> General Discussions
"of" or "in"?
Gina:
That Jesus actually sweat blood was definitely not an exaggeration -- there's such as thing as straining so hard that the capillaries in your face burst. There's a medical term for it -- hematosis or something. That's how hard he was straining to resist the temptation to call a legion angels to come save Him and all his disciples! I would have been like, Um, Now Father! Send them right now!
I don't mean to diminish anyone's death. But I'm sure some veterans would be very relieved to have the option of phoning the commander in chief and asking for 12,000 soldiers to come rescue them in a flash. Or have access to a heavy dose of morphine so that they wouldn't feel any pain.
Mr. President? Yeah, It's Michael. Listen, they're about to rip my flesh from my bones. Could you save me? There is not the man who lived would have insisted on going through that if he had the option of not going through it. And that was only part of what Jesus went through.
Jesus had so much power in him that when the soldiers came to arrest him, all he said was: I AM. And they all fell backwards on their behinds. That's how much power he had. You think maybe he was tempted to use that power? How much strength and power above and beyond that do you think Jesus had to have in order to resist the urge to use it?
Jesus could have been saved from it. The Physician could have just as easily healed himself. It would have been so easy. Can't you just hear Satan tempting him. "Oh come on, you really don't want to do this.... Do you? For these people? Are you serious?"
But He knew Satan was lying to him. And so he did something no man has ever done in the history of mankind and never will again. He fulfilled scripture and prophecy to the T. I'd say that entrusting His Father with His entire life and death in the face of all that agony and torment and embarrassment and shame glorified His Father. It's something no one besides Jesus ever did in the history of mankind. And never will again.
I would have been straining so hard, I would have sweat blood too, if I had the option of calling all that off.
I would have said forget that! I'm going home! I would have looked at them all and said, There is no way you'll EVER be any good! You can go to hell! Ya know? But with all that power, he goes: "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
I'd say that would glorify His Father. But that's me.
Kat:
--- Quote from: lurquer on January 07, 2015, 09:50:25 PM ---Gina and Kat, I love what you both said, but I don't believe he was fearing his physical "death". Something else.. Something greater than physical suffering...Something more than what was common to man...
--- End quote ---
Hi lurquer,
I'm wondering if you are not thinking along the lines of what the Christian world believes... they think that Christ was to actually become 'sin' for us and that He was struggling with the thought of God turning away from Him.
2Co 5:21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
This is a wrong translation, Christ became a "sin offering," big difference. Ray spoke on this heresy to a great degree, here are the Bible studies.
Bible study audio Oct/Nov 2006
http://bible-truths.com/audio/WS_10001.WMA
http://bible-truths.com/audio/ChristSinII.wma
http://bible-truths.com/audio/ChristSinII.mp3
transcript
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,6719.0.html
So people believe that He literally became sin and that the Father could not look upon Him as such (Habakkuk 1:13) and so turned His back on Jesus when He needed Him the most. And to top it off the church believe that the Father then poured His wrath on Christ. This is all a gross mis-translation of what happened.
So I'm just trying to figure out your hesitance to believe. That when Christ as a human man was greatly troubled by what He was about to go through. He was God and what He was about to endure was the absolute depths of human degradation possible. Sure other people have went to their death fearlessly... but they were not the God of the universe, who had been in existence for billions of years and was now about to suffer and die... I think for good reason that this was the greatest act of sacrifice possible.
Maybe I've gotten it all wrong about what you may be thinking, but this could help somebody else I suppose, so I thought it was worth mentioning.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
Gina:
If the mods consider what I am about to say teaching or preaching, please remove it by all means. I will not object.
Well, what's ridiculous about the whole notion that God was dishing out His wrath on Jesus (the spotless and faultless and blameless Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world) is this:
The Father isn't wrathful with the express image of Himself.
"I always do what pleases My Father." "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased."
How could the Father be wrathful towards the express image of Himself, in Whom He was well pleased? It would be akin to the Father showing wrath towards Himself. The Father isn't wrathful towards Himself.
Mark 3:24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
Jesus was never at odds with His Father, and His Father wasn't at odds with the express image of Himself.
Dennis Vogel:
--- Quote from: Gina on January 08, 2015, 11:00:43 AM ---If the mods consider what I am about to say teaching or preaching, please remove it by all means. I will not object.
Well, what's ridiculous about the whole notion that God was dishing out His wrath on Jesus (the spotless and faultless and blameless Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world) is this:
The Father isn't wrathful with the express image of Himself.
"I always do what pleases My Father." "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased."
How could the Father be wrathful towards the express image of Himself, in Whom He was well pleased? It would be akin to the Father showing wrath towards Himself. The Father isn't wrathful towards Himself.
Mark 3:24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
Jesus was never at odds with His Father, and His Father wasn't at odds with the express image of Himself.
--- End quote ---
You did notice Kat said: "the church believe that the Father then poured His wrath on Christ." ?
But I've never heard that "the church" teaches that. Just a few screwballs.
Gina:
No, I didn't really read the whole thing she said. But I honestly cannot recall any church or sermon I ever heard where it was taught that the Father poured out his wrath on His perfect son. It'll screw you up so bad you won't know which end is up.
It'd be like hiring a messenger to deliver a package to someone under the most extreme conditions without a hitch, and without so much as hurting a flea - per your strict orders. And they do it exactly as planned. And as a thank you to the messenger, you fly into a rage and mock him, spit on him, beat him to a bloody pulp, nail him to a cross and make him gasp for air for 12 hours, before shoving a spear through his heart and assigning him a grave with the wicked. And what's surprising is, some people continue to AGREE with that. (Even the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.)
We are very, very, very fortunate to have had Ray to straighten out that diabolical mess and shield us from that heresy.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version