The entire Christian theology is primarily based off of their withdrawal (incorretly so might I add) of the requirements for a Messiah. There is absolutely nothing of redemption through crucifixion nor is there any mention of the removal of all the previous laws once the Messiah comes.

Wanna take a piece of the theology from the Jewish bible and then from it?

That doesn't seem quite intellectually honest. Then again, I wasn't quite expecting much anyway.

Whoa kids, settle down. Try to add information rather than chasing eachother around with semantics and P->Qs.

 

I've picked out a few interesting chunks from the aforementioned article:

Quote:

Many people are surprised to find that the Ten Commandments were given to Israel, and not to the rest of the world. It is just commonly assumed among many Christians that the “Big Ten” were designed for all humans and especially for Christians. But the Bible is very plain about who are the recipients of the Sinai law. The last verse of the book of Leviticus sums it up this way: “These are the commandments the Lord gave Moses on Mount Sinai for the Israelites” (Leviticus 27:34). Verse 46 of the previous chapter gives (. . .) "These are the decrees, the laws and the regulations that the Lord established on Mount Sinai between himself and the Israelites through Moses."

Further on:

Quote:

The book of Hebrews gives us even more insight into this new arrangement. Here we are told, “But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises” (Hebrews 8:6).

So what I have gathered is1. God makes a deal with the Israelites: follow these rules and you'll be given paradise - break them and suffer death and/or eternal damnation.2. Many people die and/or are eternally damned.3. It turns out that the original law was designed to show that everyone is sinful.4. God launches a new law which relies more on getting into His good graces.5. "Good graces" means coming to Him through the head of marketing, Jesus Christ. Basically God invented coupons 1900 years in advance. You follow the teachings of Jesus, you get the half off deal on heaven. The problem still remains, however, that this is a form of chronological racism. God basically makes an example of millions of people as a set up for the liquidation sale. This is a classic example of creating demand. Similarly, De Beers was founded in 1888 and began monopolizing the diamond rush in South Africa from 1869 to 1871. They now control most of the world's diamonds and essentially created the market for them via marketing and induced scarcity.

AtheistAviB wrote:

The entire Christian theology is primarily based off of their withdrawal (incorretly so might I add) of the requirements for a Messiah. There is absolutely nothing of redemption through crucifixion nor is there any mention of the removal of all the previous laws once the Messiah comes.

wavefreak wrote:

Duh. Redemption through crucifixion is never mentioned, but redemption through sacrifice is found throughout the Old Testament.

AtheistAviB wrote:

Wanna take a piece of the theology from the Jewish bible and then from it?

wavefreak wrote:

I think you misstyped something because this makes no sense.

AtheistAviB wrote:

That doesn't seem quite intellectually honest. Then again, I wasn't quite expecting much anyway.

wavefreak wrote:

At least I know what I am lying about. You, on the other hand seem to be clueless about the theology of sacrifice, redemption and the relationship of the Law to the New Testament and Christianity.

Whoa kids, settle down. Try to add information rather than chasing eachother around with semantics and P->Qs.
I've picked out a few interesting chunks from the aforementioned article:

Quote:

Many people are surprised to find that the Ten Commandments were given to Israel, and not to the rest of the world. It is just commonly assumed among many Christians that the “Big Ten” were designed for all humans and especially for Christians. But the Bible is very plain about who are the recipients of the Sinai law. The last verse of the book of Leviticus sums it up this way: “These are the commandments the Lord gave Moses on Mount Sinai for the Israelites” (Leviticus 27:34). Verse 46 of the previous chapter gives (. . .) "These are the decrees, the laws and the regulations that the Lord established on Mount Sinai between himself and the Israelites through Moses."

Further on:

Quote:

The book of Hebrews gives us even more insight into this new arrangement. Here we are told, “But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises” (Hebrews 8:6).

So what I have gathered is1. God makes a deal with the Israelites: follow these rules and you'll be given paradise - break them and suffer death and/or eternal damnation.2. Many people die and/or are eternally damned.3. It turns out that the original law was designed to show that everyone is sinful.4. God launches a new law which relies more on getting into His good graces.5. "Good graces" means coming to Him through the head of marketing, Jesus Christ. Basically God invented coupons 1900 years in advance. You follow the teachings of Jesus, you get the half off deal on heaven. The problem still remains, however, that this is a form of chronological racism. God basically makes an example of millions of people as a set up for the liquidation sale. This is a classic example of creating demand. Similarly, De Beers was founded in 1888 and began monopolizing the diamond rush in South Africa from 1869 to 1871. They now control most of the world's diamonds and essentially created the market for them via marketing and induced scarcity.

simple theist wrote:

You forgott about the sacrifices that Jews made so their sins would be forgiven. They sacrificed animals until the temple was destroyed in 70 AD.

I don't understand how that relates.

Quote:

I'll buy the explanation that God made an example to set the stage for the solution, but that still comes with the "what about all those sinners who were made an example of" package deal.

Had one been born in the pre-new covenant era, one would more likely be struck down by the law of God than those born now. That doesn't seem right at all, and paints a spooky picture of God's character.

 

But why does he need to shed blood for forgiveness?

I can sum this up pretty quick: there's a big guy out in space who will damn you if you don't give him blood as a token of repentance. The good news is he's had enough blood now, though, so you can worship him for all the blood spilt just in case you messed up.

jive turkey wrote:

inspectormustard wrote:

But why does he need to shed blood for forgiveness?

This comes from the, "If you eat (the forbidden fruit) you will surely die", statement. It's not about blood per se but about the whole sin=death thing.

inspectormustard wrote:

I can sum this up pretty quick: there's a big guy out in space who will damn you if you don't give him blood as a token of repentance. The good news is he's had enough blood now, though, so you can worship him for all the blood spilt just in case you messed up.

More misunderstanding. The theology works like this. God = source of life. If you go away from the source of life you die. Sin = moving away from the source of life. Sacrifice = substitution. First death in the bible was the animals skins God gave to Adam and Eve as covering after they disobeyed. This introduces the idea of substitutionary death. This idea gets expanded throughout the bible, from 1 sacrifice for 1 sin to 1 sacrifice for 1 family to 1 sacrifice for 1 nation to 1 sacrifice for the world.

The whole idea is to fix what got broken.

Sure, I understand the original sin idea. It still seems an aweful lot like entrapment to me, but I'll follow the line of reasoning down as far as I can. The reason why it seems so amoral to me is if sin = death and rape, theivery, swearing, etc. = sin, all transgressions are equivalent. If all transgressions are equivalent and forgiveness is found through Jesus's sacrifice (the dues are paid, may as well use em), then if you sin you might as well run the whole gamut before praying for forgiveness again. After all, you've already committed the worst possible sin by being born a relative of Adam The Disobediant.

In other words, if you step on someone's foot you should also slap them in the face and spit on their mother. Or, if it's the number of sins that matters then we should aim to do our worst at all times since it's still the same amount of sin. If someone makes you mad at work, if you have to act out you might as well blow up their car. You can always be forgiven later.