but not to appease God, but because there are some sort of intrinsic rules of reality that we are not aware of.

 

[Messy]

To be fair, it does sound like He's rebuking Peter for not wanting it to happen.

I think that Jesus had to die, but not to appease God, but because there are some sort of intrinsic rules of reality that we are not aware of.

Our old fleshly nature, the evil inclination, yetzer hara, had to die, cease to exist and that was only possible if it was killed. Jesus' human nature didn't want to die, but He wanted to obey God and He is God, He laid down His life, noone could take it from Him, so that we could die with Him and be resurrected with Him. There's no other way to get rid of the sin nature than to kill it. David was just forgiven somewhere without blood, can't remember the text, but a Jewish guy came up with that text to show that a blood offer was not necessary and God could just forgive. But David couldn't go to heaven. He still had his sin nature. He could only go to heaven when Jesus rose. First they were in Abraham's bosom.

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Our old fleshly nature, the evil inclination, yetzer hara, had to die, cease to exist and that was only possible if it was killed. Jesus' human nature didn't want to die, but He wanted to obey God and He is God, He laid down His life, noone could take it from Him, so that we could die with Him and be resurrected with Him. There's no other way to get rid of the sin nature than to kill it. David was just forgiven somewhere without blood, can't remember the text, but a Jewish guy came up with that text to show that a blood offer was not necessary and God could just forgive. But David couldn't go to heaven. He still had his sin nature. He could only go to heaven when Jesus rose. First they were in Abraham's bosom.

I understood nothing of what you're saying, but thank you for sharing.

 

[Messy]

I understood nothing of what you're saying, but thank you for sharing.

Maybe you understand Thorben Sondergaard.