Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
I expect God’s Judgment Day with gratitude and joy.
Not because what I am, but because what He is.
God's grace to forgive and transform is not conditioned to recognizing Jesus' deity, blood atonement or physical resurrection
- Thread starter Pancho Frijoles
- Start date
Not because what I am, but because what He is.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Our Catholic brothers think that the wine becomes the blood of Jesus by means of a miracle during mass.
The text is there. Jesus said about the wine in the cup: “This is my blood” (Matthew 26:28)
Are you as Evangelical denying the explicit words of Jesus?
Of course you are not. You’re properly understanding that Jesus words cannot be taken literally.
So, speaking literally…
- The wine of the Lord’s Supper is not the blood of Christ, even when the biblical text says so.
- Believers are not expected to drink the blood of Christ, even when the biblical text says so.
- The blood of Christ does not cleanse our sins, even when the biblical text says so.
- The sacrifice of animals didn’t atone for the sins of people, even when the biblical text says so.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Unique? Certainly. Each sacred text is unique in its own right.
Exclusive? No. There is no such claim of exclusivity... and exclusivity is not inherent to inspiration.
- The Bible is not a book, but a library of books that were written over many centuries. None of them claimed exclusivity when they were written, nor announced the end of revelation.
- Whatever we find in the Bible is only a fraction of the oral revelation, which was also inspired by God and preceded the written text.
- The concept of a "Bible", as a cannon of books, is human, not divine, made after many discussions, doubts and disagreements, some of which persist up to this time. For example, should the Book of Esther be part of the Bible? Is it just a source of beautiful stories and insights... or should it be considered in the same level that, say, Isaiah? What about the portions of Esther rendered as inspired in the Vulgate but not in other translations? Is the Book of Enoch inspired and that's why it is quoted in the Epistle of Judas? Or should we consider that parts of the Book of Enoch inspired? Are the last verses of the gospel of Mark (verses 9-20 of chapter 16) divinely inspired?
"God-breathed" does not mean dictation, except for very short passages in which dictation might have occurred.
No book of the Bible explains what the meaning is of "God-breathed" or "inspired".
I interpret "God-breathed" as an invisible influence of God, that just like the air being breathed or the wind that cannot be seen nor heard, but experienced by the human author.
Other believers have different interpretations of this. You may have your own and I am interested in knowing what it is.
This seems to be a non-sequitur fallacy.
The Book of Genesis is inspired, but from this fact it does not follow that we should deny the inspiration of the Gospel of Mark, or the inspiration from God that we get through logic, archeology, linguistics, history or science, all of which help us to understand the book.
Certainly, the inspiration of the Book of Genesis does not condemn the inspiration I get from the recommendations of my mom, and the inspiration we all can take from the insights of many 5-year-old children from the Sunday School... for example, on soteriology.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Dear Joe and @civic :
It is clear from Psalm 51 that King David was not depending on any work, on any personal merit, to be forgiven by God.
And yet, David was not resorting to any belief in the deity, blood atonement or physical resurrection of the Messiah to come.
Same with the tax collector who prayed with the Pharisee (Luke 18:10-14)
The tax collector did not depend on any work or personal merit to be forgiven by God.
And yet, he did not resort to any belief in the deity, blood atonement or physical resurrection of the Messiah to come. He just recognized that he was a sinner who needed the mercy of God.
Jesus could have leveraged this story to indicate that the arrogance of the Pharisee consisted in not believing in a penal substitutionary atonement of his sins, while the humbleness of the tax collector consisted in believing such doctrine. However, Jesus just did not tell the story that way. He told it this way:
Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, "God, I thank You that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess."
And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying,
"God, be merciful to me a sinner!"
I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
CONCLUSION:
The fact that a sinner does not believe in a penal substitutionary blood atonement, DOES NOT MEAN that he's trusting in his own merits.
I am one of those sinners, Joe. I am convinced that there is no deed from my part, no merit, that make me deserve God's mercy.
Last edited:
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
I can reason only like a human. But I know this:
Reasoning is divine. Superstition is not.
Let me share with respect what I also believe to be Scripture revealed by God:
"Religion must be in conformity with science and reason;
otherwise, it is superstition;
for science and reason are realities,
and religion itself is the Divine Reality
unto which true science and reason must conform.
God has bestowed the gift of mind upon man
in order that he may weigh every fact or truth presented to him
and adjudge whether it be reasonable.
That which conforms to his reason
he may accept as true,
while that which reason and science cannot sanction
may be discarded as imagination and superstition,
as a phantom and not reality.
Inasmuch as the blind imitations
or dogmatic interpretations current among men
do not coincide with the postulates of reason,
and the mind and scientific investigation
cannot acquiesce thereto,
many souls in the human world today
shun and deny religion."
(Abdu'l Bahá)
Johann
Well-known member
Rebuttal to this nonsensical assertion that "God breathed" is an invisible "influence"
Etymological and Syntactical Analysis of θεόπνευστος
The word θεόπνευστος is a compound adjective derived from θεός (theos, "God") and πνευστος (pneustos, "breathed" or "spirated").
The verb root πνέω ("to breathe, blow") underpins πνευστος, emphasizing the active role of divine "breathing."
θεόπνευστος is a predicate adjective, describing the nature of Scripture, not merely its process. The syntax emphasizes that all Scripture exists as God-breathed rather than explaining how it became so.
In its construction, θεόπνευστος conveys:
Source of Origin: The divine ("God-breathed") as the source of Scripture.
Passive Connotation: The text is the product of divine action, with an emphasis on what the text is rather than the process of its production.
This undermines the claim that it refers solely to an "invisible influence" or to varied subjective interpretations.
2. Comparison with Related Terms and Syntax in Scripture
2 Peter 1:20–21: "For no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God (λαλῆσαι ἀπὸ Θεοῦ), as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit (φερόμενοι ὑπὸ πνεύματος ἁγίου)."
Here, the syntax explicitly connects the movement or carrying along (φερόμενοι, a participle) of human authors with the Holy Spirit. This parallels the concept of divine breathing, suggesting an active divine guidance in producing Scripture.
Matthew 4:4: Jesus quotes, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds (ἐκπορευομένης) from the mouth of God."
The verb ἐκπορεύομαι ("proceeds") parallels the imagery of breathing words forth from God's mouth, reinforcing the direct divine origin of Scripture.
3. Biblical Use of Breath/Wind in Divine Action
Genesis 2:7: God "breathed" (ἐνεφύσησεν) into Adam, giving him life. This portrays divine breath as the direct cause of creation, a parallel to the "life-giving" quality of Scripture in θεόπνευστος.
Ezekiel 37:5–10: The Spirit/breath (רוּחַ/πνεῦμα) animates the dry bones, again emphasizing God's active and life-giving work.
The syntactical and thematic parallels show that "God-breathed" refers to direct divine action, not a vague, invisible influence.
4.
YOUR claim that "God-breathed" allows for subjective interpretations is syntactically untenable.
The adjective θεόπνευστος is definitive in its function, asserting a quality of Scripture (direct divine origin). It does not leave room for variance in interpretation regarding its nature.
The active/passive relationship between God (source) and Scripture (product) is linguistically clear, leaving no indication that human authors were the autonomous agents of content production.
5. Dictation Theory and Syntax
While "dictation" may not apply universally, the syntax does not preclude direct divine guidance in specific passages.
Instances of dictation (e.g., "Thus says the LORD" in prophetic literature) indicate that certain parts of Scripture were directly transmitted.
However, θεόπνευστος covers the entirety of Scripture, implying that whether by dictation, inspiration, or guidance, all is under God's active breathing.
J.
Dizerner
Active member
I would encourage believers never to be discouraged witnessing to the lost. Not only does it give them a genuine opportunity for the rest of their life knowing the right way, and fulfill the command to go into the all the world and preach the Gospel, but it deepens our compassion, faith and understanding every time we do. It is never a waste!
civic
Well-known member
Nope night a day difference between catholic doctrine and biblical doctrine on the atonement and the blood of Jesus.
Dizerner
Active member
They are misguided on the literal flesh and blood, but they do accept a spiritual presence as well.
It's a silly misapprehension of what Jesus meant, but I would not count it as denial of it.
Some (not all) Orthodox and Catholic reject a substitutionary atoning of sins, and this is far more serious an error.
But what about considering what the Bible actually says about blood, in order to be renewed in our mind, and align our thinking with the God inspired Authors of the bible?
Lev. 17: 11 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 maketh an atonement for the soul.
So then, isn't the Blood of Christ representative of the "Life" of Christ?
Rom. 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we "shall" be saved "by his life". What does this mean, "Saved by His Life"? Is everyone then "saved by His Life"? Or are we tasked with "doing" something?
What did the Jesus "of the Bible" actually say about HIS Blood, should we not also consider HIS Words when seeking the "actual meaning" of metaphor "Blood"?
John 6: 53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have "no life in you".
So unless a man "does" something with "HIS Blood", whatever the "metaphor" actually means, we will not pass from death into life. Unless you believe in another Jesus who didn't say these things, this seems pretty important.
Was this not also true about the Exodus, and Israel's instruction to "DO" something with the Blood of the Passover Lamb, (signified by placing the Blood (Whatever the Metaphore means) on the 2 door posts and Lintel) before being "saved" from Egypt (sin)? And what of those who didn't "DO" what the God of Abraham told them to do?
These two parables concerning the Blood of God's Passover, would mean exactly the same things, Yes? The metaphor "Blood" would have the same Spiritual meaning in both instances, Yes? (For Christ is our Passover)
Shall I simply place my Faith in this world's religious business or sect of the Catholic religion, or her Protestant daughters, the Baptist, or Calvinist, or JW or any of a vast number of religious franchises, sects and businesses which make up this world's religious system, in order to know the actual meaning of the Metaphor "Blood"?
Or shall I turn away from the other voices in the garden, "who profess to know God", given the Bible warns not to be deceived by them, and consider what is actually written in the Oracles of God HE delivered into my own home?
This would be "Living by Every Word which proceeds from the mouth of God", and "Seeking First the Kingdom of God and "HIS" Righteousness. (Something you and Civic teach are a false teaching, as in the religious business you have adopted and are promoting to others, God is not/has not been capable of bringing even one sinner into His Righteousness, no not one)
Pancho knows the word "Blood" is a Metaphore, not literally "blood", which actually has a very important Spiritual Meaning. And the Jesus "of the bible" said that unless we consume/drink/eat HIS Blood, there is no life in us. So it is important to "Seek" the wisdom of God in this matter.
Surely this topic is worthy of an honest discussion. For me, I can't see the wisdom in trusting a popular religion of this world, who preaches that God is not, and has not ever been capable of bringing even "one" sinner into His Righteousness, "no not one", to explain the actual meaning that the Jesus of the Bible's Metaphore, "Blood", meant to HIM when HE used it.
I just know it doesn't mean plasma, red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets.
Dizerner
Active member
Yes, this is another way you could say that.
The Life of Christ was not lived for himself, but for our sake, and includes his Passion.
For us to "put on". At least this is what the Bible teaches. Those who just "hear" Him, have no life in them. Isn't this the message of the Jesus "of the Bible"?
Dizerner
Active member
We must put on Christ by faith, that is correct.
civic
Well-known member
Jesus blood was LITERALLY shed/given for the forgiveness of sins. Bible Basics 101 which you are denying as a core essential belief in the gospel message of the atonement. Your beliefs are unbiblical regarding Jesus atonement for sin and its another gospel, another jesus you preach.
see below for a biblcal refutation of your unbiblcal beliefs on the blood atonement for sins.
Last edited:
Dizerner
Active member
Would you say Jesus literally gave his life?
I think we are on the same page here perhaps.
Johann
Well-known member
Yes, Messiah literally gave His life as an Asham offering-Isaiah 53.
Nothing "metaphorically" about this stupendous 2Aorist event!
J.
civic
Well-known member
Yes since He died He gave His life and the blood was evidence His life was literally poured out for sins. There is both literalism and symbolism at the cross. Its not either/or its and/both.
civic
Well-known member
for @Studyman and @Pancho Frijoles who both deny the blood atonement of Jesus which is essential for the gospel and salvation. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. Bible Truth 101.you are so wrong about God, the sacrificial system, sin, forgiveness, redemption, blood- and both the Old and New Covenants.
Blood is arguably one of the most important symbols of both the Old and New Testament. From the very first account of fratricide in the OT, blood plays a significant role in both the literal and symbolic sense:
The imagery is vivid – the personified blood of Abel cries out to God for justice. Justice in turn requires restitution. In the covenant that God makes with Noah and his descendants, God declares that when human blood is shed, restitution must also be made in blood:
- The LORD said, ‘What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground. Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. (Gen 4:10-11)
This principle of blood for blood or “life for life” is key to the system of justice and the rituals of atonement in the Old Testament. Blood represents both the life that is taken, as well as the life that is offered for the atonement of sin.
- ‘Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind. (Gen 9:6)
Figuratively, blood represents death, or sin and separation from God, on the one hand; and new life, or restitution and reconciliation with God, on the other. And just as sin can be said to leave the stain of blood, the blood that is offered in atonement washes away the stain of sin.
- Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death. Anyone who takes the life of someone’s animal must make restitution – life for life. (Lev 24:17-18)
But in the NT, the blood of Christ represents both the sin and the offering, both the life that is taken and the life that is given and offered for the forgiveness of sins. His blood, alone unstained by sin, reconciles all who sin with God. Unlike the blood of Abel that cried out for justice, the blood of Christ opens the way for God's mercy. It is the blood of the new covenant and brings to fulfillment God’s ultimate vision of peace for mankind.
- But your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear. For your hands are stained with blood, your fingers with guilt. (Is 59:2-3)
- “He shall take some of the bull’s blood and some of the goat’s blood and put it on all the horns of the altar. He shall sprinkle some of the blood on it with his finger seven times to cleanse it and to consecrate it from the uncleanness of the Israelites. (Lev 7: 18-19)
Lets examine more in the N.T about the Blood of Christ and the forgiveness of sins.
- But you have come to… Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks of something better than Abel’s does. (Heb 12:22-24) Nhi @ Biblical Hermenuetics Stack Exchange
Matthew 26:26-29
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
Hebrews 9:22
Because all things are purged by blood in The Written Law, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
Leviticus 4:20,26,35
And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them
Leviticus 6:7
And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD: and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.
Leviticus 17:11
For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for your souls upon the altar; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.
A Walk through Hebrews
Hebrews 9
Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. 2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand and the table with its consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. 3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, 4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 5 Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.
6 When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order.
The Blood of Christ
11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,[a] he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption. 13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,so that we may serve the living God!
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. 16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.”21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
Hebrews 10
The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:
16 “This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds.”
17 Then he adds:
“Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more.”
18 And where these have been forgiven, sacrifice for sin is no longer necessary.
19 Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. 24 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25 not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
Hebrews 12
But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.
Hebrews 13
The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering, but the bodies are burned outside the camp. 12 And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood.
Conclusion: The forgiveness of sins is found only in the blood of Christ- His life which He gave as a sacrifice for sin. That is the heart of the Atonement. It is what the New Covenant is found upon His blood/life which was given for our sins. Forgiveness is only found in His blood/life that He gave on our behalf. That is how are sins are removed and taken away. That is what the Law required for sin was the blood of the animal/sacrifice. Notice there is no punishment anywhere above for sin.
in your own words to @Dizerner - " Notice that you, an intelligent being, are talking nonsense. " and I will add biblical nonsense.
hope this helps !!!
Similar threads
