The Crucifixion

[M. T. Cross]

I notice that often people will talk about how horrible the Crucifixion was.

But it seems to me that it was essential to the plan. That in order for Christ to make his point the Jews overall had to reject him and he needed to die the horrible death that he did.

But I wonder - how would have it turned out if they would have accpted him? Where would his religion be now? Would have it had the effect that it has had?

[dialoguewithus]

The Two Josephs

Joseph was unjustly given up by his brethren to the most unjust fate, due to their blindness and hatred. He later testified to his brothers of God’s hand in his life: “And you, you devised against me evil, yet the Elohim devises it for me for good, that it may work out as at this day, to preserve alive many people.” Gen. 50:20. The parallel with Christ’s sacrifice is stark: “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain” (Acts 2:23). Just as Joseph was used by God to save his people, so also the second and greater Joseph (Christ Jesus) is God’s instrument to save, not only His people Israel, nor even all humanity, but all creation! Colossians 1:15-20. Just as God transforms the sin of Joseph’s brothers into blessings for his people, thus also, He transforms the murder of Christ Jesus into salvation for the world!

“For to vanity was the creation subjected, not voluntarily, but because of Him Who subjects it, in expectation that the creation itself, also, shall be freed from the slavery of corruption into the glorious freedom of the children of God.” Romans 8:20, 21.

[Gibs]

All of us who have sinned and that includes every one of us is guilty of shedding his Blood. It was known by God what must be done if sin would show it's ugly head. That is the reason for Yahweh King of Israel to bring forth our redeemer before anything.

There never was any doubt that but what sin and rebellion would kill their very own redeemer. The question may be, would so called Christianity do it again today. I for one believe so.

Even before Isaiah chapter 53 the Redeemer was known to come and the 53'rd of Isaiah is your first gospel. All need to read it, 12 verses long is all but this was around 600 yrs. before the fact.

The first mention I think is , Ge 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

The blood of God had to be shed to pay for the remission of sin. Please read,

Ac 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[BobRyan]

I notice that often people will talk about how horrible the Crucifixion was.

But it seems to me that it was essential to the plan. That in order for Christ to make his point the Jews overall had to reject him and he needed to die the horrible death that he did.

But I wonder - how would have it turned out if they would have accepted him? Where would his religion be now? Would have it had the effect that it has had?

I do not agree. At no time did God "need" someone to choose to go to hell -- so that He could save someone else.

What if the Jews rejected Christ - but decided not to go after him to kill him - just stick with stubborn rejection.

What if they let him die alone in Gethsemane - tasting the sufferings of death for every man - on the Mt of Olives.

The are no roman soldiers in the lake of fire - tormenting sinners in payment for their sins.

The entire beaten, spit upon, crucified thing was "on top of" the real mission of the Messiah - which was to pay the debt of sin for every sin for all of mankind in all of time.

in Christ,

Bob

[Dr. Rich]

I notice that often people will talk about how horrible the Crucifixion was.

But it seems to me that it was essential to the plan. That in order for Christ to make his point the Jews overall had to reject him and he needed to die the horrible death that he did.

But I wonder - how would have it turned out if they would have accpted him? Where would his religion be now? Would have it had the effect that it has had?

EC, perhaps you do not understand the prophecy in Dan. 9:24? At the time Jesus was here on this earth, the Jews had time to accomplish what they were given to do, so IF they had accepted Him, then what John the Baptist was preaching would have become true and what had been sealed up in Daniel would have forever been sealed up. One of the best presentations on this same issue was given today and you can now hear it as it was archived at: www.blogtalkradio.com/sot for today's study (3/31/12).

Gibs and Miz3, I would love for both of you to hear this and tell me what you think. I for one had never heard of all of this put together in such a easy understanding way.

[Guest]

The entire beaten, spit upon, crucified thing was "on top of" the real mission of the Messiah - which was to pay the debt of sin for every sin for all of mankind in all of time.

in Christ,

Bob

That's right Bob.

[M. T. Cross]

I notice that often people will talk about how horrible the Crucifixion was.

But it seems to me that it was essential to the plan. That in order for Christ to make his point the Jews overall had to reject him and he needed to die the horrible death that he did.

But I wonder - how would have it turned out if they would have accepted him? Where would his religion be now? Would have it had the effect that it has had?

[M. T. Cross]

Originally Posted By: EmptyCross

I notice that often people will talk about how horrible the Crucifixion was.

But it seems to me that it was essential to the plan. That in order for Christ to make his point the Jews overall had to reject him and he needed to die the horrible death that he did.

But I wonder - how would have it turned out if they would have accpted him? Where would his religion be now? Would have it had the effect that it has had?

EC, perhaps you do not understand the prophecy in Dan. 9:24? At the time Jesus was here on this earth, the Jews had time to accomplish what they were given to do, so IF they had accepted Him, then what John the Baptist was preaching would have become true and what had been sealed up in Daniel would have forever been sealed up. One of the best presentations on this same issue was given today and you can now hear it as it was archived at: www.blogtalkradio.com/sot for today's study (3/31/12).

Gibs and Miz3, I would love for both of you to hear this and tell me what you think. I for one had never heard of all of this put together in such a easy understanding way.

So you think the crucifixion was plan B then?

[M. T. Cross]

The Two Josephs

Joseph was unjustly given up by his brethren to the most unjust fate, due to their blindness and hatred. He later testified to his brothers of God’s hand in his life: “And you, you devised against me evil, yet the Elohim devises it for me for good, that it may work out as at this day, to preserve alive many people.” Gen. 50:20. The parallel with Christ’s sacrifice is stark: “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain” (Acts 2:23). Just as Joseph was used by God to save his people, so also the second and greater Joseph (Christ Jesus) is God’s instrument to save, not only His people Israel, nor even all humanity, but all creation! Colossians 1:15-20. Just as God transforms the sin of Joseph’s brothers into blessings for his people, thus also, He transforms the murder of Christ Jesus into salvation for the world!

“For to vanity was the creation subjected, not voluntarily, but because of Him Who subjects it, in expectation that the creation itself, also, shall be freed from the slavery of corruption into the glorious freedom of the children of God.” Romans 8:20, 21.

Thats all good and well but I have no idea what it has to do with what I asked....

[Dr. Rich]

I do not agree with you bob and Richard. Jesus SAID He came to this world to testify to the words of His Father--and never said that He came here to die to pay the penalty for the sins of all mankind is all of the time.

The only reason you are following the words of the one who said this was because it is much easier and more pleasing to believe in this rather than in the words of Jesus himself.

If that was THE reason, then He could have been killed at an earlier time, say right after His birth. But that was NOT what Jesus said about this issue at all. A great study on this can be heard at: www.blogtalkradio.com/sot that was given today- 3-31-12. It was today's Sabbath School program.

[Guest]

And...

Satan saw that his disguise was torn away. His administration was laid open before the unfallen angels and before the heavenly universe. He had revealed himself as a murderer. By shedding the blood of the Son of God, he had uprooted himself from the sympathies of the heavenly beings. Henceforth his work was restricted. Whatever attitude he might assume, he could no longer await the angels as they came from the heavenly courts, and before them accuse Christ's brethren of being clothed with the garments of blackness and the defilement of sin. The last link of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world was broken. {DA 761.2}

[M. T. Cross]

And...

Satan saw that his disguise was torn away. His administration was laid open before the unfallen angels and before the heavenly universe. He had revealed himself as a murderer. By shedding the blood of the Son of God, he had uprooted himself from the sympathies of the heavenly beings. Henceforth his work was restricted. Whatever attitude he might assume, he could no longer await the angels as they came from the heavenly courts, and before them accuse Christ's brethren of being clothed with the garments of blackness and the defilement of sin. The last link of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world was broken. {DA 761.2}

See RLH this is part of what I mean about it being necessary. He needed to expose his advesary for what he was.

Reminds me a lot of another story from another culture.

[Dr. Rich]

Yes EC. It was plan B. But Jesus knew Plan B was going to be the truth as we can see with His discussion with the Jewish leaders in Matthew 7.

[Kevin H]

First my sources are the article "The Role of Israel in Old Testament Prophecy" and there is a similar chapter that Mrs. White wrote, sadly the chapter that has stuck in my mind seems to be a different chapter. At Atlantic Union College every semester we needed to read those two chapters and write a paper on them. They were the foundation for the approach used in the class which was while those two chapters gave an over view, they could be applied to different sections of scripture. I strongly recommend reading "The Role of Israel in Old Testament Prophecy"

Deuteronomy 4 is also a foundational chapter, which gives an overview of the two possible histories of the Hebrews. One if they were to have been faithful, the other if they are unfaithful. And the Old Testament keeps adding details to those two outlines.

The first way was if they were faithful they would be blessed. Others would wonder why these people who were not worshiping the gods were being blessed instead of cursed by the gods. The Hebrews were to share with them that they were not athiests but believed in the one true God and share their God. Nations would either join with the Hebrews or reject the message of the Hebrews. There would be a very good king born. But as the nations come together against Jerusalem the good king was to get killed in the war, and Zacharaiah teaches us that he is killed by his friends. That the Hebrew people think this king was too loving to be able to lead his people into battle. Soon there after they would get this powerful king that is first thought to be the Messiah and is worshiped in the temple. However continued Bible study would make then realize that this was God's enemy and turn against him. He would then go out and unite the nations who were against the Hebrews and attack and conquer Jerusalem and continue his conquests, however he was to hear news from the north and east that make him rush back to Jerusalem. That roumor is that Michael the prince stood up from the dead, a great eschatological battle where the wicked are destroyed; however they are not destroyed by the sword, but as they see the Messiah their hearts fail them with fear and that is what kills them. The deaths are by individuals on both sides where even thought their nations accepted or rejected the messiah as a people, their individual choice in accepting or rejecting the messiah depends on how they will respond to seeing the messiah.

I hope this helps

[M. T. Cross]

So what you are all saying is that the actions of humans can alter the plans of God.

So how do you know he is still planning his second coming? How do you know he has not come up with a plan B on that?

[BobRyan]

And...

Satan saw that his disguise was torn away. His administration was laid open before the unfallen angels and before the heavenly universe. He had revealed himself as a murderer. By shedding the blood of the Son of God, he had uprooted himself from the sympathies of the heavenly beings. Henceforth his work was restricted. Whatever attitude he might assume, he could no longer await the angels as they came from the heavenly courts, and before them accuse Christ's brethren of being clothed with the garments of blackness and the defilement of sin. The last link of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world was broken. {DA 761.2}

Satan could have used the Romans alone to do that deed. But as Acts 2 points out - the apostles after the cross were blaming the Jews not just the Romans.

But more to the point Satan was tormenting Christ IN The Garden of Gethsemane according to the Desire of Ages. That alone should have given unfallen worlds a bit of a clue as to his real character.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

So what you are all saying is that the actions of humans can alter the plans of God.

So how do you know he is still planning his second coming? How do you know he has not come up with a plan B on that?

It was never God's plan to boot 1/3 of the angels out of heaven and then roast them in the Lake of Fire.

It was never God's plan to boot Adam and Eve out then destroy all of mankind in a world wide flood, followed by destroying many of those same people "again" in the lake of fire.

All of these things came up in response to free will choice.

Do not confuse God's ability to know the future - with free will or else you will end up stuck on the point that God Himself does not have free will.

God's plan was for mankind to live forever in a paradise on earth -- in the end - even given the sinful choices of the Angels and humans - God still gets that desired goal. But a lot of needless suffering comes in the meantime due to the poor choice of the free will beings.

in Christ,

Bob

[M. T. Cross]

So Bob how do Christians know that our actions since the writing of Revelations has not changed his plan on how he is going to get what he wants?

[BobRyan]

Israel "altered the plan" at the exodus so that instead of going into Canaan they died in the wilderness but STILL God's overriding purpose was accomplished and so their descendants went into the land promised to those who left Egypt.

In the same way - at the end of the 2300 year timeline in 1844 the Day of Atonement service was setup and as Daniel 8 points out - we reached "the time of the end". By the 1890's we know that the second coming had already been delayed just as Israel was sentenced to the wilderness for 40 years so in the late 1800's did modern Israel stall but now we are once again moving into the right position for the long over due second coming.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

EC - every view has its own strengths and challenges - but since you are on an SDA site - for the sake of discussion - take a few turns where you assume that the SDA POV is correct and see just how many of the dominos fall into place making a very amazing map of the end time.

Not saying that this would be your POV - but for the sake of comparison - give it a shot.

in Christ,

Bob

[M. T. Cross]

Thats actually what I am trying to do here Bob. Hence the questions.

My issue is this. Harold Camping was fairly sure he knew how the dominoes were going to fall and provided evidence for it as well, but yet it did not happen. I can see your POV, I respect it, yet there are so very many different theories on it that all paint a neat picture.

It gets a bit confusing. I wonder if you are all saying the same thing essentially in a different language.

[Dr. Rich]

EC--how do I know? Simple my friend, just read what Jesus said in the book of Revelation. You can bank on that.

[Dr. Rich]

SD, we are right now in the delay as found in Matt. 25.

[BobRyan]

Thats actually what I am trying to do here Bob. Hence the questions.

My issue is this. Harold Camping was fairly sure he knew how the dominoes were going to fall and provided evidence for it as well, but yet it did not happen. I can see your POV, I respect it, yet there are so very many different theories on it that all paint a neat picture.

It gets a bit confusing. I wonder if you are all saying the same thing essentially in a different language.

In the days of John the baptizer - many false messiahs had come and more would come in the future according to Christ in Matt 24.

The broad brush that just observed "well they all claimed to the Messiah" would not serve to distinguish the true from the counterfeit.

In the same way there is going to be a counterfeit second coming - according to Matt 24. If we just use broad brush strokes of the form "yes but they all claim to be the second coming" we don't have the tools to identify the true vs the false. If you compare the totall off-the-wall ad hoc rules and schemes used by harold camping vs the rock solid Prophetic rule used by SDAs and ALSO used by almost every other denomination on the planet when you consider things like Daniel 9's 490 timeline prediction of the first coming and ministry of Christ -- the comparison is "instructive".

In my post I say that there are strengths and weaknesses to this or that view. But for the sake of the discussion consider the strengths for the SDA case as though the doctrines are true - to see just what it is that the group is actually saying.

Later we can add weaknesses - but first lets try to define what it is we are talking about.

In the case of the 2nd coming you have 2300 year timeline pointing to the 1800's (1844 to be precise) and in Daniel 8 we are told that this is what God calls "the time of the end".

In the late 1840's God raises up a prophet specifically for this event.

By late in the 1880's the message goes out saying that like the Jews were stalled for 40 years in the desert - so the Christian church had missed that key message starting in 1844 and was stalled waiting on the 2nd coming.

in Christ,

Bob

[John317]

So how do you know he is still planning his second coming? How do you know he has not come up with a plan B on that?

Because Christ already bought us-- paid the ransom price. Does anyone pay a ransom, or buy anything, and then show no interest in obtaining what they bought?

God does not lie. Jesus promised ".... I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also." {John 14: 3}