Why was the Blood of Christ required for Remission of Sin?

That is why Hebrews says almost all things were purged by teh shedding of blood. But that was the OT sacrificial system.

Had his blood not been shed it would have been no atonement at all. The life of the life is in the blood. It is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement for sin. God said a bloody death was necessary. Who are we to disagree with him?

Not at all. The Scriptures are very clear on the bloody nature of the atonement. It can be no other way.

 

Did you read it?? It most certainly does address the type of blood he had. It says., Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil,

The same what??? The same flesh and blood. The same flesh and blood as what??? The children. Who are the children?? Humanity. Therefore, He (Christ) partook of the same flesh and blood that humanity has. You want to deny this very clear teaching. Why?

 

And???

Hebrews 9:12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

These verses don't address the type of blood that Christ had at all.

 

It is difficult for you to con us into this view because we are versed enough in the Scriptures to ably renounce it for its gnosticism.

What is difficult is that a socalled fundamentalist denies that Christ was absolutely human. The scriptures say that a false view of Christ's humanity is actually a slap against his deity and therefore, an evidence of apostacy.

I would carefully consider this path. Young Anakin had promise also, but the dark side deceived him.

 

I will also mention that if his blood was of this "divine" properties, I should expect to know where it is today. I mean, deity is eternal. It surely wouldn't have dissolved into the group. So where is it?

This is exactly what happens when peoples theology comes from songs like "there is power in the blood...". Classic.

 

LadyEagle said:

All the blood in the human embryo is formed by itself and solely through the contribution of the male parent (No blood ever passes in the embryo from the mother to child).

This claim is demonstrably false. The genetic makeup of human blood is a combination of the genes of both parents, just like every other part of the body - eye colour, hair colour, height, and so forth. That's why children often have different blood types from their parents. In my family, my father is the only person without an O+ blood type, which would be flatly impossible if this view were true.

If there's a biologist in the house with some knowledge of genetics, he could probably explain it more accurately. Nonetheless, this "blood comes only from the father" stuff comes from people who - put simply - don't know what they are talking about.

 

Divine Blood Doctrine - Origin and Development

 

Eternal spirit - the Holy Spirit - by which Mary conceived.</font>[/QUOTE]Did you think we disputed that?? But that has nothign to do with the blood.

Human blood is all that can atone for sin. Animal blood was insufficient because it was not a "like exchange." Animal life is not the same as human life. Human blood shows the leaving of human life. Sin does not have a physical taint. That is a myth.

There is no mystery. I showed from Heb 2:14 that Christ had the same kind of flesh and blood that we have. Why is that so hard to believe??

1) Because there is no such thing as divine blood; 2) human bodies requires human blood; 3) The Bible explicitly says otherwise.

What is divine blood?? You have yet to answer how a spirit has blood and what kind of blood that is. You have yet to answer Heb 2:14 which expressly contradicts you.

 

1. No insult at all. Apparently you do not understand where this bizarre idea leads to.

2. Deny the divinity of Christ? Where have you seen that? What utter nonsense. I deny the sorcery view of his blood that you hold to.

3. Don't know who Fosdick is at all. MacArthur not a fundamentalist? I am just glad I read the Scriptures first, and then theology books.

 

Hi guys!

the wages of sin is death, and that is the payment that Christ made while He was at the cross. and i think it should be emphasized that it is not blood - but spiritual death - that is the payment for sins.

scriptures however tell us that without the sheeding of blood there will be no remission. while blood is not the actual payment, its remission represented the true payment which, again, is death.

"without the shedding of blood" is equivalent to saying "without spiritual death". blood represents Christ's death - the only acceptable payment.

should there have been shed blood yet no death, payment will not be made. blood is used, however, to represent his death.

His blood being divine is not supported by scriptures. Jesus Christ is both man and God. his blood applies only to His humanity, and not His deity. it is, however, unblemished.

 

Stop off over in 1Peter 1:18-19 for a second look---the majority of you guys can't see the forest for the trees!!!

"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptable things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot;"

 

Also, Acts 20:28??? What does the inspired, infallable, inerrant word of God say about the blood of Jesus????

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hat made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He(God) hath purchased with His(God's) own blood."(emphasis is mine)

The blood pulsin' through the physical heart of Jesus was God's blood!!! No other blood but Precious blood can redeem!!! No other blood but God's blood can redeem!!

What sort of blood did Jesus redeem with???

God's "very own!"

Jesus' blood = God's blood

 

Aki---Jesus' blood being divine IS supported by scriptures-----

Acts 20:28

 

Pastor Larry,

You said, "Had his blood not been shed it would have been no atonement at all. The life of the life is in the blood. It is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement for sin. God said a bloody death was necessary. Who are we to disagree with him?"

I'd say it is you who are disagreeing with Him because clearly God allowed atonement to be made by other means--grain/flour. So, a bloody death was not always necessary.

The important thing is that Jesus lived and died as one of us and for us. Do yo really believe that if the blood had stayed in his veins no atonement would have been made?

 

"An Examination of The Chemistry of the Blood" by J. C. Settlemoir