(C&P)
In 587 B.C. animal sacrifices were ended by the destruction of the magnificent Temple built by King Solomon. It was razed to the ground by the Babylonian army. The people had been repeatedly warned that this would happen.

The great Prophets of Israel had spoken out against the sacrificial cult, but they had been ignored. Amos, Isaiah, Hosea, and Jeremiah warned of dire consequences the people would bring upon themselves unless they repented of their sins. God wanted mercy, compassion and social justice, not the slaughter of men and beasts. "When you offer me holocausts, I reject your oblations and refuse to look at your sacrifices of fattened cattle...but let justice flow like water and integrity like an unfailing stream."(Amos 5:21,22,24 JB)

But the "official" prophets said things were just fine--that God was well pleased with His people and with sacrificial worship. They were proved wrong when Jerusalem fell and the survivors were marched off to live in what came to be called the Babylonian Exile.

After fifty years, the Jewish people were allowed to return to their homeland. And by 516 B.C. they had reconstructed the sacrificial altar. It was dedicated by a massive slaughter of animals.

The altar was set up on its old site...and on it they offered holocaust to Yahweh, holocaust morning and evening...in addition to the perpetual holocaust...New Moon feasts and all the solemnities sacred to Yahweh. (Ezra 3:3-5)

This resumption of sacrifices, as reported in the Bible, is almost a word-for-word refutation of the Prophet Isaiah's oracle against such worship. "What are your endless sacrifices to me, says Yahweh. I am sick of holocausts of rams...the blood of bulls and goats revolts me...the smoke of them fills me with disgust...Your New Moons and your pilgrimages I hate with all my soul...your hands are covered with blood, wash, make yourselves clean." (Isaiah 1:11, 13-16 JB)

Once the cult of animal sacrifice was restored, there is no further biblical denouncement of it until the ministry of Jesus. And the message he proclaimed, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice" (Matt. 9:13) was not new; he was repeating the message Hosea had given, centuries earlier (Hosea 6:6). Neither was his stand against the violence human beings inflicted on each other, as well as on the animals. The prophet Micah had denounced the abuse of both human and animal beings.

"Hear this, you leaders of the house of Jacob, you rulers of the house of Israel, who despise justice and distort all that is right; who build Zion with bloodshed and Jerusalem with wickedness....yet they lean upon the Lord and say, is not the Lord with us? No disaster will come upon us. Therefore, because of you, Zion will be plowed like a field, Jerusalem will become a heap of rubble, the temple hill a mound overgrown with thickets." Micah 3:9-12.

Like Micah, Jesus prophesied against violence: "All who draw the sword will die by the sword." (Matthew 26:56) And like the prophet, he also foretold the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. "Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to the buildings. Do you see all these, he asked? I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down." (Matthew 24:1,2)

Jesus foretold this event the day after he had disrupted the sale of animals for slaughter at the Jerusalem Temple.(Mark 11:15-18) Obviously, the people of his own time knew what he was trying to do, because the next day Christ commended one of the teachers of the Law for his understanding. This scribe said that what God wanted was the love of one's neighbor and of Himself--not the burning bodies of slain animals. And "when Jesus saw that he had spoken wisely, he said to him 'You are not far from the kingdom of God.'" (Mark 12:32-34)

But just as it was in the time of the great prophets, so it was in the time of Jesus: animal sacrifices continued until the Temple was destroyed. And this time, the Jewish exile lasted two thousand years.


Reference


Isaiah 1:11-18:

"11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto Me? saith the L-rd; I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats.

12 When ye come to appear before Me, who hath required this at your hand, to trample My courts?

13 Bring no more vain oblations; it is an offering of abomination unto Me; new moon and sabbath, the holding of convocations--I cannot endure iniquity along with the solemn assembly.

14 Your new moons and your appointed seasons My soul hateth; they are a burden unto Me; I am weary to bear them.

15 And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide Mine eyes from you; yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood.

16 Wash you, make you clean, put away the evil of your doings from before Mine eyes, cease to do evil;

17 Learn to do well; seek justice, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the L-rd; though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. "

Similarly, we see that mercy and truth can bring atonement, as in Proverbs 16:6:

"6 By mercy and truth iniquity is atoned; and by the fear of the L-rd men depart from evil."

Further, we can read in Micah 6: 7-8 that sin can be forgiven through justice, mercy and piety, as it states:

"7 Will the L-rd be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?'

8 It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, and what the L-rd doth require of thee: only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy G-d."

Interestingly, the quotes from Micah and Isaiah demonstrate that sacrifice is not even the best method to reach G-d. This idea is highlighted in Hoshea 6:6, which says:

"6 For I desire mercy, and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of G-d rather than burnt-offerings.

Proverbs 21:3 echoes Hoshea, saying:

"3 To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the L-rd than sacrifice."

The prophet Hoshea even specifically directs the Jewish people to use prayer instead of sacrifice as a means for atonement, stating in Hoshea 14:2-3:

"2 Return, O Israel, unto the L-rd thy G-d; for thou hast stumbled in thine iniquity.

3 Take with you words, and return unto the L-rd; say unto Him: 'Forgive all iniquity, and accept that which is good; so will we render for bullocks the offering of our lips."

Referencing the source for such a post BA is necessary to avoid the impression of plagiarism otherwise.



Link to: (sic) "Centuries earlier, in 587 B.C. animal sacrifices were ended by the destruction of the magnificent Temple built by King Solomon. It was razed to the ground by the Babylonian army. The people had been repeatedly warned that this would happen.

The great Prophets of Israel had spoken out against the sacrificial cult, but they had been ignored. Amos, Isaiah, Hosea, and Jeremiah warned of dire consequences the people would bring upon themselves unless they repented of their sins. God wanted mercy, compassion and social justice, not the slaughter of men and beasts. "When you offer me holocausts, I reject your oblations and refuse to look at your sacrifices of fattened cattle...but let justice flow like water and integrity like an unfailing stream."(Amos 5:21,22,24 JB)"

A man I knew had his lawyers check that out. here in the USA. Bloggers who do not operate the site can post without links or identifying sources and it not be plagerism, much like jokes sent through the email are often posted on sites. Site operators do have to do this though.
I forgot to put my (C&P) down which I usually do to note it is copied work if I do not include the authors name, though. Ty.

Do not worry about plagerism. I will be ok. Unless I receive some sort of financial compensation from business or government there is no crime of plagerism.
Sort of like taping a song over the radio and playing it while others listen.
I would have to make copies and sell them to commit a crime.

(C&P) means this is copied and pasted, so by copying and pasting a line in a search engine the source can be found.

Why not?
As I pointed out in my post there are more web sites if you look for them
Wanting to believe the Bible is without error is.......

Indeed, now that you have edited that post since my reply, so as to add the C&P you speak of you are in keeping with what you claimed to know before. Thanks for that.


~~~~~~~

All and all, the fact inherent in this discussion is that every religion is an institution of faith. Which, as stated repeatedly, precludes it's ever being construed as fact. Consequently what is a historic documentary of spiritual and religious practices that pre-date the advent of Christianity, exists. And qualified, credible comparative religious scholars are in accord with that, so it is not a matter of evil conspiracies attempting to deny the Christ. Rather, it is evidence rendered on a viable historic time line. (Gregorian Calendrical amendments in history, not withstanding. )

I would very much enjoy someone attending Uni. and the study of comparative religion to engage this discussion. It would be fascinating to read what someone in enmeshed in such a curriculum should have to say. And how that would be received, if they did not reveal their student status beforehand.
As is is said, none are so blind that will not see. In matters of faith, if one is to love god with their whole heart they are to be open to the intellect god gave them to consider it as selfish to imagine other histories of other gods is blasphemy when the Bible alludes to many god's in concert with creation, in the name of gods creating mankind.

Meanwhile, I thought another site link might provide textual comparisons, with references/Bibliography.

I thought I would add that in since I have not seen anyone else using it except me on my posts, and it is a lot easier and faster. It worked out well on that other site.

I think culture is ignored quite often also. Just as religions shape cultures over time, cultures do the same to religions. It is very much a two way street.

tags, when quoting your post below, I edited it to keep it brief. Hope you don't mind.



Cool, we're getting closer to answering my question. Now for the second half of it:

If Jesus knew that he would be crucified, as you so clearly demonstrated that he did, why didn't he mention that his sacrifice was to atone for the sins of mankind and that the path to salvation involved believing in him as the only son of God and accepting his sacrifice for our sins?

Is there anywhere in the Bible where Jesus actually said something along those lines? Or was it just sort of implied as Bluefinger suggests?

Bella-Angelique, I don't understand why you posted that explanation of God's views on animal sacrifice. Is it in reference to a previous post? Please explain.

Certainly there is enough implicit pointers to the fact that it is Christs death that atones for sin and that the way of salvation is by faith in him alone,-or by looking to him alone to be saved. The serpent that Moses lifted up in the wilderness is a shadow of the salvation that Jesus offers. Jesus alludes to this explicitly in the Gospels, (see below). So too is the passover story in exodus, Jesus is the lamb of god,- the only thing that can save the household from the angel of death is to 'apply' the blood to the door post,- and the only thing that can save the sinner is to apply the blood of Christ by faith to his own heart! Also as above, the last supper speaks of appropriation, so one must appropriate Christs blood to make it any use for himself. So therefore it is no good knowing that Christ died for the sins of the world, rather one must understand that he died for the individual who accepts him,- whosoever that may be.

The 'I am' sayings are very good at illustrating that Jesus death is the only way to be saved. Jesus said;
'I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father except through me'.

Here is a cut from this site; http://answering-islam.org.uk/Who/i_am.html
It is extensive sorry.

"I AM the Bread of Life"
The first of the notable "I AM" sayings, in the book of John, is "I AM the bread of life" (6:35). This was uttered in the discourse which followed the feeding of the multitude. During the discourse, Jesus tells the crowd, "Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you" (6:27). As He seeks to elicit their faith in Himself, He is met with a challenge to "demonstrate His credentials." (3) "What sign do you do that we may see and believe?", they ask. To this they add, "Our forefathers ate manna in the desert, as it is written: `He gave them bread to eat`" (v.31). They were obviously implying that Moses gave them the manna, for Jesus goes on to correct their misunderstanding. He states, "I tell you the truth, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but it was my Father" (v.32). To that He adds, "My father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven" (v.33). By this, Jesus was not only implying that God gave "bread from heaven" in the past and continues to do so in the immediate present, but was also implicitly stating that He Himself is "the bread of God come down from heaven" (v.33). "In apparent expression of some stirring of spiritual desire they ask for this bread from heaven, though how earth- bound their understanding remains will emerge as the conversation continues." (4)

Now, it is in response to their request that Jesus makes the astounding claim, "I AM the bread of life, he who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty" (v.35). This saying actually enshrines the essence of Jesus' message. He is the answer to the needs of the human heart. "The bread of life implies the fundamental, elemental role Jesus claims to fulfil in relation to the yearning human spirit. For Jesus' bread was `the staff of life`, the primary source of nourishment. But since bread is a basic food universally, there is also the implicit claim that he fulfils this role for everyone. He is (the Saviour of the world)" (5), and gives life to the world (v.33). Morris, interestingly, points out that the definite article, before the word bread, indicates the fact that Jesus, and Jesus alone, is the one who is the bread of life. (6) While Milne states that, "the bread of life also points to the satisfying nature of Jesus." (7) This is clearly seen in the corollary, "never go hungry, and never be thirsty." All other bread, like manna in the wilderness, leave a sense of dissatisfaction. The inner ache is not assuaged: we hunger again. By contrast Jesus, once tasted, obviates the need for further satisfaction. In conclusion, we contend that in the claim, "I AM the bread of life," Jesus is making His heavenly origins known, and the fact that He alone supplies the spiritual need of His hearers.


"I AM the Light of the World"
This is the second "I AM" statement that is followed by a predicate. John has previously informed us, in the Prologue, that the Incarnate Word was "the life," and "the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it" (vv.4- 5). He once again picks up the light metaphor, and elaborates what he has previously said. John states that Jesus made the claim, about being "the light of the world," and other similar statements, on various occasions. For example, 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46. Although John does not actually identify exactly when Jesus maid the claim in 8:12, he does tell us where He made it. He gives the Feast of Tabernacles, and the possibly the temple courts, as the backdrop to this eventful drama (7:14).

During the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, two major religious, and highly symbolic, ceremonies took place. The first was the out- pouring of water on the west side of the alter, by the Levitical priests, as the choir sang the Great Hallel (Ps. 113-18). (8) The second was the lighting of several large candels in the temple precint. John indicates that Jesus took the opportunity of using these two symbols to illustrate His teachings (7:37-38; 8:12). The light metaphor is steeped in Old Testament allusion. The glory of the very presence of God in the cloud led the people to the promised land (Ex. 13:21-22), and protected them from their enemies (Ex. 14:19-25). The Israelites were trained to sing, "the LORD is my light and my salvation" (Ps. 27:1). The Word of God, the law of God, is a light to guide the path of those who cherished instruction (Ps. 119:105; Pr. 6:23); God's light is shed abroad in revelation (Ezk. 1:4,13,26-28), and salvation (Hab. 3:3-4). "Light is Yahweh in action" (Ps. 44:3). Isa tells us that the Servant of the LORD was appointed as a light to the Gentiles, that He might bring salvation to the ends of the earth (Isa. 49:6). The coming eschatological age would be a time when the LORD Himself would be the light of His people (Isa. 60:19-22; cf Rev. 21:23-24). Perhaps Zech 14:5b-7 is especially significant, with its promise of continual light on the last day, followed by the promise of living water flowing from Jerusalem-this passage probably forming part of the litergical reading of the Feast.

So, with these verses in mind and "in the context of such powerful ritual, Jesus' declaration must have come with stunning force." (9) What is also stunning is the note of universality about the claim. He is not simply the light of the Jews, but "the light of the World." This reference to light is not just physical or moral light. As Morris correctly points out, that when Jesus declared, "If anyone walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him" (11:9-10), that the reference to the light not being in him, shows that we have moved from physical illumination to spiritual truth. He then comments, "Jesus is telling his hearers that those who reject him, who do not take him into their lives are in grave danger." (10) By way of summary, we contend that in each of the "I AM the light of the world" passages, the main thought is that "Jesus is the only light and that people must respond to the coming of the light by giving him a welcome and believing in him. Apart from that they are lost eternally. That Jesus is the light of the whole world and that people's eternal destiny depend on their reaction to him tell us something very important about him." (10)


"I AM the Door"
The next "I AM" saying of Jesus is found in the context of a disputive discourse with the Pharisees. We see in chapter 9 Jesus healing the blind man, who is subsequently excommunicated for defending Jesus and who eventually believes in Him (vv.34-38). After this miraculous sign, and the subsequent ill treatment of the former blind man by the Pharisees, Jesus contrasts Himself with the religious leaders of His day, whom He terms as "thieves and robbers." This contrast is dressed in the form of a "figure of speech" (v.6), which consists of some very striking metaphors. For example, "sheep pen" (10:1), "shepherd" (v.2), "watchmen" (v.3) and "door", or, "gate" (v.3). Despite the vividness of the metaphors, the Pharisees did not grasp Jesus' point (v.6). Therefore, Jesus, seeking to explain His message and expand its meaning , not only elucidates, but also amplifies and inter-relates the metaphors. For example, He now claims, "I AM the door" (by which the sheep of the sheep pen enter) (v.7). Previously, He spoke of Himself as "the shepherd" (v.2), which HE will do again with a further modification (v.10).

What does Jesus mean when He says "I AM the door."? In order to answer this, we may find it helpful to remind ourselves that a sheep pen normally has one doorway, and that the shepherds of the Near East often slept in the doorway, acting as the door itself. Its is plain to see then, in order for the sheep to enter the pen they would obviously have to enter through the doorway, and metaphorically speaking through the shepherd. Thus in answer to our question, we see that Jesus is saying He Himself, and no other, is the means by which the sheep may enter into the promised fulness of life (vv.9-10). For as Morris points out, "Jesus says He is "the door", not "a door." There is something exclusive about "the" door. He is saying that the way into life goes through him, and him alone. He is the door." (11) This is further emphasized when Jesus says, "The thief only comes to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life; and have it to the full." "This is a proverbial way of insisting that there is only one means of receiving eternal life, only one source of knowledge of God, only one fount of spiritual nourishment, only one basis for spiritual security-Jesus alone". (12) Jesus also said, "If anyone enters through me, he will be saved, and go in and go out, and find pasture" (v.9). Although He does not explain what He means exactly by "saved", we can take it as meaning having "eternal life." For we find the two concepts of being "saved" and having "eternal life" linked in Jhn 3:16-17. Therefore, expositional consistency demands that we understand a similar linkage here.

Thus in conclusion, as Morris has so astutely observed, "once again we encounter the thought of an exclusive salvation, exclusive in the sense that it can be entered only through the door, Jesus Christ. If there is one door for all the race, then once more we are reminded of something very important about Jesus. Like the other I AM sayings, this one leads us to think of deity." (13)


"I AM the Good Shepherd"
The next I AM saying of Jesus is closely related to the one previously discussed, in the sense that it is a metaphor that has been used in the same "figure of speech", in which we find "I AM the door." In chapter 10 verve 1, Jesus speaks of "the shepherd." He now adds an adjective to the word shepherd, and makes the claim "I AM the good shepherd" (10). Here again Jesus is contrasting Himself with the religious leaders, whom He is speaking too, who are the not-so-good-sheperds, or retaining the metaphor in the passage, "the hired hand" (vv.12-13). That He is referring to the Pharisees, as the "hired hand", is evident in verse 13. For there He speaks of the hired hand as "not caring for the sheep." This is an obvious referal to their harsh treatment of the former blind man.

When Jesus used the term "the good shepherd", He is speaking of His intrinsic goodness, as well as His moral rectitude and beauty. In His using the term "shepherd", He is speaking of His position. He is the shepherd of the sheep, He is the one who protects, leads, guides and nourishes the sheep. In turn, the sheep are utterly defensive and totally dependant upon the Shepherd. It is hard not to see an allusion to Ps 23, where the LORD is the Shepherd, who protects, leads, guides and nourishes His sheep. Jesus is also referring to His mission. For on no less than three occasions, He speaks of "laying down" His life for the sheep (vv.15,17,18). The Shepherd, who protects the sheep, now protects them to the point of death. The Shepherd now reveals that He is also the sacrificial "lamb of God" (1:29,35), who willingly lays down His life for the sheep. "The death of Jesus is no tragic accident, but the divinely appointed way whereby salvation would be brought to those who trust in Him." (14) It was not just for the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" that He was to lay down His life, but also for the "sheep of another pen" (10:16), the Gentiles. Thereby, making one flock, resided over by one Shepherd (v.16). How can the death of one man avail the redemption of so many, unless it was rendered more than sufficient by the divinity of this one man.! Thus, we contend that this I AM saying screams out the divinity of Jesus the Christ.


"I AM the Resurrection and the Life"
This particular I AM saying was made to Martha, who's brother Lazarus had recently died. When Jesus told her that Lazarus would rise again she took this to refer to "the resurrection of the last day" (11:23-24). It is at this point that He makes this explicit and astounding claim, "I AM the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me , even if he dies, he will live, and everyone who lives, and believes in me will certainly not die." (11:25-26). With this claim, Jesus is not simply stating that He imparts resurrection and life, but that He Himself is resurrection and life. As John said in his Prologue Jesus, (the Word), was life (1:4). Morris notes, "That he is the resurrection means death, which to us appears so final, is no obstacle, and that he is the life means that the quality of life that he imparts to us here and now never ceases." (15) This claim of Jesus is fully sustantiated in the following raising of Lazarus from the dead (v.44).

In commenting on John's recording of this incident, Morris powerfully states, "He is writing about one who is supremely great and who has breathtaking superiority over death. It is a comment to the human race that in the end we all face death and there is nothing we can do about that. We may stave off death for a time, but when it takes place it is final. John writes about a Lord for whom it is not final. He is such a great person that even death gives place to him." (15) Surely this claim of Jesus' has no place on the lips of an ordinary man, but can only have place on the lips of Him who is divine.


"I AM the Way and the Truth and the Life"
This is the next I AM saying, to be addressed to those who have committed themselves to Jesus. On the eve of the Lord's crucifixion, Jesus gives His `Kingly farewell speech`. He has just instituted the Lord's Supper, (though John does not record this), and announced His imminent departure (13:33,36;14:2-3). In conjunction to the announcement of His departure, He adds, "You know the way to the place where I am going" (14:4). To this, the perplexed disciple Thomas responds, "Lord, we do not know where you are going, so how can we know the way?". "He wants the position to be clear, and will not let our Lord's word stand as though he understands them when he really does not. The man's fundamental honesty stands revealed". (16) This provides Jesus with the opportunity of expanding and elucidating what he has just said. Thus, He replies, "I AM the way and the truth and the life". To which He adds, "No-one comes to the Father except through me" (14:6), (italics mine). Despite the controversy that surrounds these words, and the many forms of translations and interpretations given, it is clear, by the the syntactical structure of these words, that Jesus is saying three distinct things about Himself. (The stress in the verse falls on "the way", since that is the issue (v.5). However, the three terms, "the way", "the truth" and "the life" are syntactically co-ordinate. Hence the indication that Jesus is declaring three distinct things about Himself.)

First He says, "I AM the way". Again, we see here an exclusivity which can not be denied, nor overlooked. Since Jesus refers to going to His Fathers house (v.2), and that "No-one comes to the Father except through me (v.6), we can see that He is not speaking of a moral or ethical way, but the way of salvation. The way of salvation leading to the Father. He is confidently stating that He is not one of many ways to God, but "the" way. This astounding claim hits at the heart of our pluralistic society and the syncristic philosophy that it dearly subscribes and holds on to. With one fell swoop, He disintegrates mans false notions of approaching God, and asserts His `uniqueness`. His substitutionary, atoning death is closely linked with Him being "the way". For it is through His death that God and sinners are reconciled.

Second, He claims to be "the truth". This speaks of His utter veracity and reliability. All that He has said, claimed and done can be both believed and trusted in, not simply because He tells the truth, but because He is the truth. For He is the Word of God that has become flesh (1:1,14). As Carson insightfully points out, "Jesus is the truth, because he embodies the supreme revelation of God-he himself `narrates` God (1:18), says and does exclusively what the Father gives him to say and do (5:19ff; 8:29), indeed he is properly called God (1:1, 18; 20:28). He is God's gracious self-disclosure, his "Word", made flesh (1:14). (17)

Third, Jesus states that He is "the life". This, as Morris correctly states, "takes us into the same area as the saying, "I AM the resurrection and the life". (18) Once again we observe Jesus associating very closely with life. "It is he alone whose life is unique, self- existent like the life of the Father (5:16). He is the life and the source of life to others (3:16)". (19)

We contend, then, that "this comprehensive saying claims an exclusive position for Jesus. He is the one way to God, he is thoroughly reliable, and he stands in a relation to truth such as no one else does. The same, of course, is true of his relationship to life". (20)


"I AM the True Vine"
Now we come to the final I AM saying with the predicate. During the upper room discourse, Jesus twice makes the declaration, that He is "the vine". On the first occasion He links Himself with the Father, when He says "I AM the true vine, and my Father is the gardener", or, "vinedresser" (15:1). On the second occasion He links Himself with the believer, when He declares, "I AM the vine; you are the branches", or, "vine canes" (21), and "goes on to refer to the mutual indwelling of the Saviour and the saved (15:5)". (22)

Many commentators have indicated the connection between this declaration of Jesus' and the Old Testament usage of the vine image. One of these is the noted theologian Bruce Milne. In his commentary on the Book of John, which places the emphasis on Jesus' mission, he states, "The image of the vine serves the `mission` theme in two important ways. In the first place, it was the supreme symbol of Israel. A great golden vine trailed over the temple porch, and the coinage minted during the revolt against Rome (AD 68-70) also bore a vine symbol. The Old Testament has many pertinent allusions. Possibly the most important in connection with Jesus' claim, I am the true vine (v.1), is Psalm 80, which blends talk of Israel as `the vine out of Egypt` (v.8) with `the son of man you raised up for yourself` (v. 17).

But the vine `is burned with fire` (Ps. 80:16). Israel has failed in God's long-term role she was called to fulfil, that being `a light for the Gentiles` (Is. 49:6), to bring God's salvation `to all the ends of the earth`... Israel, however, was more attracted by the gods of the surrounding nations than penetrating them as a missionary. Her centuries-long declension from God's purposes now reaches its nadir in the rejection of the Messiah and the repudiation of the kingship of God (19:15). But God's purposes, from which Israel turn in final apostasy, does not fall to the ground. It is grasped anew by the one who stands in the midst of Israel, and among the disciples. In contrast to the vine which has destroyed itself by disobedience, Jesus is `the true vine`. He is the obedient Son through whose sacrifice and consequent mission the age-old purpose of Israel would find fulfilment, the nations would be reached, and `all the families of the earth shall bless themselves` (Gn. 12:2).

He then continues, "The image of the vine has a second, less theological, pointer to mission. the vine is an essentially utilitarian plant; it exists to bear fruit. W. Temple eloquently portrays the fruit- bearing function of the vine. `The vine lives to give its life-blood. Its flower is small, its fruit abundant, and when that fruit is mature and the vine has become, for a moment, glorious, the treasure of the grapes is torn down and the vine is cut back to the stem`. This function is reflected in Jesus' stress on fruit-bearing (explicitly in verses 2, 4-5, 8, 16). We should therefore beware of interpretations of this passage which concentrate solely on our inward relationship with the Lord. Its real thrust is the renewal of the mission of Israel through Jesus the Messiah and the disciple community. While more `subjective` aspects are not entirely absent (cf. Jesus' reference to `love` and `obedience` to his commands; 10, 12, 17), the primary focus remains bracingly objective and missionary. Jesus by his exaltation in death and resurrection will be removed tangibly from the world. The disciples are sent into the world, as was Jesus, to carry on the task in his `absence`. That is the principle implication of Jesus' saying, I am the vine; you are the branches". (23)

While I concur with Milne's interpretation of Jesus being the fulfiller of God's missionary objectives, i.e. the true vine, through His life, death and subsequent resurrection. I do not whole-heartedly agree with his interpretation of I am the vine; you are the branches. I would tend to agree more on the lines of Morris' argument when he states, "the second saying emphasizes the vital contact with Christ. `He who remains in me, and I in him`, says Jesus `this man bears much fruit, apart from me you can do nothing` (15:5)." He continues, "it is an error to suppose that in the energy of the flesh that we are able to do anything that pleases God. For that we need the strength that he alone can supply. The condition of fruitful in Christian service is vital contact with Christ... Exactly what the "fruit" is is not explained, but usually in the New Testament the word means qualities of Christian character (Matt. 3:8; 7:20; Rom. 6:22; Gal. 5:22 etc.) and we should see this as primary in mind here. (24)

When we consider that "Salvation comes from God" (Jonah 2:9), and that Jesus the Christ is appointed of God as "a light for the Gentiles", so that He may bring God's "salvation to the ends of the earth" (Isa. 49:6), and that the transformation of the believer is only possible by the work of the indwelling Spirit of Christ (Rom. 8:9), and one's vital contact with Him (Jn 15:5). We can see that this I AM saying, like the rest, indicates His deity.


"I AM" without the Predicate
Having briefly examined the I AM sayings with a predicate, we now come to the I AM sayings without the predicate. While it may be true that the Greek words `ego eimi`, (translated I am in English), can normally have a simple human meaning (e.g. Jn. 9:9; 12:26), as we have already pointed out John's use of the term is highly distinctive. This truth is evident as one views the following passages in their context.

In John Chapter four, we see Jesus having a conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well. When she states that the matters that they have been discussing would be dealt with by the coming Messiah, Jesus responds, "I AM, who am speaking to you"(v.26). Morris points out that, "Ethelbert Stauffer", (whoever he his!), "denies that this is `an indirect messianic affirmation`, and insists `that John wishes Jesus' answer to be understood as the theophanic formula ANI HU`. (25) While I Totally disagree with Stauffer that this is not `an indirect messianic affirmation`, as a syntactical analysis indicates that it is. (For Jesus is directly responding to her statement about the Messiah (v.15)). I do, however, concur with him that that this is a "Theophanic formula". For as we have previously stated, John's usage of the term is highly distinctive, the underling emphasis being divinity. I see no incongruity in seeing Jesus' claim as an indirect Messianic affirmation, and a claim to deity. For, we have already observed that John's intentions are to demonstrate the Messiahship and Deity of Jesus (20:30-31). Also, we see a link between "the Prophet who is to come into the world" (6:14), and His deity (6:33).

Two other passages, in which we find the "I AM" sayings, are Chapters 8 and 13. In the former passage, Jesus says to the Jews, "Unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins" (v.24). While in the latter, He declares to His disciples, "I tell you before it happens, so that when it happens you may believe that I AM" (13:19). Morris helpfully comments, "In both passages we find the Johannine emphasis on the importance of believing, and in both it is linked with Jesus' own person. In both Jesus is saying that it is important that those addressed come to trust him as the I AM, which looks very much like a claim to sharing in the nature of deity". (25)

Probably the most familiar "I AM" saying, without the predicate, is to be found in verse 58 of chapter 8. There, Jesus pulls the theological rug from underneath the feet of the Jews, when He confidently asserts His pre-existent and consequently His deity, by saying, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM". It is evident, from the context, that Jesus was declaring His deity. For the biblical record states, "At this, they picked up stones to stone him". John has previously stated that the Jews tried to kill Jesus, for exactly the same reason-"He was calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God" (5:18). (italics added)

For exactly what you seem to be thinking also. Ritual was pasted over the actual teachings. Animal sacrifices as well as human ones were always considered gross and unacceptable to God. There is no enlightenment or salvation in shedding blood of any kind and never was. The text is clear about that and what Stephen was stoned to death for pointing out.

What makes you say that there is no salvation in shedding of blood of any kind?

the Gospels were written for Christians, not for converting others. if Jesus had said anything like that, the gospel writers would have assumed that their audience would have known about it and used that space for something else.
there was that "I am the way the truth and the life and the only way to the Father is through me" verse. i think it goes like that. my scripture memory is imperfect to say the least.

Bella-Angelique:

OK, I gotcha now! Hehe, I'm a little dense sometimes.

BTW, that's a good argument that I had never heard before now.



tags:

It seems as though you are making the same argument that Bluefinger did: salvation through faith in Jesus Christ as your personal saviour is implicit, though not specifically mentioned by Jesus in the Bible.

Let's assume you are right. So, what about good works? Are those also necessary for salvation?

And thank you for discussing these issues in a respectful way. I really am just trying to understand more about Christians' points of view.



Something Like Laughter:


On the contrary, I would think they would be sure to include something as important as the path to salvation. The Gospel writers noted all kinds of random information, some of which seems rather useless. Besides, I thought God inspired every word anyway. Surely he would want to be as clear as possible........ On second thought, having read through the Bible, maybe not.

**The sky is falling.....I am agreeing with Tags on something**

That is a good question!
Yes Bela Can you answer?

I already did on post 51# of this thread. It is too long to post all over again on the same thread.

You said this:

I did not see anything in your post #51 that answered our question.

Are you saying the Christian God does not like sacrifices?

THe sacrifices of animals were irrelevant. They were a herald to the true sacrifice, nothing more than an imitation. The punishment for sin was death, and so animals were sacrificed to atone. However, God does not care about those animal sacrifices. THey are useless, imperfect. Yet people religiously (hey, there's that word again) did it as if it could actually save them. Sacrifice an animal and do whatever they want for the rest of the time.

God labeled these people hypocrites. They had no real Faith in Him. They cared more about the ritual than the figure behind the ritual.

As for the sacrifice of Jesus, his death was the fulfillment of the Old Testament sacrificial Laws. The perfect and Holy Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. The only one ever who was worthy and capable of dying as that perfect sacrifice.

That's how I see it, at least.

Regards, PA

About the whole salvation and good works:

There is some truth you may need to know.

First, Jesus is the way to salvation, but it requires more than just accepting His life, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven. It requires that you accept him as Lord over your life, making all choices for his glory. This is where the good works come in, for if we confide in Jesus for everything thing we think and say, good works flow like a mighty river. For the things we do for him will be rewarded us when he gets back because we sought out goodness and righteousness instead of the lusts of our own flesh. We do these good works by faith, believing that our Father will take care of us. But we must also count these as joy, for a man who does good works just to get into heaven is like an empty vase sitting on the shelf; it looks good, but is empty. Thus we must pour out our lives with love, in full appreciation and thanks for all that God has done for us. This is how we obtain a righteous and Christ filled life. We also put our trust and confidence in the Holy Spirit, whom Jesus sent to us to reveal to us the truth about God and to follow Jesus in power. You see, the Holy Spirit empowers us with a gift from God that serves God only. We accept this by faith and it is made manifest by our works known to all that see. So, how do work in the Spirit? We do it by love, the very purpose that life was created.

God bless

So are you saying all othe Biblical laws still good?

Translation -

Those who truly love all that is good, live it and practice in all aspects of their daily lives.

That was directed at PA

In response to you how ever to post a few:

-"Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man ... , keep alive for yourselves."
[Moses, relaying God's orders to his people, Numbers 31:17-18]

-But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."
[Jesus, Luke 19:27]

-"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword."
[Jesus, Matthew 10:34]

20: And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21: And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die:
so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Deuteronomy 21

Morals from the Bible

The pristhood (that were originally trained butchers and meatcutters who were given health standards to help them since they insisted on eating meat other than poultry) invented all of the rituals of blood sacrifice, includind human sacrifice of those who were "doomed to God" from poor families under threat to come up with the goods demanded by the priests. (see last page of Leviticus)
God never asked for blood sacrifices of any kind ever. It infuriated him and disgusted him that they had invented this travesty of rituals out of greed and power hunger to replace the people learning ethics and morality.(See post 51#)

Jesus was a messenger and teacher, not a human sacrifice (dog returning to its vomit).
They killed the messenger as expected, but the message of love, forgiveness, ethics, and morality made it through anyway. He was truly the son of God who managed to pull off what the prophets sent before him had not managed to do, bringing the message that God wants love and not fear.

Not at all, my good man. It was an example. Other laws have been fulfilled also. None have been done away with.

Anyhow, on the Faith vs. Works argument, here's my input (it's really just a simplified version of Bluefinger's post):

No one is saved by works. It is completely through the Grace of God. However, the works a man (or woman) does, shows the state of their heart. If I say I am an apple tree, then I should produce apples, right? But if I produce oranges, then something is not right. As Gideon is fond of saying, judge a tree by its fruit (though i speak of individual's, not organizations).

The Faith a person has will be reflected in their actions.

Regards, PA

btw, Here I must disagree. Biblically speaking, Jesus was a sacrifice.

Bella you really must read Hebrews. It explains it all a lot better than i could here!! You are simply wrong biblically speaking, but If it is your own opinion then thats fine.

You are making statements like, God never asked for sacrafices etc, this is wrong!

Well i think the fact that Jesus is the only way to God, and Heaven is extremely explicit from what i have showed you. Also explicit is the fact that his death was an atonement for mankinds sins and that to come into the good of the sacrifice one must accept Jesus alone as Lord and Saviour. But you may disagree if you wish.

Good works are a consequence of Salvation, however salvation is not a consequence of good works. It is that simple.

"For by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight." Romans.
"For by GRACE are ye saved THROUGH FAITH,- and NOT OF YOURSELVES it is a GIFT of God, and NOT OF WORKS lest any man should boast" Ephesians 2v8.

Heb. 13:24: "Those who come from Italy send you greetings."



Blood sacrifices were deeds of the law (invented by priests).

Does the term "blood of the lamb" ring a bell?

Ex 13:15
And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem.

Ex 20:24
An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.

Mr 9:49
For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.

Lu 2:24
And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

Burnt offerings (AKA barbecue) unless you kill the animal first......

Read up on the book of Leviticus

The Levites (Leviticus) were the priests who made the stuff up out of greed and hunger for power. Last page covers human sacrifice. Either the poor families came up with the goods demanded by the priests or a family member would become "doomed to God".

Laws or prophecies (as in Jesus coming and returning)?


OK now we have that aside.....Laws of our Lord

Maybe she will listen to you.

There's still the blood of the Lamb on the doors of Israelite houses in Exodus (for example). That first Passover, the angel of death spared the Israelites, because of the blood sacrifice on the doors (the angel literally "passed over" those houses).

Haven't you ever wondered why the Bible sometimes calls Jesus the Passover Lamb?

In reference to human sacrifice.....why else!

Both

I'll answer them better in the next couple of days - it's 2am here, I've just finished an essay and I've got to go to bed for uni. However, the first point as strikes me: Don't let cattle graze with other kinds of Cattle. I can't say as I've ever let that happen. Not knowingly at least

Regards, PA

Those were not blood sacrifices. It was the only water resistant paintable material the slaves had on hand for marking in their living areas. As they were taught that eating blood was unhealthy for them, it would have been disposed of anyway after slaughter for food. They timed their activites so that they would all have it on hand at the same time.

I am not wrong.

I........ see.

So where does Jesus the Passover Lamb fit into that paintable substance theory of yours?

I reject with the same disgust that God showed toward other human sacrifices the priestly insertion of the belief that Jesus was a blood sacrifice.

I won't even ask where you got this from

Bella i must admit you may have a point to certain extent; but somewhere along the way it has become wrong.
Everyone see;
http://members.aol.com/johnodhner/Sacrifice.html

In other words your opinion.

I think Bella-A's opinions are based on logic and an understanding of people, not opinions based on some book.

Thanks Arty.
Sometimes being the lone Arian is not so comfortable.

Thats your opinion!

Well, she's not getting it from the Bible, that's for sure

Just as your's is.


Is that a bad thing?

i post this again for comment

Arian as in Arianism?

Arianism:

A heresy which arose in the fourth century, and denied the Divinity of Jesus Christ.

DOCTRINE

First among the doctrinal disputes which troubled Christians after Constantine had recognized the Church in A.D. 313, and the parent of many more during some three centuries, Arianism occupies a large place in ecclesiastical history. It is not a modern form of unbelief, and therefore will appear strange in modern eyes.

Blood Sacrifice Jesus and the Bible

Perhaps you are unaware of the Old Testament and Blood of the Covenant.


(Sic)"....Genesis 3.7, 21. Cain offers the fruit of the ground and is not accepted, while Abel offers the ‘firstborn of his flock’ and is accepted. Genesis 4.3-4. Noah offered a sacrifice of the clean animals that came out of the ark and this is ‘soothing aroma’ to the Lord. Genesis 8.20-22. God made the covenant with Abraham concerning his descendants and the Promised Land, after Abraham had made the sacrifice of animals which God required of him. Genesis 15. After God gave the Torah, Moses read the commandments to the people and sprinkled blood of the sacrificed animals on the people and on the altar. Exodus 24.3-8. "


(sic)"...The Bible also teaches us that there is a barrier between God and all humanity, Jewish and Gentile, caused by our sin. Under the covenant made with Israel at the time of the giving of the Torah, that barrier separating the Holy One from His sinful people could only be removed by repentance and faith in the sacrifice which God appointed. In Leviticus 17.11 we read:

‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that makes an atonement for your soul.’ "
Source Link
Todays Christian Communion is the sympathetic ritual of a blood sacrifice, as Jesus said it is the new covenant. Which the Old Testament denotes the gods entered into a blood covenant with his/their creation.


Authorized King James VersionExodus 24:8

-[Original Hebrew Link] "And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words. "

*Other Books of the Law Blood Covenant References* (With Original Hebrew Links)





New Testament Blood Covenant Links

Matthew 10:34-35

King James Version (KJV)
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.


Jesus also knew he was born to be sacrificed in the fulfilling of the New Covenant.
Mark 8:31-38



Mark 9:31-38(King James Version) King James Version (KJV)

31 For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.


*link fix*

She has eyes but does not see, ears but does not listen.

Save your breath Tags.