2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 Are these people going to be saved?

[Seth]

Your teaching a doctrine from a group of writings called the NT.
If the temple and its implements were patterned after those in heaven (which is what the NT says), then why go to a place that has human sacrifice?  

The shadows are not the image of the very thing. That is why. The sacrifices are not simply a shadow of Christ killed on the cross. They are the shadow of a life lived in sacrifice by walking according to the Spirit.

Jesus Christ is the priest setting the animal (me) on the alter and killing it. All that is a shadow of a life changed from old death in sin, to newness of life.

[Seth]

Thats alright...I have argued with Orthodox Jews on this too.
Many think sacrifices are not abstract symbols but to be taken literally...some of you are sort of the same "Roman letter of the law" folks.

The book of Romans is awesome.  :cloud9: :thumbsup:

[wilmont]

Again, you take that out of context.
None is good as Gd, none is righteous as Gd, does not mean none is good or does good things, or none is righteous.

That's the point, to be conformed to the righteousness of God.

People do good things. That is why it is called having ones "own RIGHTEOUSNESS." But our own righteousness (good deeds), which are by the law, are as dirty rags.

I don't think Gd views all people good works as dirty rags (I think you really got to understand the context), in fact there is actually Holy Word thats says this is not so.
Even a tiny fruit can save a starving person (doesn't have to be a big fruit).

[Beloved Servant]

MATTHEW'S  ACCOUNT:
Chapter 17
1 And after six days Jesus is taking aside Peter and James and John, his brother, and is bringing them up into a high mountain, privately,
2 and was transformed in front of them. And His face shines as the sun, yet His garments became white as the light.

[wilmont]

Your teaching a doctrine from a group of writings called the NT.
If the temple and its implements were patterned after those in heaven (which is what the NT says), then why go to a place that has human sacrifice?  

The shadows are not the image of the very thing. That is why. The sacrifices are not simply a shadow of Christ killed on the cross. They are the shadow of a life lived in sacrifice by walking according to the Spirit.

Jesus Christ is the priest setting the animal (me) on the alter and killing it. All that is a shadow of a life changed from old death in sin, to newness of life.

They are the shadow of a life lived in sacrifice by walking according to the Spirit.


I agree with some, except I am not sure on your concept of spirit.

What does the NT commentary actually say?

A pattern, which is a detailed description based in heaven.  Are there sacrifices in heaven?  

So maybe something is not quite right?

What happened to setting yourself on the altar of Christ (I have heard that one too)?

[wilmont]

Also,
Animals did not sacrifice themselves...they had/have no choice (yet).
However I can be chosen by Gd (as his servant) to self sacrifice for the unsaved (whether Christians or Jews).

[wilmont]

I got to go for now (got to watch house hunters with the wife).
I suppose I must sacrifice.

[Seth]

They are the shadow of a life lived in sacrifice by walking according to the Spirit.


I agree with some, except I am not sure on your concept of spirit.

What does the NT commentary actually say?

A pattern, which is a detailed description based in heaven.  Are there sacrifices in heaven?  

So maybe something is not quite right?

What happened to setting yourself on the altar of Christ (I have heard that one too)?

No sacrifices in heaven, because the shadows are a type of Christ who is in heaven. He is the only sacrifice that counts. That is what it means to say that the tabernacle is pattered after heavenly things. All those heavenly things are found in Christ.

When Jesus died what happened to the veil in the temple? It ripped in two. It is revealed in the NT writings that the veil was Christ's flesh. So, it was by Christ sacrificing himself (breaking his body like bread), that we are able to enter into the most holy place (the then resurrected Spirit). That is how the tabernacle is patterned after heavenly things.

That is how we pass through the veil into the holiest place, which is no longer closed off to people who aren't of the Levitical bloodline. The veil is open to all who believe and therefore proceed through the newly torn veil. We pass through because when Christ's flesh was torn in two, leading to the resurrected Spirit, our own flesh likewise is joined to Christ's death, so that anyone who passes through the threshold of the holiest place, will likewise see their flesh torn asunder.

[Seth]

Also,
Animals did not sacrifice themselves...they had/have no choice (yet).
However I can be chosen by Gd (as his servant) to self sacrifice for the unsaved (whether Christians or Jews).

Exactly, the animals did not sacrifice themselves. That is why love was not yet revealed in the shadow. Love is when a man lays down his life for his enemies.

[wilmont]

Also,
Animals did not sacrifice themselves...they had/have no choice (yet).
However I can be chosen by Gd (as his servant) to self sacrifice for the unsaved (whether Christians or Jews).

Exactly, the animals did not sacrifice themselves. That is why love was not yet revealed in the shadow. Love is when a man lays down his life for his enemies.

No, that does not define love ( Jesus did not teach lay life down for enemies, he taught different in Matt. 5 commentary). Gd would rather have you live for him; laying down life FOR A FRIEND, does not mean to kill oneself, or be killed (although it might happen).
To serve, lay aside, bend down for etc.

In Deut. 6:5;
"And you shall love God your lord with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might."

I would understand, that all my desires must be subordinate to love of Gd with all my heart.  To love with all your soul, means to love more than love itself regardless of the sacrifice it might take (Jesus had teachings on this)...which could be literally my own.  All my might means, my capabilities, every last penny if necessary.
It is like a marriage between a husband and wife (Gd and I), and Holy Union.  Dying and living for love.

Of course love was revealed to some, before Jesus came.
It was never about literally sacrificing animals and giving Gd blood so he could be appeased of His wrath (this came from the nations by which Israel was to be weaned away from).

But as Moses said in Ex. 34:7;

keeping mercy unto the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and unto the fourth generation.'

We pass on our guilt (transfer it of sorts) to our children through our WORD and DEED.
We teach our children that they are a bad creation that only does good once in awhile, instead of teaching them that they are a good creation which sins once in awhile.
There were always those who understood what the sacrifices were about....SELF SACRIFICE, they were this sacrifice, killing off the flesh to be as if re- born in original state,  as Ohr / light.

[wilmont]

I was raised from a very early age to believe that I was a bad creation who very rarely did good.
I always hurt Gd.

Do you really think you will make your children more obedient or better "repenters" because they think they are a bad creation?

Stop transfering the guilt.

[wilmont]

There is lot in the Qumran texts, concerning how they viewed guilt, righteousness, love etc.
They were called "sons or elect of righteousness", they had a "teacher of righteousness" which would deliver them.

The nations had a different view in the later Roman Christian Jesus doctrine, since this was all new to them (for the most part, except for those previously known as Gd fearers).  And he was to become the end to their previous forms of deity worship, and sacrifices (he became their understanding of the True Gd).

[Seth]

Also,
Animals did not sacrifice themselves...they had/have no choice (yet).
However I can be chosen by Gd (as his servant) to self sacrifice for the unsaved (whether Christians or Jews).

Exactly, the animals did not sacrifice themselves. That is why love was not yet revealed in the shadow. Love is when a man lays down his life for his enemies.

No, that does not define love ( Jesus did not teach lay life down for enemies, he taught different in Matt. 5 commentary). Gd would rather have you live for him; laying down life FOR A FRIEND, does not mean to kill oneself, or be killed (although it might happen).

According to the word of God it does.

Romans 5
6For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
7For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
8But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

You see, while Jesus' enemies considered him their enemy, Jesus died for them, something a friend does.

[wilmont]

Seth,
Greetings.
You might think that, but I am going by what NT says.
It is not always as easy when it comes to these things.

To people who don't believe in Gd.....none of this makes a bit of difference to them.
At the time of Jesus the main issue of concern was between competing sects who believed in an afterlife.
One group believed (after captivity in baby land) that giving of alms, and Torah study / Works ensured your placement in the kingdom of Gd.  Another sect believed that this was not the case, because they had a different interpretation of Torah, its purpose.
Jesus died for the ungodly, because these were those who were still held captive to pagan ritual, sacrifices and alot of that stuff spoken of by Paul.  Also being born Jewish did not mean you would not be ungodly, but following Torah (even if one did believe in good works to get to the kingdom), certainly did not make a person ungodly.

Also, check your ungodly.



Jesus did say (I am sure it is in there), that he would become a ransom for many.  Not all ransoms are biblically the same.
Some people were already beyond sacrifice...they were/are not part of the many, because they already BELIEVED in a Jesus Gospel.

It is also possible that Jesus saw himself as a symbol of Israel and would take the punishment of captivity from the gentiles (their guilt transfer upon Israel) upon himself and thus save them from this (prophecy that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation).

[Seth]

Seth,
Greetings.
You might think that, but I am going by what NT says.
It is not always as easy when it comes to these things.

Yes, and the NT says that Jesus died for all and that he died for the ungodly. It also says that everyone has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. That is who Jesus died for: everyone. As you well know, none are good but God comparatively. Well that is the whole point. God is SO Good that even our righteousness is dirty rags in comparison.

Jesus did say (I am sure it is in there), that he would become a ransom for many.  Not all ransoms are biblically the same.

Jesus did say that he would be a ransom for many. However it would be a fallacy to say that "all" cannot also qualify as "many."

[wilmont]

Seth,
Greetings.
You might think that, but I am going by what NT says.
It is not always as easy when it comes to these things.

Yes, and the NT says that Jesus died for all and that he died for the ungodly. It also says that everyone has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. That is who Jesus died for: everyone. As you well know, none are good but God comparatively. Well that is the whole point. God is SO Good that even our righteousness is dirty rags in comparison.

Jesus did say (I am sure it is in there), that he would become a ransom for many.  Not all ransoms are biblically the same.

Jesus did say that he would be a ransom for many. However it would be a fallacy to say that "all" cannot also qualify as "many."

I certainly don't believe that the writers of the NT were inept...but you keep trying to convince me.

If you define ungodly by the standard Christian definition....where does Holy Word say a man can die for another mans sin?

[Seth]

Well, think about it: The Holy Word says a man DID die for everyone's sin. So if Jesus did die for everyone's sin, then it makes perfect sense that he CAN, or COULD. If he couldn't, he wouldn't have.

[wilmont]

I don't believ we are quite yet to this point as my brother so say;

" In those days they shall no longer say, "The fathers ate unripe grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge,"
but through his own fault only shall anyone die: the teeth of him who eats the unripe grapes shall be set on edge.

"But suppose this son has a son who sees all the sins his father commits, and though he sees them, he does not do such things:
"He does not eat at the mountain shrines
      or look to the idols of the house of Israel.
      He does not defile his neighbor's wife.

 He does not oppress anyone
      or require a pledge for a loan.
      He does not commit robbery
      but gives his food to the hungry
      and provides clothing for the naked.

He withholds his hand from sin
      and takes no usury or excessive interest.
      He keeps my laws and follows my decrees.
     He will not die for his father's sin; he will surely live.

But his father will die for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people


Everyone still DIES.

[Seth]

Everyone still DIES.

Do you think I believe in substitutionary atonement?

[wilmont]

Well, think about it: The Holy Word says a man DID die for everyone's sin. So if Jesus did die for everyone's sin, then it makes perfect sense that he CAN, or COULD. If he couldn't, he wouldn't have.

Where does Tanach say that man sacrifice is a substitute for animals sacrifice?
You are not trying to portray or teach that it is alright to violate the righteous holy good law, for an unholy concept of sacrificing are you?

[wilmont]

Do you think I believe in substitutionary atonement?

Boy...NT writers must have been really illiterate and certainly not Jewish if they tried to teach sacrifice that way; although there is a Jewish concept of dying in the place of another; see Book of Samuel and David as examples.

But certainly never in a atonement sacrifice or offering per Torah.

[Seth]

Well, think about it: The Holy Word says a man DID die for everyone's sin. So if Jesus did die for everyone's sin, then it makes perfect sense that he CAN, or COULD. If he couldn't, he wouldn't have.

Where does Tanach say that man sacrifice is a substitute for animals sacrifice?
You are not trying to portray or teach that it is alright to violate the righteous holy good law, for an unholy concept of sacrificing are you?

No, I am saying that the Holy Law was a shadow of Christ who came to fulfill it. That includes the sacrifices.

[Seth]

Do you think I believe in substitutionary atonement?

Boy...NT writers must have been really illiterate and certainly not Jewish if they tried to teach sacrifice that way; although there is a Jewish concept of dying in the place of another; see Book of Samuel and David as examples.

But certainly never in a atonement sacrifice or offering per Torah.

You sidestepped my question.

[wilmont]

I am not sidestepping anything.  Your argumentation is off.
Similar to how Christians will say that Jesus can change the law, because he is Gd....even though Holy Word says, and Jesus said he was/is not.


Think critically about it?
The way of your argumentation is actually refuting Jesus as a subsitute for your sin.  Because he has not worked properly, because your still going to die (we all do).  No different then animal sacrifices.

[Seth]

I am not sidestepping anything.  Your argumentation is off.
Similar to how Christians will say that Jesus can change the law, because he is Gd....even though Holy Word says, and Jesus said he was/is not.


Think critically about it?
The way of your argumentation is actually refuting Jesus as a subsitute for your sin.  Because he has not worked properly, because your still going to die (we all do).  No different then animal sacrifices.

Do you think I believe in substitutionary atonement?