The BLOOD is the key to Christianity!!!

[Major]

Christianity is a BLOODY religion!

To understand why Christianity is a “bloody religion,” we must go back to God’s declarations regarding blood in the Old Testament: “the life of the flesh is in the blood” in Leviticus 17:11 & 14. Here God tells us that life and blood are essentially one and the same. The blood carries life-sustaining nutrients to all parts of the body. It represents the essence of life. In contrast, the shedding of blood represents the shedding of life, = death.

In God's gracious plan, He provided a “way out” the dilemma Adam and Eve was in by declaring that sacrifices of blood, first the blood of animals and finally the blood of the Lamb of God (Jesus Christ), would be sufficient to cover the sin of fallen mankind and restore us to spiritual life. He instituted the sacrificial system, beginning with the animals He himself killed to provide the first garments, thereby “covering” the sin of Adam and Eve.

All the Old Testament sacrifices which followed from then on were temporary ones, needing to be repeated over and over. These continual sacrifices were a foreshadowing of the one true and final sacrifice, Christ, whose blood shed on the cross would pay the penalty of sin forever. His death made any further bloodshed unnecessary.

As far as Christianity being a bloody religion, it is. But it is uniquely a bloody religion. Contrary to bloodless religions, it takes sin seriously, indicating that God takes sin seriously and gives a death penalty for it. Sin is not a small matter. It is the simple sin of pride that turned Lucifer into a demon. It was the simple sin of jealousy that caused Cain to slay Abel, etc. And in Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit, they believed the deceiver over a good and loving God, choosing to rebel against His love and denying the goodness of His character. Christianity is a bloody religion because it views sin as a holy God views it—seriously.

Also, because God is just, sin requires a penalty. God cannot merely forgive in mercy until the demands of justice have been met. Thus the need for a sacrifice before forgiveness is possible. The shedding of the blood of animals, as Hebrews points out, could only "cover" sin for a time (Hebrews 10:4) until the intended and sufficient sacrifice was made in Christ’s atoning death. Thus, Christianity is different from other bloody religions in that it alone provides a sufficient sacrifice to take care of the sin problem.

Last, although Christianity presents a bloody sacrifice in these regards, it is the only religion that is bloodless in the end. The opposite of death is life. In Jesus’ death, He brought life as is shown in so many verses. And in trusting Christ and His atoning sacrifice for one’s sins, one is saved from death and has passed into life (John 5:24; 1 John 3:14). In Him is life. All other paths lead to death.
Source: https://www.gotquestions.org/Christianity-bloody.html

 

[Papa Smurf]

Hey Brother (Major), while I agree with your OP (of course), I've had some interesting pushback against it recently. It came from a Jew (on a different forum) on a thread of his where the forgiveness of sins was part of the topic. I brought up the animal sacrifices of ancient Israel to him and asked him how Jews of today believe/teach that their sins can be forgiven 'apart' from the sacrificial system. Apparently, "Rabbinic Judaism" (which, as I understand it, is the normative practice of modern-day Jews all over the world), teaches that there is no longer a need for the animal sacrifices (as the basis for the forgiveness of sins), that God forgives Jews simply by them asking Him to do so.

I asked him for the basis of that belief, and he pointed me to this verse,

2 Samuel 12​

13 David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, “The LORD also has taken away your sin; you shall not die.​

He said that, "As you can see, no animal sacrifice was required for God to forgive David for his ~intentional~ sins of adultery and murder. All he had to do was recognize his sin, be contrite about it, and ask to be forgiven". (in point of fact, the animal sacrifices were apparently useless in regard to "intentional" sin in the OT)

I believe that what my Jewish friend is missing is that there were no sins (whether they were unintentional or intentional) which were ACTUALLY forgiven in the OT on the basis of the animal sacrifices, rather, God passed over judging and condemning His people until the one and only sacrifice that would be sufficient to atone for their sins was finally available to do so .. e.g. Romans 3:25. IOW, I believe that the future death/shedding of the Lord Jesus' blood on the Cross was the price that was paid to atone for David's adultery and murder, and therefore the basis of God's choice to forgive him/take away his sin.

All of this (the 'necessity' in the OT for animal sacrifices to forgive sin, the fact that they were the basis for the forgiveness of unintentional sin only, the fact that the OT never spells out how 'intentional' sins could be forgiven, and the fact that the animal sacrifices were never the ACTUAL basis for the forgiveness of even unintentional sins) creates quite a conundrum (of sorts), doesn't it?

I'd love to hear your thoughts about all of this!

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

​

Numbers 15​

27 If a person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering. ​

28 And the priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven. ​

29 You shall have one law for him who does anything unintentionally, for him who is native among the sons of Israel and for the alien who sojourns among them. ​

30 But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people. ​

31 Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt shall be on him.’”.​

​

 

[Major]

Hey Brother (Major), while I agree with your OP (of course), I've had some interesting pushback against it recently. It came from a Jew (on a different forum) on a thread of his where the forgiveness of sins was part of the topic. I brought up the animal sacrifices of ancient Israel to him and asked him how Jews of today believe/teach that their sins can be forgiven 'apart' from the sacrificial system. Apparently, "Rabbinic Judaism" (which, as I understand it, is the normative practice of modern-day Jews all over the world), teaches that there is no longer a need for the animal sacrifices (as the basis for the forgiveness of sins), that God forgives Jews simply by them asking Him to do so.

I asked him for the basis of that belief, and he pointed me to this verse,

2 Samuel 12​

13 David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, “The LORD also has taken away your sin; you shall not die.​

He said that, "As you can see, no animal sacrifice was required for God to forgive David for his ~intentional~ sins of adultery and murder. All he had to do was recognize his sin, be contrite about it, and ask to be forgiven". (in point of fact, the animal sacrifices were apparently useless in regard to "intentional" sin in the OT)

I believe that what my Jewish friend is missing is that there were no sins (whether they were unintentional or intentional) which were ACTUALLY forgiven in the OT on the basis of the animal sacrifices, rather, God passed over judging and condemning His people until the one and only sacrifice that would be sufficient to atone for their sins was finally available to do so .. e.g. Romans 3:25. IOW, I believe that the future death/shedding of the Lord Jesus' blood on the Cross was the price that was paid to atone for David's adultery and murder, and therefore the basis of God's choice to forgive him/take away his sin.

All of this (the 'necessity' in the OT for animal sacrifices to forgive sin, the fact that they were the basis for the forgiveness of unintentional sin only, the fact that the OT never spells out how 'intentional' sins could be forgiven, and the fact that the animal sacrifices were never the ACTUAL basis for the forgiveness of even unintentional sins) creates quite a conundrum (of sorts), doesn't it?

I'd love to hear your thoughts about all of this!

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

​

Numbers 15​

27 If a person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering. ​

28 And the priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven. ​

29 You shall have one law for him who does anything unintentionally, for him who is native among the sons of Israel and for the alien who sojourns among them. ​

30 But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people. ​

31 Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt shall be on him.’”.​

​

Why not invite your friend to join us here on CFS and begin to read through the thread on Romans!

I would love to talk with him on the subject.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Hello Major, I could do so, but I'm pretty sure that CFS would find his posts offensive enough to quickly ban him. He is an educated, anti-Christian, Jewish apologist, who is (unfortunately) hard to have a discussion with (because he holds to his beliefs so tightly and unreasonably that having an ongoing discussion with him about soteriology is pretty difficult).

I haven't talked to him directly in the last few months (though I continue to read some of his posts), but I've found him to be an interesting and often humorous chap (in a sarcastic way). Maybe I should point you in his direction on a PM and you can see what you think for yourself?

That said, where does 'your' understanding/belief fall in all of this (with particular regard to OT "intentional" sinning, I mean, and God's ~seeming~ unwillingness to forgive such sins)?

After being confronted with this (on the other forum), I'm not sure what to think anymore. So, I suppose my first question is, do you know of any place(s) in the OT where God tells us that "intentional" OT sins could be forgiven by Him in the same manner that David's were? All I can remember is that such sins (w/o exception) resulted in the guilty party being "cut off" from the congregation of Israel. IOW, forgiveness for intentional sinning seemed like it was off the table/never an option that God offered to His people back then (but I must be mistaken about that, as 2 Samuel 12:13 makes clear).

Thanks for your help brother

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

 

[bobinfaith]

Hello Major, I could do so, but I'm pretty sure that CFS would find his posts offensive enough to quickly ban him. He is an educated, anti-Christian, Jewish apologist, who is (unfortunately) hard to have a discussion with (because he holds to his beliefs so tightly and unreasonably that having an ongoing discussion with him about soteriology is pretty difficult).

I haven't talked to him directly in the last few months (though I continue to read some of his posts), but I've found him to be an interesting and often humorous chap (in a sarcastic way). Maybe I should point you in his direction on a PM and you can see what you think for yourself?

That said, where does 'your' understanding/belief fall in all of this (with particular regard to OT "intentional" sinning, I mean, and God's ~seeming~ unwillingness to forgive such sins)?

After being confronted with this (on the other forum), I'm not sure what to think anymore. So, I suppose my first question is, do you know of any place(s) in the OT where God tells us that "intentional" OT sins could be forgiven by Him in the same manner that David's were? All I can remember is that such sins (w/o exception) resulted in the guilty party being "cut off" from the congregation of Israel. IOW, forgiveness for intentional sinning seemed like it was off the table/never an option that God offered to His people back then (but I must be mistaken about that, as 2 Samuel 12:13 makes clear).

Thanks for your help brother

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

Hello Papa Smurf;

Your friend is more than welcome to register, go through the vetting process and receive an email of our forum rules for his/her agreement. If we do approve the new member he/she is more than welcome to have pm discussions on almost any subject with any of our members.

Based on the early years at CFS there was sort of a no holds barred policy on any topic in the open forums but at some point it broke the fellowship severely from a friendly Christian atmosphere. After 17 years we learned from experience and I believe God held His site in place with our current forum rules.

Jesus welcomed everyone to receive and have an eternal relationship with Him. We desire to emulate Christ but with wisdom and discernment.

This is just a courtesy if you feel led to invite anyone to fellowship with us.

God bless you, Papa Smurf, and your whole family.

 

[Major]

Hello Major, I could do so, but I'm pretty sure that CFS would find his posts offensive enough to quickly ban him. He is an educated, anti-Christian, Jewish apologist, who is (unfortunately) hard to have a discussion with (because he holds to his beliefs so tightly and unreasonably that having an ongoing discussion with him about soteriology is pretty difficult).

I haven't talked to him directly in the last few months (though I continue to read some of his posts), but I've found him to be an interesting and often humorous chap (in a sarcastic way). Maybe I should point you in his direction on a PM and you can see what you think for yourself?

That said, where does 'your' understanding/belief fall in all of this (with particular regard to OT "intentional" sinning, I mean, and God's ~seeming~ unwillingness to forgive such sins)?

After being confronted with this (on the other forum), I'm not sure what to think anymore. So, I suppose my first question is, do you know of any place(s) in the OT where God tells us that "intentional" ? All I can remember is that such sins (w/o exception) resulted in the guilty party being "cut off" from the congregation of Israel. IOW, forgiveness for intentional sinning seemed like it was off the table/never an option that God offered to His people back then (but I must be mistaken about that, as 2 Samuel 12:13 makes clear).

Thanks for your help brother

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

Thanks for asking. The idea of 'intentional' is better understood as 'defiant' or 'high handed'. Unintentional therefore includes many sins committed due to want of knowledge, through weakness, or where the offender did not really understand his guilt. Intentional sin, is not that you were consciously aware of sinning, like when King David committed adultery, rather it is more of a public defiance against the covenant, like the man stoned for picking up sticks on the Sabbath.

This was just after God had declared that the whole camp should not work on the Sabbath. This open rebellion during the establishment of the ceremony was like a spirit of mutiny on a ship at sea. This is what 'intentional' means in this context.

"Cutting Off" = many 'high handed' sins were punishable by death, and the term should not be confused with excommunication as some sins incurred but as in literally being put to death. Naturally their is no atonement for that.

In Isaish 6:6-7 ..........
"Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a burning coal in his hand, which he had taken from the altar with tongs. He touched my mouth with it and said, “Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away and your sin is forgiven.”

In this passage we are told that an angelic being, called a seraphim, touched the lips of the prophet Isaiah with a burning coal. At the same time the angel announced that the sins of Isaiah were forgiven. A casual reading would seem to suggest that the prophet suffered some form of penance when his lips were touched with a burning coal and as a result his sins were forgiven. That is, since he suffered he was forgiven.

But I would add that the basis for salvation in the Old Testament is not any different than that for salvation in the New Testament. The basis for salvation is the same in the Old and New Testaments. For example, in Romans 4:1-5 we read,

"What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “ Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness."

Did you notice that Abraham was not justified by works but by faith. Justified means to be declared righteous. It is a judicial act whereby God declares a person righteous. This is a clear statement that even in the Old Testament a man or woman was declared to be righteous or forgiven of their sins by faith and faith alone.

Salvation is also by faith and faith alone in Messiah/Jesus in the New Testament. That is, Isaiah and all the Old Test. believers saw Jesus from the distant past and believed in the Messiah. That is, Isaiah had his sins forgiven. Therefore, when the seraphim declared that Isaiah’s sins were forgiven, it was because Isaiah knew about Christ/Messiah and believed. The same was true of Abraham and everyone else in the Old Test.

They were forgiven by faith in Christ, the coming suffering Messiah They just did not know His name!!!!!!

Then we are told that in Old Testament times God “passed over” the sins previously committed when a saint believed in the coming suffering Messiah. The Greek word that is translated as “forbearance” has the sense of “patience” or “tolerance.” Forbearance is a wonderful attribute of God. It means that He was not in a hurry but patiently allowed Old Testaments to believe in Christ even though Christ had not yet died for sins. Remember that salvation is always by faith. Then when Christ died those sins were finally forgiven and they were CLEANSED OF SIN INSTEAD OF SIN BEING PASSED OVER!!!!

Lets imagine a credit card that can be used for the forgiveness of sins. When the Old Testament saints believed, the forgiveness of their sins, we could say, was charged on a credit card. A debt card would not have worked since Christ had not yet died for our sins. Then when Jesus died for our sins, the credit card debt was paid off and forgiveness was finally a reality. But from the time the saints believed until the time Christ died, the Father treated them as if their sins were forgiven.

Therefore, the answer to the question, “Were Old Testament saints forgiven on the basis of Christ’s future sacrifice?” is “Yes!” They were forgiven because the Father, who is the One who forgives our sins (Matthew 5:12, 14) and knew Christ would die for their sins, patiently waited for Christ to die thus enabling their sins to eventually be forgiven.

I do not know if that is what you were asking for but maybe in some way it can be helpful to your friend.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Hello again Major, what a wonderful post! Thank you

I believe that one of my questions was answered, if there truly is a difference in God's eyes between "intentional" sins and "high-handed"/"defiant" sins in the OT (and I believe that you've demonstrated that there is).

The question that remains for me, then, is why and how David's sins were forgiven by God APART from the sacrificial system. I suppose that a sacrifice for his sins could have been made later, but that is not what Rabbinic Judaism teaches.

Again, thank you for your help with this

--Papa Smurf
p.s. - I think that your last post should be required reading

 

[Major]

Hello again Major, what a wonderful post! Thank you

I believe that one of my questions was answered, if there truly is a difference in God's eyes between "intentional" sins and "high-handed"/"defiant" sins in the OT (and I believe that you've demonstrated that there is).

The question that remains for me, then, is why and how David's sins were forgiven by God APART from the sacrificial system. I suppose that a sacrifice for his sins could have been made later, but that is not what Rabbinic Judaism teaches.

Again, thank you for your help with this

--Papa Smurf
p.s. - I think that your last post should be required reading

Thanks for the compliment brother. That was a very nice thing to say!

Papa, one of the things I lerned a long time ago is that as we face our sin, we have to navigate between two unbiblical ditches.
#1. Despairing that our sin is beyond forgiveness.
#2. Carelessly thinking we can violate God’s commands without experiencing painful repercussions.

It seems to me that what you are asking is - "Was David fully forgiven?" Then, If the answer is, then the question is: "On what basis did David know full forgiveness?"

It could only have been through CONFESSION of sin. Then the question has to be...on what BASIS??? His confession was before Calvary, before the Temple, and in the Old Testament period - Tabernacle Worship, which Yahweh instituted through Moses, was still operational may suggest us to conclude that David was fully forgiven through faith in the future Messiah - this Old Testament Gospel was predicted, promised and portrayed in the Old Testament Scriptures and Sacrificial System. This implies the following:

David believed the Promise of a Redeemer
David believed the Prophecies of a Messiah
David believed the Promise of Atonement bound up with, foreshadowed by, and typified in, the Sacrificial System
David believed the Promise of Nathan
David believed in the Promise of Atonement proclaimed and trumpeted on the Day of Atonement

2 Samuel 12:13........
David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD." And Nathan said to David, "The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die".
So then, by David's belief in the Promise of Atonement which was enacted in the ritual presentation and slaughter substitutes - Moses records how worshipers brought prescribed animals to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting: hands were laid on the head of the sacrifice while sin was confessed, thereby signaling transfer or imputation of the guilt of the sinner to the beast - violent slaughter of the victim then took place; blood was next collected and manipulated by the priest who finally prepared the slain beast for offering on the altar - incinerated in flames, indicative of wrath, God was propitiated by this acceptable sacrifice; where faith was present, worshipers were shocked at the blood-bath sin required - but they were also assured and relieved that guilt was pardoned.

On THAT BASIS David was forgiven! Now think!!!!!!! How different was David's forgivness than is ours today????????

David's grasp on Christ's work was deficient and dimmer in comparison to ours. He did not know a fraction of what we know today but he knew enough to be saved. What all this shows is that all sinners throughout history who truly seek God's mercy, and use the appointed means, will have the Gospel applied powerfully to the conscience by the Spirit which comes by FAITH!

 

[Dave F.]

Note that it says "The LORD has put away your sin" , as Major had stated earlier they were passed over or set aside until David's sin, like ours, was forgiven at the cross.

 

[Major]

Note that it says "The LORD has put away your sin" , as Major had stated earlier they were passed over or set aside until David's sin, like ours, was forgiven at the cross.

Yep!

Old Test saints were saved on a credit card.
New Test saints are saved on a debit card.

Some one will of course challenge that so I guess I better explain.

CREDIT is the ability to obtain goods or services before payment, based on the trust that payment will be made in the future.
DEBIT is the ability to obtain goods or services AFTER a payment has been made in you account.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Thank you Major et Dave F.!

While I agree with you both that it was the Lord Jesus' blood, shed on the Cross at Calvary, that (eventually) made atonement for/paid the price to forgive David's sins (in the same way that ALL of the OT saints' sins were actually forgiven .. e.g. Romans 3:25), how do I begin to explain that to a Jew who believes (thanks to the teaching of Rabbinic Judaism) that God now forgives both unintentional AND intentional sins willy-nilly/just for the asking/without an animal sacrifice to atone for them, like He appears to have done in the case of King David's sins of murder and adultery? (the proof for Rabbinic Judaism's teaching about this being the Bible itself, at least in the case of "intentional" sins, an interpretation that, sadly, is not w/o merit, even if it does not seem reasonable to those of us who know better)

I've also asked them to explain how "unintentional" sins* are forgiven these days (apart from animal sacrifices, that is), and why they believe that God required animal sacrifices to atone for their "unintentional" sins in the OT, but not for their "intentional" ones, but I am not getting any traction with any of these inquiries.

The belief that is taught by Rabbinic Judaism, that our sins are forgiven by God simply for the asking (without being atoned for/apart the shedding of blood, IOW), certainly seems to make witnessing to them about their need for a Savior more difficult.

Do you two have any ideas about this/about how I might approach them (and this problem) differently?

Thanks for your help

God bless you!!

~Papa Smurf
p.s. - I wonder how they deal with their guilt? I ask because, while I too believed that my sins could be forgiven simply by asking God to forgive them (prior to becoming a believer) I, nevertheless, continued to feel guilty because of them (a guilt that felt like a nearly unbearable weight pressing down on me, in fact, that was finally lifted off of me by God when I 'knew' that He had saved me/when I 'knew' that my sins were finally/truly forgiven in Christ).

*The reason given for the forgiveness of "unintentional" sins by Rabbinic Judaism today is simply this, no Temple means no animal sacrifices for sin are possible, just FYI.
.

 

[Major]

Thank you Major et Dave F.!

While I agree with you both that it was the Lord Jesus' blood, shed on the Cross at Calvary, that (eventually) made atonement for/paid the price to forgive David's sins (in the same way that ALL of the OT saints' sins were actually forgiven .. e.g. Romans 3:25), how do I begin to explain that to a Jew who believes (thanks to the teaching of Rabbinic Judaism) that God now forgives both unintentional AND intentional sins willy-nilly/just for the asking/without an animal sacrifice to atone for them, like He appears to have done in the case of King David's sins of murder and adultery? (the proof for Rabbinic Judaism's teaching about this being the Bible itself, at least in the case of "intentional" sins, an interpretation that, sadly, is not w/o merit, even if it does not seem reasonable to those of us who know better)

I've also asked them to explain how "unintentional" sins* are forgiven these days (apart from animal sacrifices, that is), and why they believe that God required animal sacrifices to atone for their "unintentional" sins in the OT, but not for their "intentional" ones, but I am not getting any traction with any of these inquiries.

The belief that is taught by Rabbinic Judaism, that our sins are forgiven by God simply for the asking (without being atoned for/apart the shedding of blood, IOW), certainly seems to make witnessing to them about their need for a Savior more difficult.

Do you two have any ideas about this/about how I might approach them (and this problem) differently?

Thanks for your help

God bless you!!

~Papa Smurf
p.s. - I wonder how they deal with their guilt? I ask because, while I too believed that my sins could be forgiven simply by asking God to forgive them (prior to becoming a believer) I, nevertheless, continued to feel guilty because of them (a guilt that felt like a nearly unbearable weight pressing down on me, in fact, that was finally lifted off of me by God when I 'knew' that He had saved me/when I 'knew' that my sins were finally/truly forgiven in Christ).

*The reason given for the forgiveness of "unintentional" sins by Rabbinic Judaism today is simply this, no Temple means no animal sacrifices for sin are possible, just FYI.
.

My dear brother.......you are talking about fixing something that is broken with no glue. These people you are talking about have had the Jewish faith pounded into them their whole life. They are BRAINWASHED!

This is exactly why Jesus had to do miracles to break through their heard headedness and stubborness. I can not do it, Dave can not do it and you can not do it. It will take the Holy Spirit to do it.

I would also advise you that you do not have any guilt in your relationship with the, YOU have shared the gospel and it is not up to you to save them! WE never have anyone! All we can do is share the gospel with the lost and then it is up to God to convict and save them!

 

[bobinfaith]

how do I begin to explain that to a Jew who believes (thanks to the teaching of Rabbinic Judaism) that God now forgives both unintentional AND intentional sins willy-nilly/just for the asking/without an animal sacrifice to atone for them, like He appears to have done in the case of King David's sins of murder and adultery? (the proof for Rabbinic Judaism's teaching about this being the Bible itself, at least in the case of "intentional" sins, an interpretation that, sadly, is not w/o merit, even if it does not seem reasonable to those of us who know better) I've also asked them to explain how "unintentional" sins* are forgiven these days (apart from animal sacrifices, that is), and why they believe that God required animal sacrifices to atone for their "unintentional" sins in the OT, but not for their "intentional" ones, but I am not getting any traction with any of these inquiries. The belief that is taught by Rabbinic Judaism, that our sins are forgiven by God simply for the asking (without being atoned for/apart the shedding of blood, IOW), certainly seems to make witnessing to them about their need for a Savior more difficult. Do you two have any ideas about this/about how I might approach them (and this problem) differently? Thanks for your help God bless you!! ~Papa Smurf p.s. - I wonder how they deal with their guilt? I ask because, while I too believed that my sins could be forgiven simply by asking God to forgive them (prior to becoming a believer) I, nevertheless, continued to feel guilty because of them (a guilt that felt like a nearly unbearable weight pressing down on me, in fact, that was finally lifted off of me by God when I 'knew' that He had saved me/when I 'knew' that my sins were finally/truly forgiven in Christ).
*The reason given for the forgiveness of "unintentional" sins by Rabbinic Judaism today is simply this, no Temple means no animal sacrifices for sin are possible, just FYI.
.

Hello Papa Smurf;

Please click to expand what I blue and red lighted.

I feel one of the core reasons Jesus' Gospel in Matthew 5:17-48 was to lift the guilt and deep sub-contextual teachings of multi-level categories of sin and atonement (intentional and unintentional.) That was a mouthful. lol!

When a Christian disciple learns the Bible, or a Jew gains knowledge of Rabbinic Judaism teaching does not mean all are masters and are on our way. God keeps that academic discipline open for further learning and this was Jesus' cue of fulfillment in full forgiveness whether intentional, unintentional, unaware of our sin, all by one repentance and forgiveness of His Love Commandments.

Just the same, I'm not discouraging you if you enjoy discussing the process of the Old Law.

When you and I share the Gospel to a Jewish brother/sister or someone of another faith or higher power (both false) we lay it at their feet and pray the Holy Spirit will help them overcome the guilt and plant the seed given their listening ear.

The part where God grew me was the guilt I felt after He had forgiven me. This suggested that I didn't really believe God had forgiven me. I'm still getting there.

God bless you, brother, and thank you for asking good questions.

 

[Papa Smurf]

My dear brother.......you are talking about fixing something that is broken with no glue.

Actually, I'm just interested in trying to figure out a better approach to witnessing (or more specifically, apologetics, in this case .. e.g. 1 Peter 3:15). I know that it is the Lord alone who saves, not us. Nevertheless, He (for a reason that I do not fully understand) trusted us to be part of the process of His bringing His people to saving faith in Him (we are His witnesses .. e.g. Isaiah 43:10; Acts 1:8; Romans 10:17).

These people you are talking about have had the Jewish faith pounded into them their whole life. They are BRAINWASHED!

True, but weren't we all "brainwashed" in some way prior to coming to saving faith, by the world, if nothing else Maybe there is nothing that we can say to them to help them find their way to the Lord, but I have a ways to go before I will accept that (as it 1. seems INCREDIBLE to me that those of the Jewish faith would be more difficult to witness to than atheists, for instance, and 2. look at how the Messianic movement has been growing over the last few decades).

Maybe I should ask one of them (one of my Messianic Jewish friends, that is)?

This is exactly why Jesus had to do miracles to break through their heard headedness and stubborness. I can not do it, Dave can not do it and you can not do it. It will take the Holy Spirit to do it.

That's true. Although the Apostle Paul continued to go to/witness in Jewish synagogues (in town after town after town) on his various missionary journeys, he did open the door to witnessing to Gentiles too (in part, as you just said, due to the hard-headedness of the Jews .. and perhaps due to the willingness of the Gentiles, as well? .. e.g. Acts 13:46-48).

I would also advise you that you do not have any guilt in your relationship with the, YOU have shared the gospel and it is not up to you to save them! WE never save anyone! All we can do is share the gospel with the lost and then it is up to God to convict and save them!

The "guilt" that I mentioned in my last post was due to my own, unforgiven sins alone (prior to coming to saving faith). It actually has nothing to do with feeling unsuccessful in witnessing to Jews here of late (especially since the two that I have been referring in earlier posts are well-versed in Rabbinic Jewish apologetics).

I'm just hoping to discover new/better ways to help them see how lost they really are outside of Christ, ways of making a better defense to them for my faith and their need for the Savior/to better explain the reason for the hope that I now have in me because of Christ. Granted, it may prove an impossibility, but (as I said above) I'm not quite ready to give up on them yet

Thanks Major

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

 

[Papa Smurf]

Hello Papa Smurf;

Please click to expand what I blue and red lighted.

I feel one of the core reasons Jesus' Gospel in Matthew 5:17-48 was to lift the guilt and deep sub-contextual teachings of multi-level categories of sin and atonement (intentional and unintentional.) That was a mouthful. lol!

When you and I share the Gospel to a Jewish brother/sister or someone of another faith or higher power (both false) we lay it at their feet and pray the Holy Spirit will help them overcome the guilt and plant the seed given their listening ear.

I was resistant for YEARS, but the Lord changed my heart and broke through to hard-headed me such that I was finally able to see myself for who/what I really was, a lost sinner w/o hope in this world. He also provided the final witness (a colleague of mine) with the exact words that I needed to hear in my despair (following what I guess I would refer to as my "dark night of the soul" the night before).

What I'm saying is that it's clear to me (now) that God had been at work in my life for years before I finally came to saving faith in Him (and also that He was wholly the reason for my coming to saving faith), as the words that my friend/colleague shared with me that day while being both timely and exactly what I needed to hear, were hardly new to me (IOW, I had heard them many times before that day, I just hadn't connected with them before that moment).

The part where God grew me was the guilt I felt after He had forgiven me. This suggested that I didn't really believe God had forgiven me. I'm still getting there.

God bless you, brother, and thank you for asking good questions.

I was the same way brother (feeling guilty for sins that I knew God had forgiven me of even after becoming a Christian), but after hearing someone on the radio talk about that very problem, that it was actually displeasing to God because it showed that I was listening to/trusting my feelings (and, no doubt Satan) rather than listening to/trusting Him and taking Him at His word. I remember being hit hard by that broadcast (cut to the quick by it, so to speak), so I began to take those kind of thoughts "captive" as soon as they'd enter my mind (refusing to believe them and my feelings, and then choosing to take Him at His very word instead) and eventually, the continuous spiritual battle that I found myself in at first began to fade away into sporadic skirmishes instead (just like the promise half of James 4:7 told me that it would, PTL ).

I, of course, still feel guilt and shame whenever I sin (as I should), but I have come to far more fully believe/embrace what God tells us in verses like 1 John 1:9 about God forgiving and cleansing us when we are penitent (so the time that it used to take me to get past my feelings of guilt and have been lessened greatly, PTL).

God bless you brother!!

--Papa Smurf

 

[Papa Smurf]

Thinking back to this thread's title, BLOOD is also/has always been the key to Judaism too (and so much more obviously so than it has ever been to Christianity, yes? ... since the Jews had animal sacrifices), but amazingly, modern Judaism (Rabbinic Judaism) has found a way to say that this is no longer the case for them

May the Lord keep us forever safe from this kind of error by always helping us abide in the Truth/His Truth, such that we will never be capable of following the example that has been set for us by modern Judaism!

--Papa Smurf
p.s. - if I find out something interesting from my Messianic Jewish friends (about how they witness to Jews who still hold to Rabbinic Judaism), I will come back and pass it along.

 

[crossnote]

Thinking back to this thread's title, BLOOD is also/has always been the key to Judaism too (and so much more obviously so than it has ever been to Christianity, yes? ... since the Jews had animal sacrifices), but amazingly, modern Judaism (Rabbinic Judaism) has found a way to say that this is no longer the case for them

May the Lord keep us forever safe from this kind of error by always helping us abide in the Truth/His Truth, such that we will never be capable of following the example that has been set for us by modern Judaism

This seems to highlight the importance of sticking to Scripture or Sola Scriptura. Apparently your Jewish friend has other authoritative sources outside of Scripture (even his own).

Mark 12:24 KJV
And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?

If he objects and says "You are using your Scriptures", then remind him of ...

Leviticus 17:11 KJV
For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

 

[Dave F.]

I would ask them what they think is the purpose of the messiah, why would the scriptures even suggest him, then ask them to read ISA:53 and show them how Jesus fulfilled this prophesy. As mentioned before, it is the Holy Spirit that leads us to salvation. Another question you might want to ask is If God forgives sins without any atonement, then He would also have to forgive everyone of any sin (including the atheist) without partiality, would He not? For He is a just God.

 

[Major]

Actually, I'm just interested in trying to figure out a better approach to witnessing (or more specifically, apologetics, in this case .. e.g. 1 Peter 3:15). I know that it is the Lord alone who saves, not us. Nevertheless, He (for a reason that I do not fully understand) trusted us to be part of the process of His bringing His people to saving faith in Him (we are His witnesses .. e.g. Isaiah 43:10; Acts 1:8; Romans 10:17).


True, but weren't we all "brainwashed" in some way prior to coming to saving faith, by the world, if nothing else Maybe there is nothing that we can say to them to help them find their way to the Lord, but I have a ways to go before I will accept that (as it 1. seems INCREDIBLE to me that those of the Jewish faith would be more difficult to witness to than atheists, for instance, and 2. look at how the Messianic movement has been growing over the last few decades).

Maybe I should ask one of them (one of my Messianic Jewish friends, that is)?


That's true. Although the Apostle Paul continued to go to/witness in Jewish synagogues (in town after town after town) on his various missionary journeys, he did open the door to witnessing to Gentiles too (in part, as you just said, due to the hard-headedness of the Jews .. and perhaps due to the willingness of the Gentiles, as well? .. e.g. Acts 13:46-48).


The "guilt" that I mentioned in my last post was due to my own, unforgiven sins alone (prior to coming to saving faith). It actually has nothing to do with feeling unsuccessful in witnessing to Jews here of late (especially since the two that I have been referring in earlier posts are well-versed in Rabbinic Jewish apologetics).

I'm just hoping to discover new/better ways to help them see how lost they really are outside of Christ, ways of making a better defense to them for my faith and their need for the Savior/to better explain the reason for the hope that I now have in me because of Christ. Granted, it may prove an impossibility, but (as I said above) I'm not quite ready to give up on them yet

Thanks Major

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

Brother.........if there was a NEW or BETTER way to witness I would know about it. There is NO NEW way!!!! There is the gospel or the highway!

You may be trying to convince ourself of situation whereby you can present the same OLD gospel way to God.

I do not think we were all BRAINWASHED before salvation, NO. We were consumed by SIN which clouded our understanding.

Now............please sit down and undrstand this, You do not have ant unforgiven sins!!!! All your sins were forgiven at the moment that you said YES to the Lord Jesus Christ. He forgave you and then tossed those sins into the deepest part of the ocean never to be brought up again.

I am presenting a systematic study of Romans on our thread. I invite you to read alonf and ask questions or comment as I go. I think from what I am hearing from you that it would be a blessing to you.

Romans 3:24-25 Paul clearly speaks to your comment when he says..............
“Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of SINS THAT ARE PAST, through the forbearance of God;”

If that is not enough, Peter agrees with Paul in 1 Peter 1:8............
“But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his OLD SINS.”

ANY guilt you are feeling from past sin is nothing more that Satan working to drag you down and get your eyes off of Christ!

 

[Papa Smurf]

Hello Major, thank you for the invitation to the Romans study, I'll jump over and check it out

As far as guilt and sin is concerned, I do not feel guilt due to "past sins", as I know that all of those have been forgiven in Christ (though as I said in my last post, Satan spent a lot of time with me when I was a younger believer trying to get me to believe otherwise ).

I do feel guilt/shame whenever I fall for a temptation and allow it to become sin today however ("new sins", that is, as I'm sure you do too). Once I have confessed them, I get back to my walk as quickly as I am able, treating them like all of my other past (forgiven) sins (that is a bit more difficult to do with certain sins, if they are sins that end up causing a problem for someone else, for instance).

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

.​