> General Discussions
Sacrifice to God
GlenKlein:
Thanks hillsbororiver,
I remember reading that from Ray! It's a good one! ;D
But... it still doesn't answer the question (unless I'm missing something?) - why did God choose the blood?
Surely, an omniscient God, knowing the end from the beginning, could have chosen an alternate means to bridge the gap between us and Himself... other than - delighting in the brutal beating, and bloody death of His own Son. I think that's really the question?
Maybe I missed your answer in that post - I'll go back and read it again. If the point is that He needed to present evil, in order for us to appreciate virtuous good - I can understand that. But that's not the question - He (God) could've chosen another form of evil... right? So - that's the question I get asked by atheists/agnostics.
Are you saying that this picture is the ultimate in evil? It definitely is God taking the responsibility on Himself, to be sure... but how do you answer the naysayers? It's just a mind blower to me - at least right now.
GlenKlein:
--- Quote from: bobbys43 on August 10, 2006, 02:45:48 PM ---Glen my friend this statement does not sound right either.
The sinner needs One Who can cope with His sins and arise in Triumph over them.
--- End quote ---
He became sin - we as mere mortals would not be able to cope with that... nor could we Triumph over them. That's why it had to be Christ... that's what I'm trying to say. He acts for our sakes, on our behalf. He is not doing something that we could do, but what we cannot do.
EDIT: I think the capital "H" in my quote may have thrown you off? It should've read: "The sinner needs One Who can cope with his sins..." (I edited the original post to read correctly.)
--- Quote ---but because He is above us... (gk: huper) - we are beneath, or not on His level.
Romans 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
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.
--- End quote ---
Well... I'm definitely not claiming that Christ was not man. That's to be sure... now I'm just not sure what I am trying to say. Let me think about it and get back to you...
orion77:
Bobby, I like that verse you quoted, got me to thinking.
(Phi 2:8) and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, having become obedient until death, even the death of a cross.
Christ, who knew no sin, who had the mind of God, even so humbled himself and became obedient to death. Being crucified with Christ, no longer living for self, but for God and neighbor, is the death we are obedient unto. Interesting verse. Could this be why the second death has no power over us at the white throne judgment? Because we have experienced that death during this life, and why God starts His judging at the House of God first.
Thanks for that scripture, Bobby.
God bless,
Gary
GlenKlein:
Phi 2:8 and, being found in fashion as a human, He humbles Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."
yeah... that is a good verse. I just checked out "fashion" [gk: schema] in Strong's:
a figure (as a mode or circumstance), that is, (by implication) external condition: - fashion
GlenKlein:
--- Quote from: hillsbororiver on August 10, 2006, 04:21:42 PM ---Glen,
Explaining God's purpose to the naysayers? I hope you bring a lunch :D that is impossible, if one is unable to digest even milk than they will surely choke on the meat. It is not the God's will for the carnal mind to understand;
--- End quote ---
Yeah.. I know ;) I just like to be prepared to give an answer when asked...
--- Quote ---Now the reason blood was shed is because that is what gives the flesh life, the flesh must die to give spiritual man birth, both figuratively, spiritually and ultimately at the resurrection, we must die in the faith that He will give us a new and better life in the next age.
--- End quote ---
Ok... I'm still with you - I understand all of the above.
--- Quote ---His blood being the blood of the Son of God and not only mortal man is the bridge between us and God, it is shed to cover us from our imperfection, a spiritual transfusion, life springing from death.
--- End quote ---
Here's where I get a little stuck. His "blood" is really not the issue - His blood is the memorial, the evidence, of what He really gave up - Himself. Which is kind of the same thing right? The soul is in the blood. Scripture says He gave His soul - not His blood.
I *think* I'm getting hung up on the carnal definition of "blood" rather than the Spiritual definition?? - which is really saying that without blood - you have no soul (the body would not function). Right? Because the soul is the product of the combination of body + God's Spirit.
--- Quote ---Joh 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
Can you see Christ as the "corn of wheat" which must die to bring forth "much fruit."
--- End quote ---
Yes... I'm still with you.
--- Quote ---We must all give up the wisdom of this world, we must die to it and be born in spirit, all this business of dying in order to live and sacrificing (gladly) in this life in the hope of the next curdles the flesh of the natural (beast) man.
To become perfect Sons and Daughters we must experience imperfection, to show us the extreme importance and the priceless value of this gift He was willing to give us the sacrifice of His Son.
We don't need to jump through hoops for the unbelievers, leave the calling and choosing to God, it is better to seek His wisdom, love and grace, He will direct our steps and give us an answer when we are called to witness. There is a difference between witnessing and debating, one is of the spirit, the other is of the flesh.
--- End quote ---
Well - I guess that takes me back to my original thought - God chose the "bloody sacrifice" in order to allow our carnal minds to be able to relate. Life and death (the ultimate pinnacles of either end of the spectrum) we can relate to... the physical must come first, right? So - I guess that's my answer?
God could've chosen a different path (other than the brutal slaying of Christ), but - it then would not have been the "ultimate" representation of life/death, and obedience. So, He really couldn't choose any other path... I can't help but think that there's still something that I can't quite put my finger on... I'm gonna go re-read your post again.
If anyone has further thoughts... please offer them up!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version