Thomas Helwys
New Member
In the interest of accuracy: Even in the OT sacrificial system, this was not true.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is Your Preaching Stained With Blood?
- Thread starter Revmitchell
- Start date
- Status
In the interest of accuracy: Even in the OT sacrificial system, this was not true.
HisWitness
New Member
maybe he was saying an atonement without the shedding of blood was not an atonement for the remission of sins ?
Exo_29:36 And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it.
Lev_4:26 And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.
Num_15:28 And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.
2Ch_29:24 And the priests killed them, and they made reconciliation with their blood upon the altar, to make an atonement for all Israel: for the king commanded that the burnt offering and the sin offering should be made for all Israel.
Neh_10:33 For the shewbread, and for the continual meat offering, and for the continual burnt offering, of the sabbaths, of the new moons, for the set feasts, and for the holy things, and for the sin offerings to make an atonement for Israel, and for all the work of the house of our God.
Rom_5:11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.
Lev_4:26 And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.
Num_15:28 And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.
2Ch_29:24 And the priests killed them, and they made reconciliation with their blood upon the altar, to make an atonement for all Israel: for the king commanded that the burnt offering and the sin offering should be made for all Israel.
Neh_10:33 For the shewbread, and for the continual meat offering, and for the continual burnt offering, of the sabbaths, of the new moons, for the set feasts, and for the holy things, and for the sin offerings to make an atonement for Israel, and for all the work of the house of our God.
Rom_5:11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
And that's not true, either. Study the OT sacrificial system presented in the OT.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
Oh, look; I can quote scripture, too:
Leviticus 5:11-12
"If, however, they cannot afford two doves or two young pigeons, they are to bring as an offering for their sin a tenth of an ephah of the finest flour for a sin offering. They must not put olive oil or incense on it, because it is a sin offering.
They are to bring it to the priest, who shall take a handful of it as a memorial portion and burn it on the altar on top of the food offerings presented to the LORD. It is a sin offering."
Leviticus 5:11-12
"If, however, they cannot afford two doves or two young pigeons, they are to bring as an offering for their sin a tenth of an ephah of the finest flour for a sin offering. They must not put olive oil or incense on it, because it is a sin offering.
They are to bring it to the priest, who shall take a handful of it as a memorial portion and burn it on the altar on top of the food offerings presented to the LORD. It is a sin offering."
preacher4truth
Active Member
Tom H. was looking for a snack and is getting a meal.
HisWitness
New Member
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
I keep forgetting that this is the BB, where precision counts (not a dig at you. Just a truism for this board).
The atonement for sin that Jesus Christ accomplished on the cross required the shedding of His blood. For some odd reason the ransom theory, prevalent during the patristic age, is gaining a niche in some evangelical circles. In this poster's opinion the ransom theory, or any other theory that negates the blood of Christ, fails the test of Scripture (Heb. 9:11-28).
hmmmm....I cannot for the life of me imagine why anyone would respond to you negatively........ever!
The idea that blood atonement for sin is not necessary is complete heresy.
convicted1
Guest
Without the shedding of blood there is no remission........If what Jesus went through was seen in it's entirety as He was literally beaten, whipped, the beard ripped off His sweet face, 99% of the world's population couldn't stand to watch it, imo. They didn't take Him straight from the garden to the cross. Neither did they take Him up Golgotha's hill, and play "patty-cake" with Him either. They mutilated Him BEFORE nailing Him to the cross. Without Him going through this, and raising again, we'd be without hope, forever lost.
Sorry for their behavior Tom, you bring up a good point... something even the author of Hebrews noted in the verse already mentioned.
God provided an exception based on the poverty of the individual... so no one was excluded. It is curious that Joseph and Mary fell into this class when they went to the Temple with Jesus early in his life.
Rob
Thomas Helwys
New Member
Look, junior, I am able to more than hold my own against anyone here. Just because I don't like confrontation doesn't mean I am incapable of handling it. So, if that's what you desire, bring it on.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
The ransom theory/Christus Victor was not prevalent just during the patristic age. It was the theory held for the first thousand years of the church. Why? Because it was what those Christians saw in scripture. Satisfaction was not "discovered" until Anselm and penal substitution until Calvin.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
Rev, I probably agree with you more often than not, but this type of response is why I don't like you and would not care for your company, here or hereafter.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
Yes, isn't it funny how those who are supposed to be literalists resort to all kinds of attacks when they are given scripture they don't like.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
For all of you who get your theology from the 16th century and think that's when Biblical doctrine came into being, it would serve you well to actually study the history and doctrine of atonement, so here are some articles to start with. Read all of them all the way through. Theories developed after the first millennium, which are all legalistic in one way or another, are all johnny-come-lately theories unknown in the earliest churches and for the first thousand years. Were it not for my study of the earliest churches and the views of atonement found there, I could not be a Christian:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral...Common_criticisms_of_the_moral_influence_view
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus_Victor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recapitulation_theory_of_atonement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitutionary_atonement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral...Common_criticisms_of_the_moral_influence_view
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus_Victor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recapitulation_theory_of_atonement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitutionary_atonement
What actually happens is when you are given clear scripture and cannot answer it you act like you have been attacked when you have not. You are not a victim here.
- Status