Coming Sunday
- Thread starter Guno צְבִי
- Start date
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win
The term “original sin” is unknown to the Jewish Scriptures, and the goyim’s teachings on this doctrine are antithetical to the core principles of the Torah and its prophets.
For the Church, however, Moses’ unwavering message creates a theological disaster. How could the authors of the New Testament reasonably insist that man’s dire condition was hopeless if the Torah unambiguously declared that man possessed an extraordinary ability to remain faithful to God? How could the Church fathers possibly contend that the mitzvoth in the Torah couldn’t save the Jewish people when the Creator proclaimed otherwise? How could missionaries conceivably maintain that the commandments of the Torah are too difficult when the Torah declares that they are “not far off,” “not too hard,” and “you may do it”?
This staggering problem did not escape the attention of Paul. Bear in mind, the author of Romans and Galatians constructed his most consequential doctrines on the premise that man is utterly depraved, and therefore incapable of saving himself through his own obedience to God. In chapter after chapter, he directs his largely gentile audiences toward the cross and away from Sinai, as he repeatedly insists that man is utterly lost without Jesus.
Yet, how could Paul harmonize this wayward theology with the Jewish Scriptures in which his teachings were not only unknown, but thoroughly condemned? Even with the nimble skills that Paul possessed, welding together the Church’s young doctrine of original sin with diametrically opposed teachings of the Jewish Scriptures would not be a simple task.
it was easy for paul to convince the goyim at that time since they knew nothing off Jewish scripture
no need for the failed man god of the christains
The Bible is clear, and it is consistent: one person cannot die for the sins of another. In other words, the sins committed by one person cannot be wiped out by the punishment given to another. In Exodus 32:30-35, Moses asks Gd to punish him for the sin committed by the people in regards to the Golden Calf. Gd tells Moses that the person who committed the sin is the one who must receive the punishment. Then, in Deuteronomy 24:16, Gd simply states this as a basic principle, ‘Every man shall be put to death for his own sin.’ This concept is repeated in the Prophets, in Ezekiel 18: ‘The soul that sinneth, it shall die… the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.’ The prophet Jeremiah looks to the day when the mistaken belief that one man’s death atones for another man’s sins shall no longer be held by anyone: in Jeremiah 31:29-30, the prophet says: ‘In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.’
The Christian understanding is that Jesus, the one they believe to be the messiah, died for the sins of all humanity. In this view, the messiah is supposed to be the blood sacrifice necessary for the forgiveness of sin; in other words, a human sacrifice. However, not only is this concept of the messiah not found in our Bible, but we are also taught quite clearly and consistently that no one can die for the sins of another, that one person’s guilt cannot be forgiven because of another person’s death. In Exodus 32:30-35, Moses tries to offer himself as an atonement for the sins of the People, by being written ‘out of Thy book which Thou has written.’ To be written out of Gd’s book means to be written out of the Book of Life; therefore Moses is asking to die for the sins of the People. Gd’s response is that it does not work that way, each man dies for his own sin:
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the father. Every man shall be put to death for his own sin. [Deuteronomy 24:16]
For the Church, however, Moses’ unwavering message creates a theological disaster. How could the authors of the New Testament reasonably insist that man’s dire condition was hopeless if the Torah unambiguously declared that man possessed an extraordinary ability to remain faithful to God? How could the Church fathers possibly contend that the mitzvoth in the Torah couldn’t save the Jewish people when the Creator proclaimed otherwise? How could missionaries conceivably maintain that the commandments of the Torah are too difficult when the Torah declares that they are “not far off,” “not too hard,” and “you may do it”?
This staggering problem did not escape the attention of Paul. Bear in mind, the author of Romans and Galatians constructed his most consequential doctrines on the premise that man is utterly depraved, and therefore incapable of saving himself through his own obedience to God. In chapter after chapter, he directs his largely gentile audiences toward the cross and away from Sinai, as he repeatedly insists that man is utterly lost without Jesus.
Yet, how could Paul harmonize this wayward theology with the Jewish Scriptures in which his teachings were not only unknown, but thoroughly condemned? Even with the nimble skills that Paul possessed, welding together the Church’s young doctrine of original sin with diametrically opposed teachings of the Jewish Scriptures would not be a simple task.
it was easy for paul to convince the goyim at that time since they knew nothing off Jewish scripture
no need for the failed man god of the christains
The Bible is clear, and it is consistent: one person cannot die for the sins of another. In other words, the sins committed by one person cannot be wiped out by the punishment given to another. In Exodus 32:30-35, Moses asks Gd to punish him for the sin committed by the people in regards to the Golden Calf. Gd tells Moses that the person who committed the sin is the one who must receive the punishment. Then, in Deuteronomy 24:16, Gd simply states this as a basic principle, ‘Every man shall be put to death for his own sin.’ This concept is repeated in the Prophets, in Ezekiel 18: ‘The soul that sinneth, it shall die… the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.’ The prophet Jeremiah looks to the day when the mistaken belief that one man’s death atones for another man’s sins shall no longer be held by anyone: in Jeremiah 31:29-30, the prophet says: ‘In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.’
The Christian understanding is that Jesus, the one they believe to be the messiah, died for the sins of all humanity. In this view, the messiah is supposed to be the blood sacrifice necessary for the forgiveness of sin; in other words, a human sacrifice. However, not only is this concept of the messiah not found in our Bible, but we are also taught quite clearly and consistently that no one can die for the sins of another, that one person’s guilt cannot be forgiven because of another person’s death. In Exodus 32:30-35, Moses tries to offer himself as an atonement for the sins of the People, by being written ‘out of Thy book which Thou has written.’ To be written out of Gd’s book means to be written out of the Book of Life; therefore Moses is asking to die for the sins of the People. Gd’s response is that it does not work that way, each man dies for his own sin:
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the father. Every man shall be put to death for his own sin. [Deuteronomy 24:16]