CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: All things Christianity

[JettaKnight]

something something rock something something

Balderdash!

 

[Hoosierdood]

Balderdash!

I've played that before. Fun game.

 

[JettaKnight]

I was curious why y'all cared so much what a man in Rome wearing a pointy hat, who sometimes wears a triple crown, said or did.

Here's why.

 

[foszoe]

Gut Reaction Question, Elaborate if you wish with a scriptural defense!

Was a Blood Sacrifice required to satisfy the Wrath of God in order to obtain forgiveness of sins?

 

[foszoe]

 

[JettaKnight]

Gut Reaction Question, Elaborate if you wish with a scriptural defense!

Was a Blood Sacrifice required to satisfy the Wrath of God in order to obtain forgiveness of sins?

Gut answer - yes and no.

Yes, because everything was leading up to this, and everything afterwards points back to it. Can you really say the wages of sin are death is there's no death? A blood offering was always required for the remission of sin.


No, because I suppose everything could have been different starting with Adam and Eve.

 

[Hoosierdood]

Gut Reaction Question, Elaborate if you wish with a scriptural defense!

Was a Blood Sacrifice required to satisfy the Wrath of God in order to obtain forgiveness of sins?

Yes. I could give the quick "Sunday School" answer and point you to Hebrews 9:22, but some have argued against that verse supporting Jesus' blood being required. That being said, Hebrews has a lot to do with comparing Jesus to the Law. Hebrews speaks at length how Jesus was better than the Law, prophets, angels, etc. in every way. Which is why his sacrifice only had to be done once, rather than every year.

The secondary reason, and one that I don't have time to gather all the references for, is the comparison to the OT. Even before the Mosaic Law, God set the example by sacrificing a lamb for Adam and Eve. With the Mosaic Law, they were to sacrifice yearly for the forgiveness of sins. Jesus was the perfect Lamb of God without blemish that was sacrificed once and for all.

 

[foszoe]

To the responses so far...and perhaps I should have bolded it as it was key to the question..."...required to satisfy the Wrath of God..." I didn't see that addressed.

I heard a priest say that no blood sacrifice in scripture was linked to the Wrath of God that he could find, the only sacrifice linked directly to the Wrath of God was an offering of incense.

an excerpt from a transcript...

Second, in those places where Holy Scripture does speak of propitiating the anger of God, this propitiation is never linked to blood sacrifice. When biblical men are said to soften the divine wrath, it is done with prayer, as in the case of Moses on Mount Sinai, or by the offering of incense, which symbolizes prayer. Because blood sacrifice and the wrath of God are two things the Bible never joins together, I submit that authentic Christian theology should also endeavor to keep them apart.
Moreover, when the Apostle Paul does write of God's anger, it is never in terms of appeasement but of deliverance. At the final judgment, when that divine anger, far from being placated, will consume the realm and servants of sin, Christ will deliver us from it, recognizing us as His faithful servants (1 Thessalonians 1:10; Romans 5:9). There will be not the slightest hint of appeasement at that point.

 

[Hoosierdood]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Bonus:

 

[JettaKnight]

[h=1]Calvinist Utterly Paralyzed By Number Of Choices On Coca-Cola Freestyle Machine[/h]

 

[breakingcontact]

Calvinist Utterly Paralyzed By Number Of Choices On Coca-Cola Freestyle Machine

I chose to find this funny.

Thank God I'm not in charge of choosing my salvation or not.

 

[breakingcontact]

Baptist churches were predominantly Calvinist in the 1600s, 1700s and half of the 1800s.

What changed?

Thankfully a good many in the church are rediscovering their roots.

 

[breakingcontact]

How seriously does your church take church membership and church discipline?

What does that look like in practice?

 

[T.Lex]

Well, mine is pretty serious.

People can worship without joining. But, if joining, need to have baptism certificates with the "right" information on it.

In terms of discipline... well... there's a process.

 

[JettaKnight]

Ditto. We're pretty serious, too.

My good friend is a regular, but not a member because of a few doctrinal disagreements. That's OK.

We also have a guideline for church discipline. It's only gone "all the way" to revoking membership once or twice. That was a sad time for everyone.

 

[T.Lex]

Frankly, in our church, people tend to become "former" members WAY before any discipline is meted out.

 

[breakingcontact]

Planning to formally join the church I've been attending soon and it got me to thinking on both membership and discipline.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

In terms of discipline... well... there's a process.

(this is actually the safest self-flagellation gif I could find... without nudity or blood. There was one better, but turns out it was a woman and just a little boob peeked out. First result, too.)

 

[foszoe]

Unlike many Protestant churches, they can't just go to another Catholic Parish and have their fate decided by the local congregation either.

Frankly, in our church, people tend to become "former" members WAY before any discipline is meted out.