Heresy Du Jour

Why do you say this? What scripture do you use to support that statement? </font>[/QUOTE]What documentation do we have that indicates any other race of people sacrifice animals for the forgiveness of sin? What record is there in the bible that non Jews sacrificed for the atonement of sin?

The only record we have for such activity is that of the Jews.

 

That verse is Paul teaching non-jews regarding atonement for sin. Those non Jews did not sacrifice for the atonement of sins.

The verse is not in question, the Calvinist teaching is!

 

And Jesus died as a substitute for His people - Jews and Gentiles as an atonement and propitiation for their sins.

So what are you trying to say? Why don't you just admit you're argument is wrong? This has been Scripturally proven.

 

And Jesus died as a substitute for His people - Jews and Gentiles as an atonement and propitiation for their sins.

So what are you trying to say? Why don't you just admit you're argument is wrong? This has been Scripturally proven. </font>[/QUOTE]Have you not read any of my posts? I have consistantly stated that Jesus' atonement for mankind is for all mankind. It was a Jew who was sacrificed for Jews at the time the atonement took place.

It was not until after Jesus arose and at the ascention to the Father's right hand that it was revealed to Peter and the Apostles that the Gentiles are to be included. That was reinforced by the conversion of Paul who was to be the Apostle to the Gentiles.

 

So what is it you are arguing about then?

 

I agree with you that the OT sacrifices were for the nation of Israel. But they also were for non-Israelites who were associated with the nation Israel, like Rahab, for instance, or Ruth. This may have been a foreshadowing that the sacrificial provision for sin that God would make in Christ would include the Gentiles--that Gentiles would be brought in under the umbrella of the once for all sacrifice.

Ephesians tells us that Christ has given himself for us (including Gentiles--see 2:11) as "an offering and sacrifice for a sweet smelling odor to God." 1 Corinthians says that "our paschal lamb has been sacrificed, even Christ." (5:7)

Anytime the scripture mentions peace or reconciliation or propitiation coming through the blood of Christ, it would seem that the idea of sacrifice is in mind.

Ephesians 2 tells us that we both--Jews and Gentiles--come together through the one sacrifice. The Gentiles are brought in under the umbrella of this sacrifice. The middle wall of separation that keeps Gentiles out of the place where the sacrifices for sins were made is broken down by Christ's sacrifice, and both Jews and Gentiles have peace with God through the sacrifice of Christ.

[ March 16, 2003, 01:54 AM: Message edited by: russell55 ]

 

What did the Ephesians know of a "Paschal Lamb"?

It seems Ephesus is in present day Turkey, and the people of Ephesus more than likely did not offer sacrifices for sins, and may not have understood the significance of sin because they were not subject to the Mosaic law.

Corinth is even further away from Israel, and I'm sure they were not subject to the Mosaic law, and there is evidence remaining even today that the Corinthians were no saints.

Otherwise I have no difficulty with your post.

 

Isn't it true that Paul spoke to the Corinthian church concerning meat offered to idols? This shows that other societies besides Israel did offer sacrifice to their gods.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

But were those sacrifices for Atonement?

 

They certainly thought they were in some form or the other to 'appease' the god, or for what other reason would they be offered?

Bro. Dallas

 

Wouldn't they, as believers, be studying the Old Testament scriptures? Obviously, Paul expected them to know something about it or he wouldn't have used the term, would he?

I'm not sure what this has to do with the price of tea in China. Whether they had a tradition of sacrifices or not, or knew of the Mosaic law has nothing to do with whether Christ was now a sacrifice to God on their behalf, does it? It makes me wonder if we are missing completely the point you are trying to make....

 

Was the Old testament available to them? I believe the Old Testament was transcribed on scrolls that were maintained in the Jewish synagogs. They were not common to every household, and they were certainly not broadcast to the Gentiles. Even so, I acknowledge that it is conceivable that some time during the intervening years before Paul wrote his letters, the various churches may have been able to obtain copies of the books of the Law, and the Prophets, though they were in separate scrolls. Remember Gutenburg was still 1400 years in the future.