What is the Atonement?

[John317]

>>>OK, but go now to Saint Paul and read what the Holy Spirit ("breath") inspired him to write in 1 Cor. 6: 9, 10.

Is Paul contradicting Jesus? I don't believe so.

Also, in view of the fact that the 2 great commandments say nothing about immorality, is a believer free to do that because of his faith in Christ?

Not if we understand the meaning of Christ's words.

But if we have a misunderstanding of Christ's words, we can make it appear that they have nothing to do with my living in a gay bar. Or with lying or stealing or, yes, also with not keeping the Sabbath.

I think that you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. So I herein correct my religion to read thusly:

"Love God,love your neighbor, and stay out of Gay Bars - ESPECIALLY on The Day of God's Favorite Number - 7".

Does that provide enough support for God's righteousness and justice??!

Bill Ross

Well, not quite. But you're on a roll, man. LOL

Speaking of which, I need to go do some things to get ready for the Sabbath.

We have to talk about the Sabbath some time-- I mean about what it really means! I think everyone would admit that people need a rest day once a week, don't they?

[BibleShockers]

>>>OK, but go now to Saint Paul and read what the Holy Spirit ("breath") inspired him to write in 1 Cor. 6: 9, 10.

Is Paul contradicting Jesus? I don't believe so.

1 Cor 6:9 ¶ Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Note that Paul refers to violating another man's property rights over a woman (adultery - which is one of the 10) plus frequenting prostitutes, plus anal sex. He even goes on to say that it is good for a man to touch a woman! So not only does he add at least two prohibitions (PORNEIA and ARSENOKOITHS) beyond what is in the ten, and one beyond the whole of Torah (frequenting prostitutes is not forbidden) but he introduces an idea that would apall Moses - that "it is good for the man to be alone!"

Ge 2:18 And the LORD God said, **It is not good that the man should be alone**; I will make him an help meet for him.

This is also not present in Jesus' alleged "magnification" of the commands:

27 ¶ Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

So in what way does the law, magnified or not, tell us what we need to know?

If all I had was the 10 commands, would I know that sex with a man or unmarried woman was a sin? Or that divorce is wrong? Or that I should not be effeminate? I don't think so. Would I know from the first 5 books that sex with an unmarried woman was a sin, and divorce was wrong? Or that I should only have one wife? I don't think so. If I added the sayings of Jesus from Matthew 5, would I know that it was good not to touch a woman? Certainly not.

Paul said that through the law was the knowledge of sin. If you look at the context, he is not referring to a complete list of specific behaviors. If he were saying that then he would be contradicting himself in 1 Cor 6:9. He is speaking of "Mr. Sin" - the evil alien in his muscles.

Jesus didn't claim to be expanding a list into a complete list either (although looking at a woman with strong desire being a sin suggests that you should be blind and asexual just to be safe).

My point is that your concept of the **perfect list of sins** that make up "the moral law" is not workable. The most complete list is in Paul's writings, not in the Torah.

>>>Also, in view of the fact that the 2 great commandments say nothing about immorality, is a believer free to do that because of his faith in Christ?

Not if we understand the meaning of Christ's words.

But if we have a misunderstanding of Christ's words, we can make it appear that they have nothing to do with my living in a gay bar. Or with lying or stealing or, yes, also with not keeping the Sabbath.

I have heard that the Catholic church used to (not too long ago) openly solicit gay men for the priesthood because they did not believe that gay sex violated their vows of celibacy! It is not good to touch a woman, so touch a man! Well, being effeminate and having anal sex are forbidden, but what about oral sex among men? There does not seem to be a prohibition. So they felt that they had an option.

Paul provides a big list of objectionable behaviors. Is it complete? If so, then in order to constitute the moral law and give the knowledge of sins (plural) the law really ought to include all of this info. "Do not commit adultery" does not cut it. You need "no gay bars, especially on day 7" added in order to "magnify it and make it honorable." In fact, the 10 would be a whole lot more in line with the NT if it just said "you shall not even look on any person other than your one wife with lust, and it would be better if you weren't even married!" That would have been a much better way to summarize NT morality ala Paul and Jesus!

So what I'm saying is that the 10 commands are a lousy excuse for a moral law.

Is that really their Biblical purpose? The Bible never says so. They were a small part of a larger body of law given to Jews to form the basis of a covenant. If you assign a greater meaning than that you will find that they are not up to the task.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>And in Africa, members of all religious groups-- except, to the best of my knowledge, "Jehovah's Witnesses,"--- slaughtered each other for no other reason than that they belonged to another tribe.

Religion defines who is in and who is out. It is a line in the sand by its very nature. If the line in the sand is the seventh day, then it can quickly become something to kill over.

>>>That is not a reflection on the religion-- unless the religion itself teaches that this is OK to do. But the NT never calls us as believers to murder people for any reason.

The "moral law" said "You shall not suffer a witch to live." Taking this at its face, many people were killed for being witches not all that long ago in this country.

>>>Now it's a fact that some people claiming to be Christians murdered Jews, but that is because they did not have a true understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ and did not practice it.

Martin Luther was a rabid anti-semite. His sermaons spurred on thousands to kill Jews. Did he not know the gospel and not practice it? It was Paul who said Jews were "Christ killers." This is my point. Good people with moral absolutes that are founded in dogmatic (non-reason based) values can quickly become dangerous.

>>>But apart from the Holy Spirit abiding (living) in us, we are each of us capable-- under certain circumstances-- of committing virtually every horror imaginable.

Some people are overly confident that they have within them a direct link with the deity. I would not in the least be surprised that the people who bomb abortion clinics or synagogues weren't very sure that "the Holy Spirit" was prompting them to do so.

I think that the moral law is not even the 2 commands. That morality is too dangerous. That morality puts honoring the Sabbath - a religious thing - above so many more important things. I'm going to point out what I think is a pretty darn good summation of human duty:

Mt 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Now THAT is why Jesus gets paid the big bucks!

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

I think that these were both intended as versions of a comprehensive "moral law":

Deut 10:12 And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,

Mic 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

One more!

Joh 15:17 These things I command you, that ye love one another.

Bill

[John317]

John3:17-- >>>Now it's a fact that some people claiming to be Christians murdered Jews, but that is because they did not have a true understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ and did not practice it.

Quote:

Bill Ross----Martin Luther was a rabid anti-semite. His sermaons spurred on thousands to kill Jews. Did he not know the gospel and not practice it? It was Paul who said Jews were "Christ killers." This is my point. Good people with moral absolutes that are founded in dogmatic (non-reason based) values can quickly become dangerous.

Yes, Martin Luther was anti-Semite. He was a great man and he did a work that I believe God called him to do, which was to call people back to the Bible and to Christ, and away from Church traditions and from human priests. He understood the doctrine of justification by faith, but there was much about the gospel and God and the Bible that he did not understand.

Quote:

BILL RSS-- I'm going to point out what I think is a pretty darn good summation of human duty:

Mt 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

That is human duty. What about duty toward God?

Notice what it says above: BECAUSE THIS IS THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS. In other words this is the meaning of the whole law and the prophets; this is what they are trying to get you to learn and practice; this is their whole purpose.

[John317]

One more!

Joh 15:17 These things I command you, that ye love one another.

Bill

That is true. Now if you love one another, truly, you will obey the rest of the Ten Commandments regarding "one another." That is also Paul's point.

You can't say you love your neighbor if you aren't honest with him/her/ or if you do the things prohibited in the last 6 of the commandments.

[John317]

I think that these were both intended as versions of a comprehensive "moral law":

Deut 10:12 And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,

Mic 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

Bill Ross

Yes, I love those verses. I certainly believe those.

Now if we understand what those verses mean, and we practice them, can you imagine that we would murder Jews or other people? I can't see how.

Do you believe what those verses say?

[John317]

Interesting post.

I think you could use some help in understanding the Ten Commandments in relation to the teachings of Paul and Jesus. You're taking some verses out of context.

From my viewpoint, you are looking at the Ten Commandments and other moral commandments legalistically and not paying attention to the underlying principles.

[John317]

>>>OK, but go now to Saint Paul and read what the Holy Spirit ("breath") inspired him to write in 1 Cor. 6: 9, 10.

Is Paul contradicting Jesus? I don't believe so.

1 Cor 6:9 ¶ Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Note that Paul refers to violating another man's property rights over a woman (adultery - which is one of the 10) plus frequenting prostitutes, plus anal sex. He even goes on to say that it is good for a man to touch a woman! So not only does he add at least two prohibitions (PORNEIA and ARSENOKOITHS) beyond what is in the ten, and one beyond the whole of Torah (frequenting prostitutes is not forbidden) but he introduces an idea that would apall Moses - that "it is good for the man to be alone!"

Ge 2:18 And the LORD God said, **It is not good that the man should be alone**; I will make him an help meet for him.

My whole point in quoting 1 Cor 6: 9 is to show that the NT prohibits things that are prohibited by the Ten Commandments. All of the things Paul says will keep us out of the kingdom of God are prohibited by the Ten Commandments.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>But apart from the Holy Spirit abiding (living) in us, we are each of us capable-- under certain circumstances-- of committing virtually every horror imaginable.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- Some people are overly confident that they have within them a direct link with the deity. I would not in the least be surprised that the people who bomb abortion clinics or synagogues weren't very sure that "the Holy Spirit" was prompting them to do so.

Yes, we know from the Bible that the Holy Spirit does not lead people do violate Christ's teachings. So while some people may think wrongly about that-- just like many did during the 40s-- we know that they are wrong. People find excuses to commit all kinds of wrong things, but that doesn't change the word of God.

[John317]

I think that the moral law is not even the 2 commands. That morality is too dangerous. That morality puts honoring the Sabbath - a religious thing - above so many more important things.

Do you really think that Christ's "2 greatest commandments"-- love to God and love to mankind-- are dangerous?

Let's talk further about that aspect-- the meaning and significance of the weekly Sabbath.

[BibleShockers]

>>>Yes, Martin Luther was anti-Semite.

His granddaughter lives not far from here. She recently wrote a letter to some Jewish organization apologizing on behalf of her grandfather's actions.

Most people know about John the Baptizer's diet of locusts and wild honey but not very many people know about Luther's Diet of Wurms!

>>>He was a great man and he did a work that I believe God called him to do, which was to call people back to the Bible and to Christ, and away from Church traditions and from human priests. He understood the doctrine of justification by faith, but there was much about the gospel and God and the Bible that he did not understand.

Indeed. He was a Trinitarian traditionalist to his toes.

>>>Mt 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

That is human duty. What about duty toward God?

Well, I didn't make up the saying (and neither did Jesus). But it is obscure in meaning. If he meant that this is only part of the law and part of the prophets, what did he mean by saying "this is"? Why not "so say?" I think we are intenionally being given the impression that he means that "this is what the whole thing boils down to." I suppose we can chalk it up to hyperbole.

>>>Notice what it says above: BECAUSE THIS IS THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS. In other words this is the meaning of the whole law and the prophets; this is what they are trying to get you to learn and practice; this is their whole purpose.

So would this not qualify as "the moral law?" I mean, if it is *explicitly said to be* the summary of the law and the prophets (unlike the 10), shouldn't we be able to count on that?

James provides another, similar, under-appreciated, all-encompassing, "moral law":

Jas 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

John, I've enjoyed this part of the discussion and it has inspired me to think in a new direction.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>That is true. Now if you love one another, truly, you will obey the rest of the Ten Commandments regarding "one another." That is also Paul's point.

NO! Paul's point is that your "only obligation is to love" because by loving, everything else takes care of itself - the "6 commands" and any other legitimate obligation, such as humility, thankdgiving and not being angry without a cause. He doesn't say "obey the 6 commands" because that would be the opposite of what he is saying.

>>>You can't say you love your neighbor if you aren't honest with him/her/ or if you do the things prohibited in the last 6 of the commandments.

There are laws in Germany against committing murder. I am not beholden to those prohibitions because I am not in Germany, nor a citizen. So if I do not murder anyone, I have fulfilled those laws without **obeying** the laws of Germany. This is Paul's point. Obey the royal law to "love one another" and don't bother yourself with Jewish law. THis is an important distinction.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Yes, I love those verses.

Now if we understand what those verses mean, and we practice them, can you imagine that we would murder Jews or other people? I can't see how.

And that is my/Paul's point... that morality dictates behavior, while "not murdering" and "not stealing" do not generate morality. Hence, the principles are moral and the "listed bad behaviors" are not. One can "not kill" and yet not be moral, but per John:

1Jo 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is [or might as well be] a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

Hence, don't expect to see Luther in the promised land!

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>...From my viewpoint, you are looking at the Ten Commandments and other moral commandments legalistically and not paying attention to the underlying principles.

And I think you are reading volumes into them that are just not there. You think "thou shalt not commit adultery" covers "don't screw a sheep" and "don't have gay sex." You are reading way too much into these commands.

But the global verses I cited are said to be global and are, in fact, pretty darn global in their scope.

Can you please define precisely what a "moral law" is - since it is not defined in our text? Please be very specific. Then we'll see if your instance matches up.

Thanks,

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>...All of the things Paul says will keep us out of the kingdom of God are prohibited by the TEn Commandments.

Where is there a prohibition against anal sex? Prostitution? Multiple wives? Divorce? Three-way sex? Sex with animals? Looking at a woman with strong desire? Where is the positive duty to love one's wife and cherish her, etc, and for her to submit to her husband and not deny him sex?

"You shall not violate another man's property rights over a woman" does NOT provide either an explicit prohibition/command or a guiding moral principle. It is a particular act being forbidden. Anything more is your overly active imagination.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Yes, we know from the Bible that the Holy Spirit does not lead people do violate Christ's teachings.

Did Martin Luther have "the Holy Spirit" living inside of him? (I'm not sure how something non-physical can live inside of someone).

>>>So while some people may think wrongly about that-- just like many did during the 40s-- we know that they are wrong. People find excuses to commit all kinds of wrong things, but that doesn't change the word of God.

Did the Torah teach that it is always wrong to take a life? Or did it just forbid "murder?"

Did Jesus teach that it is always wrong to take a life?

Did Paul?

What about human slavery? Does the law forbid it?

Did Jesus?

Die Paul?

So was it right that the Bible condones it?

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Do you really think that Christ's "2 greatest commandments"-- love to God and love to mankind-- are dangerous?

Yes.

>>>Let's talk further about that aspect-- the meaning and significance of the weekly Sabbath.

What I meant is that because the second command ranks second to the first, it can be trumped. So the second command is in a precarious position.

Suppose the deity of the Jews tells the Jews to invade their neighbor's land, slaughter its inhabitants, enslave those around it and set up an altar to himself. Love for neighbor goes flying out the window.

Suppose God tells you to sacrifice your son to him. Love for son is trumped.

Suppose God tells you to dump your servant girl and the son you bore together. The servant and the son are dumped into the wilderness to die.

Suppose you are a runner and the race is on your Sabbath (in this case, Sunday). You ruin the festivities by refusing to run! (Chariots of Fire - but they bent the rules to allow for his religion).

I know such devotion sounds noble, and in the text, works out, but such "conviction" is often problematic.

Consider that in Europe, Muslim taxi drivers refuse to carry unescorted female passengers. To them it is conviction, but to you and I it is obnoxious.

Bombing abortion clinics, burning witches and the slaughter of Jews all spring to mind. The ghettoization of Jews (started by Christians), the slaughter of Catholics by Protestants, building of Cathedrals while people went hungry..

The point is that a morality where religion is more important than people puts a great deal of power into the hands of the clergy.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

By the way, I don't recall you ever answering whether or not you thought men would be judged by "the law of liberty aka some (undefined) subset of the Torah (as magnified and made honorable by Jesus).

Please consider that:

* Jews will be judged by the law, but gentiles by conscience:

Ro 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

* [true, acting] believers will not be judged:

Lu 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

1Co 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

Bill Ross

[John317]

JOHN3:17-->>>Yes, Martin Luther was anti-Semite.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- His granddaughter lives not far from here. She recently wrote a letter to some Jewish organization apologizing on behalf of her grandfather's actions.

Most people know about John the Baptizer's diet of locusts and wild honey but not very many people know about Luther's Diet of Wurms!

Are you sure Martin Luther's granddaughter lives near you?

Of course, I assume you realize Martin Luther was born in in the 1400's. He nailed the 95 Thesis to the door of the Wittenburg church in 1511.

You must be talking about Martin Luther King. Are you being facetious?

Speaking of Luther's Diet of Worms-- I served in the US military with an Engineering unit only a few miles from where that took place. The huge church is still in use and on Saturday's the locals hold something like a swap meet out in front of it. At the back of the cathedral, they have built large statues of all the great reformers, including, of course, Martin Luther.

Have you read some good biographies of Martin Luther. There was a lot more to Luther than the fact that he was anti-Semite. Just like there was a lot more to Thomas Jefferson or George Washington than the fact that they owned slaves.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>He was a great man and he did a work that I believe God called him to do, which was to call people back to the Bible and to Christ, and away from Church traditions and from human priests. He understood the doctrine of justification by faith, but there was much about the gospel and God and the Bible that he did not understand.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- Indeed. He was a Trinitarian traditionalist to his toes.

Well, I realize you would consider his belief in the Trinity to be part of what shows he did not understand the Bible, but I believe he was correct to accept the Trinity. I studied the doctrine of the Trinity very carefully for about 2 years when considering the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses. Not only did I study the Bible but I read everything I could find on both sides of the issue.

The Adventist church was basically Arian from its beginnings to the end of the 19th century. The church didn't become fully Trinitarian until about 1920. I mean that until the 1920s there were still some Adventists who were not fully persuaded of the Trinity.

The reason for that is that the early Adventists were originally from all different Christian groups, including denominations that were Arian in their belief about the nature of Christ. That included such prominent leaders as Joseph Bates, James White, Uriah Smith, J.H. Waggoner, etc.

The Adventist church was formed around some core beliefs regarding the Second Coming, and therefore in those early years, they believed rightly that the other issues should not become a reason for division or separation. If they had not decided to put some of those questions on the back burner, the church would have broken up in the 1870s and 1880s.

[BibleShockers]

>>>Are you sure Martin Luther's granddaughter lives near you?...

Um, I guess some great, great descendent.

>>>Speaking of Luther's Diet of Worms-- I served in the US military with an Engineering unit only a few miles from where that took place. The huge church is still in use and on Saturday's the locals hold something like a swap meet out in front of it.

Obviously not Adventists!

>>>At the back of the cathedral, they have built large statues of all the great reformers, including, of course, Martin Luther.

Have you read some good biographies of Martin Luther. There was a lot more to Luther than the fact that he was anti-Semite. Just like there a lot more to Thomas Jefferson or George Washington than the fact that they owned slaves.

I saw (and was inspired by) the movie "Here I Stand" and I've read a bunch of his "works." But they left out all of the good parts. Here they are:

http://www.pbs.org/empires/martinluther/cheats.html

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

I did not know that about the Adventists. Very interesting. I guess that is why you don't have the knee-jerk "damn you to hell" reaction that Trinitarians usually exhibit.

I am going to start another thread on handling differences of opinion that I hope you'll participate in. I would like to know the SDA policy.

Bill

[John317]

I saw (and was inspired by) the movie "Here I Stand" and I've read a bunch of his "works." But they left out all of the good parts. Here they are:

http://www.pbs.org/empires/martinluther/cheats.html

Bill Ross

Yes, I went to the link. Thanks. Luther has been a "hero" of mine since I was about 5. Have you read the book, Here I Stand, by Roland Bainton? Excellent book. The film was based on that book. The film follows the facts pretty well, but naturally, as all films must do, it also leaves out a great deal.

Of course Luther was a very imperfect man. But God doesn't judge us by what we don't know or by what we aren't convicted on. He takes into account how much spiritual light we have had or could have known if we had searched for Him.

Luther wasn't always consistent. Of course he sometimes drank a lot, but most Germans do. Their beer is great and so is their wine. Their water is terrible, and that is one reason why Germans drink alcohol.

Luther had little use for the books of James or Revelation. His primary interest was in justification, and if he couldn't relate a book or passage to justification, he didn't much care for it.

I believe God raised him up specifically for the purpose of leading the protestant reformation at very critical time, and in that, Luther did what God had called to do. That was "present truth" for Luther, just as calling people to get in the ark and trust God was "present truth" in the time of Noah.