123 replies

  1. far fetched

    Like

  2. So..the middle man / mediator lost job now

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Actually, it is agreeing with Protestant faith – that we don’t need a priest as in the RC system on earth.

    Because Jesus Al Masih (the Messiah) was the final sacrifice, atoned for sin, was a propitiation (satisfied God’s justice and wrath against sin) and high priest and rose from the dead and ever lives at the right hand of the Father praying for us believers.

    Like

    • Ken: “we Protestants don’t need a priest” also Ken: “Jesus is our high priest”.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Your silly religion misappropriated the Passover sacrifice and mistakenly applied it to Jesus (pbuh). That is enough to show that Christianity is a false religion. Jesus was not the “ultimate” Paschal lamb.

      Liked by 3 people

    • @Ken Temple

      Ken, do you believe in sola scriptura?

      Liked by 1 person

    • @Ken Temple

      First, thank you for answering my question. Second, can you please show me from jewish scripture where the passover lamb is said to be a sacrifice for sin? Third, can you please cite any reference from christian scripture to yom kippur?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Exodus 12 shows that the blood sacrifice of the Passover lamb applied to the doorposts protected the Jewish homes from the wrath of God expressed through the death / judgement angel.

        The wrath of God is His judgement against sin and so the sacrifice of the Passover lamb and blood applied caused the death angel to passover those houses.

        Like

      • It was not a sacrifice for sin. That is quite different. Remember Ken human sacrifice is an abomination according to the prophets. This proves Christianity is a false religion.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Yes it was because it protected them from the wrath angel of death, which is judgement on sins and idolatry.

        Also, the Qur’an unwittingly and unknowingly teaches the principle of substitutionary atonement by appropriating the story of Abraham and his willingness to sacrifice his son (gotten from Genesis 22, and changed a little)
        Surah 37:107
        “We have ransomed him with a mighty sacrifice”

        Like

      • Tovia Singer believes in Genesis 22 and life of David and Solomon as is, in 1-2 Samuel; 1-2 Kings, 1-2 Chronicles, Daniel, etc. as God’s word and not tampered with. What is his explanation of Deut. 7, 9, Joshua and 1 Samuel 15?

        Would be interesting to know.

        Like

      • SOLUTION: For many years the prevailing view of critical scholars has been that there was no city of Jericho at the time Joshua was supposed to have entered Canaan. Although earlier investigations by the notable British archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon confirmed the existence of the ancient city of Jericho, and its sudden destruction, her findings led her to conclude that the city could have existed no later than ca. 1550 b.c. This date is much too early for Joshua and the children of Israel to have been party to its demise.

        However, recent reexamination of these earlier findings, and a closer look at current evidence indicates that not only was there a city that fits the biblical chronology, but that its remains coincide with the biblical account of the destruction of this walled fortress. In a paper published in Biblical Archaeology Review (March/April, 1990), Bryant G. Wood, visiting professor to the department of Near Eastern Studies at the University of Toronto, has presented evidence that the biblical report is accurate. His detailed investigation has yielded the following conclusions:

        1. That the city which once existed on this site was strongly fortified, corresponding to the biblical record in Joshua 2:5, 7, 15; 6:5, 20.

        2. That the ruins give evidence that the city was attacked after harvesttime in the spring, corresponding to Joshua 2:6, 3:15, 5:10.

        3. That the inhabitants did not have the opportunity to flee with their foodstuffs from the invading army, as reported in Joshua 6:1.

        4. That the siege was short, not allowing the inhabitants to consume the food which was stored in the city, as Joshua 6:15 indicates.

        5. That the walls were leveled in such a way to provide access into the city for the invaders, as Joshua 6:20 records.

        6. That the city was not plundered by the invaders, according to God’s instructions in Joshua 6:17–18.

        7. That the city was burned after the walls had been destroyed, just as Joshua 6:24 says.

        Like

      • Ken, don’t believe outdated scholarship from 1990.

        Today, scholars agree almost unanimously that the Book of Joshua holds little historical value.

        See: Killebrew, Ann E. (2005). Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archaeological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, and Early Israel, 1300–1100 B.C.E. Society of Biblical Literature. ISBN 9781589830974.

        Kenyon’s work was corroborated in 1995 by radiocarbon tests which dated the destruction level to the late 17th or 16th centuries BCE. See: Bruins & van der Plicht 1995, p. 213.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jericho

        Liked by 1 person

      • lol crappy christian lies

        Liked by 2 people

      • You didn’t answer Vaqas’ question, stupid. Where does it say the Passover lamb was for the forgiveness of sins?

        Liked by 3 people

      • The Hebrew word for “sin offering” is “hattat”.[39] This word never appears in conjunction with the Passover sacrifice. Rather, in Exodus 12:27, the Hebrew word is “zebah” (i.e., “the Passover zebah/sacrifice of the Lord”; similar to the general Arabic word “zibah”, which also just means “sacrifice”).[40] Of course, a “sacrifice” could be for the specific purpose of atonement (a sin sacrifice or offering), but the fact that the Passover sacrifice is never referred to as a “hattat” (sin offering) refutes the notion that it had that purpose. It never did.

        So, what was the purpose of the Passover sacrifice? In Exodus 12:11, the sacrifice is referred to as “the Lord’s Passover”.[41] Commenting on this verse, the Jewish scholar Rashi stated that:

        “[t]he sacrifice is called פֶּסַח because of the skipping and the jumping over, which the Holy One, blessed be He, skipped over the Israelites’ houses that were between the Egyptians houses. He jumped from one Egyptian to another Egyptian, and the Israelite in between was saved. [“To the Lord” thus implies] you shall perform all the components of its service in the name of Heaven. (Another explanation:) [You should perform the service] in the manner of skipping and jumping, [i.e., in haste] in commemoration of its name, which is called Passover (פֶּסַח)…”[42]

        So, the sacrifice was a commemoration of the “skipping” that God did with the last plague by avoiding the Israelite houses and only striking the Egyptian houses. While it is true that the sacrifice protected the Israelites from immediate death (not death in general), there is no indication that it served to atone for their prior sins.[43]

        In the Midrash Pesachim, the sacrifice is described as follows (emphasis ours):

        “[The] Passover-offering [is offered] because the Omnipresent One passed over the houses of our ancestors in Egypt. Unleavened bread [is eaten] because our ancestors were redeemed from Egypt. [The] bitter herb is [eaten] because the Egyptians embittered the lives of our ancestors in Egypt. In every generation a person must regard himself as though he personally had gone out of Egypt, as it is said: “And you shall tell your son in that day, saying: ‘It is because of what the Lord did for me when I came forth out of Egypt.’” Therefore it is our duty to thank, praise, laud, glorify, exalt, honor, bless, extol, and adore Him Who performed all these miracles for our ancestors and us; He brought us forth from bondage into freedom, from sorrow into joy, from mourning into festivity, from darkness into great light, and from servitude into redemption.”[44]

        So, the sacrifice was for thanksgiving, and while it talks about “redemption”, this redemption was from slavery in Egypt, not redemption from sins. Again, not once are the words “sin” or “atonement” mentioned.

        In addition, William S. Morrow explains that:

        “[b]y late Second Temple times, the Passover had become a kind of toda: a thanksgiving sacrifice offered at the altar that remembered the Exodus experience.”[45]

        Moreover, Morrow also observes that the sacrifice had nothing to do with sin (emphasis ours):

        “[n]o less than the other kinds of sacrifices of well-being, the Passover lamb was a type of gift offering, which communicated Israel’s commitment to honor YHWH. In fact, this is already implied in the Passover legend itself. It was not offered as remedy for sin but as an act of dedication. For it was precisely those who were marked by this ritual of devotion that the angel of death passed over (Exod 12:13).”[46]

        Finally, Morrow criticizes the narrow interpretations of Christians by stating that (emphasis ours):

        “…there is a tendency in the church to associate sacrifice with rituals for the expiation of sin. Unfortunately, such an understanding ignores the rich meanings of sacrifice in Priestly traditions. Gift offerings were occasions for joy and praise.”[47]

        Jewish sources from the 1st century CE also confirm that the Passover sacrifice was offered as a celebratory thanksgiving offering and not as a sin offering.[48] Philo of Alexandria described the sacrifice as follows (emphasis ours):

        “[a]nd after the feast of the new moon comes the fourth festival, that of the passover, which the Hebrews call pascha, on which the whole people offer sacrifice, beginning at noonday and continuing till evening. And this festival is instituted in remembrance of, and as giving thanks for, their great migration which they made from Egypt, with many myriads of people, in accordance with the commands of God given to them; leaving then, as it seems, a country full of all inhumanity and practising every kind of inhospitality, and (what was worst of all) giving the honour due to God to brute beasts; and, therefore, they sacrificed at that time themselves out of their exceeding joy, without waiting for priests. And what was then done the law enjoined to be repeated once every year, as a memorial of the gratitude due for their deliverance.”[49]

        Josephus also emphasized the celebratory nature of Passover:

        “…the law ordained that we should every year slay that sacrifice which I before told you we slew when we came out of Egypt, and which was called the Passover; and so we do celebrate this passover in companies, leaving nothing of what we sacrifice till the day following.”[50]

        In fact, Josephus clearly differentiated the purpose of the Passover sacrifice from the sacrifice offered for the festival that followed Passover: the feast of unleavened bread. He explained that (emphasis ours):

        “[t]he feast of unleavened bread succeeds that of the passover, and falls on the fifteenth day of the month, and continues seven days, wherein they feed on unleavened bread; on every one of which days two bulls are killed, and one ram, and seven lambs. Now these lambs are entirely burnt, besides the kid of the goats which is added to all the rest, for sins; for it is intended as a feast for the priest on every one of those days.”[51]

        He made an important point when he emphasized that the sin offerings for the feast of unleavened bread were only eaten by the high priest, not by the community. We should note that the Passover sacrifices were eaten by the whole community. This is an important distinction because sin offerings could only be eaten by priests and not by the community. This is explained by Morrow as well:

        “[t]he ritual procedures for purification [hatta’t] and reparation [asam] offerings were fairly identical. […] The fat portions were burnt on the altar and the rest of the animal eaten by priests under ritually clean conditions in the courtyard of the tabernacle.”[52]

        That the sin offering could only be eaten by the priest or any male in his family is emphasized in the Bible. Leviticus 6:26, 29 states:

        “The priest who offers it shall eat it; it is to be eaten in the sanctuary area, in the courtyard of the tent of meeting. […] Any male in a priest’s family may eat it; it is most holy.”

        Ezekiel 44:29 also states that only the priests may eat certain types of offerings (the sin offering being one of them), but the Passover sacrifice is not included in this rule:

        “They will eat the grain offerings, the sin offerings and the guilt offerings; and everything in Israel devoted to the Lord will belong to them.”

        Was the Passover sacrifice any of these types of offerings? The answer is no.

        Liked by 2 people

      • “Yes it was because it protected them from the wrath angel of death, which is judgement on sins and idolatry.”

        Irrelevant, moron. The Passover lamb does not protect from death in general, does it? It was not a “hattat”, which is literally what a sin offering is called in the Bible.

        Also, a sin offering could only be eaten by the priests, not by the community. The Passover sacrifice was eaten by everyone. Therefore, it cannot be a sin offering.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Wood’s 1990 thesis has been weakened as more carbon-14 dating has been done. Robert Hubbard explains:

        “Wood’s reading of the archaeological evidence is still subject to dispute. His dating of Jericho’s destruction to the Late Bronze Age depends heavily on carbon-14 dating of remains from Jericho’s burn layer. But a subsequent study applied high-precision radiocarbon dating to eighteen samples of carbon and six charred cereal grains from that same source and twelve other carbon samples. The results confirmed Kenyon’s original dating (1550 BC) rather than that of Wood (ca. 1400 BC). By implication, they also undermine the force of Wood’s observation that the city’s archaeological data favorably compares to the biblical data.” (The NIV Application Commentary: Joshua, 2009, p. 204)

        Also, along with Jericho, the placing of Ai in the time of Joshua has also been refuted by archaeological evidence. Ironically, the evidence is also present in the name “Ai” which literally means “ruin”. The archaeological evidence shows that Ai was destroyed around 2400 BC and was reoccupied around the 12th century BC.

        There is also another problem. If the Exodus occurred around the time of Ramesses II (d. 1214 BC), as most Christians believe, then even if the destruction of Jericho occurred around 1400 BC (per Wood), it would still be earlier than the time that the Bible claims the city fell. After the 40 years of wwandering, the earliest the attack on Jericho could have occurred would have been in the 1170s or 1160s. That’s more than 200 years later.

        Liked by 2 people

    • @Ken Temple

      Ken, I didn’t ask for you’re interpretations but a reference from jewish scripture where the passover lamb is said to be a sacrifice for sin. Additionally I can’t help but notice you completely ignored my last question so i’ll just ask it again, can you please cite any reference from christian scripture to yom kippur?

      Liked by 2 people

      • the fact that the slaughter and blood applied protected them from God’s wrath / judgment, etc. demonstrates it was for the forgiveness of sins.

        On the Yom Kippur question, patience, my friend.

        It seems to me that Isaiah 53 is combining aspects of the 2 goats “taking away sins”.

        See here for more, which shows the development from Leviticus 16-17 (Yom Kippur) to Isaiah 53 to the NT:

        One should read all of Leviticus chapter 16 and 17 and see the context, the two goats – one was slaughtered for atonement and one was sent away for atonement, after the priest confessed all the sins of the people of Israel onto the goat.

        Here are the most relevant verses of Leviticus 16 concerning the Day of Atonement and the scapegoat:

        20 “When he finishes atoning for the holy place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall offer the live goat. 21 Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the sons of Israel and all their transgressions in regard to all their sins; and he shall lay them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who stands in readiness.22 The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a solitary land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness. (Leviticus 16:20-22)

        34 Now you shall have this as a permanent statute, to make atonement for the sons of Israel for all their sins once every year.” And just as the Lord had commanded Moses, so he did. (Leviticus 16:34)

        A very important point I want to make is about the word “bear” or “carry” in verse 22. This is the Hebrew word Nasa’ = נשא and it also used several times in Isaiah 53.

        Surely our griefs He Himself bore [Hebrew: נשא]
        And our sorrows He carried;
        Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
        Smitten of God, and afflicted. (Isaiah 53:4)

        Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
        And He will divide the booty with the strong;
        Because He poured out Himself to death,
        And was numbered with the transgressors;
        Yet He Himself bore [ נשא ] the sin of many,
        And interceded for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:12)

        There is also another Hebrew word for “carry” and “bear” or “take away” [ סבל – “sabal” ] used in Isaiah 53:4 and 53:11, that would emphasize the taking away aspect of the scape-goat (literally: “the goat of sending away”, or “the goat of escaping” = עז- אזל = “Az” = goat; “azel” [ אזל ] = sending away or escaping)

        Isaiah 53 really starts in 52:13, according to context, as the chapter divisions were a later invention. “Behold, My servant, will act wisely and succeed, and He will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted.” Note, the Hebrew word Nasa’ [ נשא ] is also used in this verse, but in this context, it means, “lifted up”. This may be pointing to the “lifting up” of the Son of Man on the cross (John 3:14, 12:32) or the lifting up of the Son of Man in the resurrection and ascension to heaven. Almost every verse in Isaiah 52:13 to 53:12 is either quoted in the NT or alluded to the NT (see examples at end); and many aspects are alluded to back to earlier parts of the TaNakh. (the Hebrew Bible – T = Torah; N = Nabi’im = prophets; “Kh” = Ketuvim = writings (the Psalms, poetry, wisdom, and historical books. These are the three sections of the Hebrew Bible that Jesus also affirmed in Luke 24:44.)

        The whole section, beginning in Isaiah 52:13-15 and 53:1-12 has several indicators that Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is about atonement aspects of both goats in the Day of Atonement of Leviticus 16. Because the suffering servant (52:13 – “My servant”; and 53:11 – “My servant, the righteous one, will justify the many”) both bears our sins and is slaughtered, He is fulfilling both aspects of the Day of Atonement. By both aspects, I mean both goats – one was slaughtered and one was “sent away”, representing 2 aspects of atonement. Because He is also called “a lamb”, He is fulfilling the aspect of the Passover lamb of Exodus 12, which turned God’s wrath away from those that had the blood on the doorposts, and He is the lamb that Abraham said “God will provide for the lamb for the sacrifice” in Genesis 22.

        Isaiah 53:6 also points to the scapegoat of the Day of Atonement.

        “All of us like sheep have gone astray,
        Each of us has turned to his own way;
        But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
        To fall on Him.” ( Isaiah 53:6)

        The concept of the iniquity “falling upon” or “encountering” Him seems to allude back to the lot falling upon the scapegoat. And that the priest placed his hands on the head of the scapegoat and confessed all the sins of the sons of Israel over the goat was a symbol of transference of sin from us humans onto the goat.

        Isaiah 53:6 is alluded to in 1 Peter 2:25 – “For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and guardian of our souls.”

        Also, the shepherd imagery points to Psalm 23:1, Isaiah 40; and Micah 5:2-5, and Jesus makes that claim that He is the Messiah who is the good shepherd who will shepherd My people, etc. (John chapter 10)

        Getting back to the idea of “bearing sin” – from Isaiah 53:4 and 11-12 – this is picked up a lot in the New Testament.

        1 Peter 2:24

        ” and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. ”

        The last phrase, “for by His wounds you were healed” is a direct reference to Isaiah 53:5; and the first part that He “bore our sins” is a reference to Isaiah 53:4, 11, and 12. In fact, the LXX translation of “bore” in Isaiah 53:4 and 12 is the same Greek word in I Peter 2:24. (ανηνεγκεν, from ανα-φερω – to carry, to carry away, to bear, to offer up (a sacrifice). This word is also used in Hebrews 7:27 (twice, offering up sacrifices, and Jesus offered Himself up); Hebrews 9:28, and James 2:21 about Abraham offering up Isaac.

        Another argument that the Rabbi makes is about Isaiah 53:10 – that phrase, “He would render Himself as a guilt offering . . . ” is harkening back to Leviticus 5:15-19 and the guilt offering there, but it states that it is only for unintentional sins, not intentional ones. But if one keeps reading into Leviticus chapter 6:1-7, one can see that the “guilt offering” [ אשם ] also includes intentional sins. (Thanks to Michael Brown for that insight! Answers to Jewish Objections to Jesus. 5 Volumes. In volume 2, “Theological Objections, on page 128 and following. ) Furthermore, the day of atonement emphasizes several times “for all the iniquities of the sons of Israel”. (see Leviticus 16:20-22 and verse 34) All would include both intentional and unintentional sins.

        But the Lord was pleased
        To crush Him, putting Him to grief;
        If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, [ אשם ]
        He will see His offspring,
        He will prolong His days,
        And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand. (Isaiah 53:10)

        Allusions or quotes in the NT:

        Isaiah 52:13 – “My Servant” – Mark 10:45; Matthew 20:28. Matthew 12:1-4 also about “My servant” which is a quote from Isaiah 42:1-4. Jesus, as the servant who serves and “give His life a ransom for man” alludes to all of Isaiah 53, and He was clearly claiming to be the servant of Isaiah 42 and 53.

        “He will act wisely or prudently” = the Hebrew word here is a deep word, meaning, “He will act wisely so as to succeed or prosper”, in carrying out the will of God. This word is also used in Joshua 1:8.

        “He will be high, and lifted up, and great exalted.” This points to the numerous concepts of Jesus’ glorification and victory over sin in His resurrection, and ascension to heaven, and His taking His seat of authority at the right hand of the Father.

        Isaiah 52:14 – “His appearance was marred more than any man” – refers to the beatings and sufferings of the brutal crucifixion. He was so disfigured that the disciples did not recognize Him when He rose from the dead, because the last memories of His dis-figurement was so seared into their brains.

        Isaiah 52:15 – “what had not been told them, they will see, and what they had not heard, they will understand” – this is quoted by the apostle Paul in Romans 15:20-21, that when the gospel goes to new areas and new people groups, the mission of the suffering servant is being fulfilled and accomplished. The mission of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 52-53 is not complete until all the unreached people groups have heard, and some of them come to know the true God, the fulfillment when some from all the nations will be redeemed by the blood of the lamb. (see Revelation 5:9)

        Isaiah 53:1 – quoted in John 12:38 and Romans 10:16

        Isaiah 53:2- 3 – alluded to back in Isaiah 11:1 and as the “Netzer” [ נצר ] and the branch and tender shoot, (with Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15; and Zechariah 3:8 and 6:12) – as the “Netzer” – he was despised and rejected and this is what Matthew 2:23 is talking about when it says, “this was to fulfill the word of the prophets, He will be called a Nazarene.” (“Netzer” or “Nazer” is the root of “Nazarene”) The Jews of the south around Jerusalem were disgusted with the area of Galilee, “Galilee of the Gentiles”, and the Samaritans, because they were half Jews, mixed with the Assyrians and others peoples (see 2 Kings 17); and so many Greeks and Romans and other foreigners were up there in around Galilee. “can anything good come out of Galilee?” was a common saying.

        Isaiah 53:4 – quoted in Matthew 8:17;

        the “bearing of sin” is alluded to in 1 Peter 2:24 and other places. The word for “pain”/”sickness” is used in Isaiah 1:3-9 about the sins of the people. Also, Jeremiah 17:9 speaks of the heart being sick and deceitful, and although a different word for “sick”, the concept points to spiritual sickness in sin.

        Isaiah 53:5 – the last phrase is quoted in 1 Peter 2:24

        Isaiah 53:6 – alluded to in 1 Peter 2:25

        Isaiah 53:7 – 8

        He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
        Yet He did not open His mouth;
        Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, (see John 1:29)
        And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
        So He did not open His mouth.

        By oppression and judgment He was taken away,

        And as for His generation, who considered that He was cut off out of the land of the living,

        For the transgression of My people, to whom the stoke was due?

        Isaiah 53:7-8 is quoted in Acts 8:30-35

        30 Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “Well, how could I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 Now the passage of Scripture which he was reading was this:

        “He was led as a sheep to slaughter;
        And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
        So He does not open His mouth.
        33 “In humiliation His judgment was taken away;
        Who will relate His generation?
        For His life is removed from the earth.”

        34 The eunuch answered Philip and said, “Please tell me, of whom does the prophet say this? Of himself or of someone else?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.

        Another interesting note is the phrase “cut off from the land of the living”. This concept of being “cut off” is similar to the passage about the Messiah in Daniel 9:26 – “Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.” Clearly this is about the death of the Messiah predicted by Daniel, and then after His death, the temple will be destroyed, in 70 AD, as Jesus predicted in Matthew 23:36-39 and 24:1-3 and 15.

        Isaiah 53:9 –

        His grave was assigned with wicked men,
        Yet He was with a rich man in His death, (allusion to Joseph of Arimathea’s grave in Matthew 27:57)
        Because He had done no violence,
        Nor was there any deceit in His mouth. (Quoted in 1 Peter 2:22)

        Isaiah 53:10 –

        But the Lord was pleased – (pointing to the wrath of God being satisfied by His atonement in willingly being a guilt offering- Leviticus chapter 5 and 6)

        To crush Him, putting Him to grief;
        If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, (Leviticus 5 and 6:1-7)
        He will see His offspring, (The Messiah’s “seed” is His spiritual sons and daughters by faith – also referred to later in the passage in Isaiah 54:1-4 and Galatians 3-4)
        He will prolong His days,
        And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand.

        Isaiah 53:11-12

        As a result of the anguish of His soul,
        He will see it and be satisfied;
        By His knowledge the Righteous One,
        My Servant, will justify the many, (Jesus alludes to this in Mark 10:45; and Romans 5:11-21 speaks of the justification of many by the death of Christ)
        As He will bear their iniquities. (referred to at the beginning of the article)
        12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
        And He will divide the booty with the strong;
        Because He poured out Himself to death,
        And was numbered with the transgressors; (quoted in Luke 22:37; and also probably fulfilled by being crucified between 2 other criminals.)
        Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, (I Peter 2:24; Hebrews 7:27; 9:28)
        And interceded for the transgressors. (see Luke 23:34; Christ continues to intercede for us now – Romans 8:34, Hebrews 7:25)

        So, Isaiah 53 was a further development of the substitutionary sacrifice and the bearing of sins of the goats of the day of atonement in Leviticus 16, 17:11, (also in Leviticus 5-6) and a prediction of the Messiah to come, as almost every verse in Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is either directly quoted or alluded to in the NT.

        Like

    • @Ken Temple

      Ken once again I didn’t ask for you’re interpretations but a reference from jewish scripture where the passover lamb is said to be a sacrifice for sin. Additionally the reason i asked you to cite any reference from christian scripture to yom kippur is because while the passover lamb is mentioned frequently the sacrifice which is the actual day of atonement is absent from christian scriptures, showing their ignorance and disproving the oft claimed “intertextualilty.” So i’ll just ask it again, can you please cite any reference from christian scripture to yom kippur?

      Liked by 3 people

      • The score is now 11-0, with Vaqas leading.

        You won’t get an answer bro. Kennywise the scumbag is going to beat around the bush and then disappear claiming that he’s “busy”.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Isaiah 53 develops the 2 goats as atonements (one slaughtered and the other “sent away that bears the iniquities of all Israel”. Both slaughter and bearing iniquities is picked up in the NT all over the place. Read the whole article I already gave, will all the constant allusions back to the lamb in Genesis 22, Job’s offerings of burnt offerings for sin in the thoughts and intensions of the heart (Job 1:5 – see the word, sin, and the Lxx for thoughts and intentions – which points back to Genesis 8:21 and 6:5) The lamb of God is pointing back to Genesis 22:7-8 and Exodus 12 – when God “sees” the blood on the door posts, etc. – the atonement / slaughter protected them from the wrath of God – if they had not applied the blood, they would have been killed by God’s justice – against their own sinful hearts, which is illustrated by the idolatry and rebellion and paganism of the Egyptians and later manifested in the hearts of the sons of Israel in the golden calf incident.

        So, many verses of the NT speak of Christ bearing sin – which is allusions back to the scapegoat of Leviticus 16-17 that bore / carried sin away and the other one that was slaughtered.

        1 Peter 2:24
        He Himself bore our sins in His body on the wood / cross . . .

        Like

      • You are doing that demand for the wooden and brittle kind of thinking again; demanding the exact words “Yom Kippur”.

        the “bearing of sin” all over Isaiah 53 and the NT points back to the “bearing / carrying away of sin of Leviticus 16:21 of the scapegoat, the goat sent away bearing the sins.

        1 Peter 2:24
        Hebrews 7:27
        Hebrews 9:28

        the “bearing of sin” in these 3 verses are alluding back to Yom Kipper in Leviticus 16.

        Both the OT and the NT require both – the bloody substitutionary sacrifice and repentance on the part of the sinner. Genesis 22, Exodus 12 (Passover), Leviticus chapters 1-7 and 16-17, 1 Kings 8, Psalm 50:5; Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, and other passages all point to the necessity of blood sacrifice. Leviticus 17:11 is still teaching the necessity of blood sacrifice, despite the Rabbi’s argument against it, and is what Hebrews 9:22 is referring to – “without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins.”

        As time allows, in later posts, I may comment on other parts of this lecture, which is basically trying to counter the arguments and evangelism that Messianic Jews and other Christians who witness to Jews make. Muslims like to use this lecture also, in making arguments against the Christian faith. (No longer available as Paul B. Williams changed his blog three times.)

        One should read all of Leviticus chapter 16 and 17 and see the context, the two goats – one was slaughtered for atonement and one was sent away for atonement, after the priest confessed all the sins of the people of Israel onto the goat.

        Here are the most relevant verses of Leviticus 16 concerning the Day of Atonement and the scapegoat:

        20 “When he finishes atoning for the holy place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall offer the live goat. 21 Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the sons of Israel and all their transgressions in regard to all their sins; and he shall lay them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who stands in readiness.22 The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a solitary land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness. (Leviticus 16:20-22)

        34 Now you shall have this as a permanent statute, to make atonement for the sons of Israel for all their sins once every year.” And just as the Lord had commanded Moses, so he did. (Leviticus 16:34)

        A very important point I want to make is about the word “bear” or “carry” in verse 22. This is the Hebrew word Nasa’ = נשא and it also used several times in Isaiah 53.

        Surely our griefs He Himself bore [Hebrew: נשא]
        And our sorrows He carried;
        Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
        Smitten of God, and afflicted. (Isaiah 53:4)

        Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
        And He will divide the booty with the strong;
        Because He poured out Himself to death,
        And was numbered with the transgressors;
        Yet He Himself bore [ נשא ] the sin of many,
        And interceded for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:12)

        There is also another Hebrew word for “carry” and “bear” or “take away” [ סבל – “sabal” ] used in Isaiah 53:4 and 53:11, that would emphasize the taking away aspect of the scape-goat (literally: “the goat of sending away”, or “the goat of escaping” = עז- אזל = “Az” = goat; “azel” [ אזל ] = sending away or escaping)

        Isaiah 53 really starts in 52:13, according to context, as the chapter divisions were a later invention. “Behold, My servant, will act wisely and succeed, and He will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted.” Note, the Hebrew word Nasa’ [ נשא ] is also used in this verse, but in this context, it means, “lifted up”. This may be pointing to the “lifting up” of the Son of Man on the cross (John 3:14, 12:32) or the lifting up of the Son of Man in the resurrection and ascension to heaven. Almost every verse in Isaiah 52:13 to 53:12 is either quoted in the NT or alluded to the NT (see examples at end); and many aspects are alluded to back to earlier parts of the TaNakh. (the Hebrew Bible – T = Torah; N = Nabi’im = prophets; “Kh” = Ketuvim = writings (the Psalms, poetry, wisdom, and historical books. These are the three sections of the Hebrew Bible that Jesus also affirmed in Luke 24:44.)

        The whole section, beginning in Isaiah 52:13-15 and 53:1-12 has several indicators that Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is about atonement aspects of both goats in the Day of Atonement of Leviticus 16. Because the suffering servant (52:13 – “My servant”; and 53:11 – “My servant, the righteous one, will justify the many”) both bears our sins and is slaughtered, He is fulfilling both aspects of the Day of Atonement. By both aspects, I mean both goats – one was slaughtered and one was “sent away”, representing 2 aspects of atonement. Because He is also called “a lamb”, He is fulfilling the aspect of the Passover lamb of Exodus 12, which turned God’s wrath away from those that had the blood on the doorposts, and He is the lamb that Abraham said “God will provide for the lamb for the sacrifice” in Genesis 22.

        Isaiah 53:6 also points to the scapegoat of the Day of Atonement.

        “All of us like sheep have gone astray,
        Each of us has turned to his own way;
        But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
        To fall on Him.” ( Isaiah 53:6)

        The concept of the iniquity “falling upon” or “encountering” Him seems to allude back to the lot falling upon the scapegoat. And that the priest placed his hands on the head of the scapegoat and confessed all the sins of the sons of Israel over the goat was a symbol of transference of sin from us humans onto the goat.

        Isaiah 53:6 is alluded to in 1 Peter 2:25 – “For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and guardian of our souls.”

        Also, the shepherd imagery points to Psalm 23:1, Isaiah 40; and Micah 5:2-5, and Jesus makes that claim that He is the Messiah who is the good shepherd who will shepherd My people, etc. (John chapter 10)

        Getting back to the idea of “bearing sin” – from Isaiah 53:4 and 11-12 – this is picked up a lot in the New Testament.

        1 Peter 2:24

        ” and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. ”

        The last phrase, “for by His wounds you were healed” is a direct reference to Isaiah 53:5; and the first part that He “bore our sins” is a reference to Isaiah 53:4, 11, and 12. In fact, the LXX translation of “bore” in Isaiah 53:4 and 12 is the same Greek word in I Peter 2:24. (ανηνεγκεν, from ανα-φερω – to carry, to carry away, to bear, to offer up (a sacrifice). This word is also used in Hebrews 7:27 (twice, offering up sacrifices, and Jesus offered Himself up); Hebrews 9:28, and James 2:21 about Abraham offering up Isaac.

        Like

    • @Ken Temple

      “You are doing that demand for the wooden and brittle kind of thinking again; demanding the exact words “Yom Kippur”.”

      The reason i’m employing such “wooden” thinking is because we find frequent explicit mention of the passover sacrifice in the christian scriptures as a sin atonement, and yet yom kippur is noticeably absent!

      Let me ask you ask Ken, why do you think the christian bible which connects the passover sacrifice to sin, would not explicitly mention the actual DAY of atonement?!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Exactly. We find direct references to Passover in the Gospel of John and in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, but for some reason, not one mention of Yom Kippur, only alleged allusions to it. Of course, there is a simple reason. Idiots like Paul and “John” didn’t know what they were talking about, and modern Christians are too embarrassed to admit it. #ChristiansApologistsAreStupid

        Liked by 2 people

      • but it does by “takes away” in John 1:29 (sends away, as in the scapegoat of “sending away” in Leviticus 16:21) – shows it is combining the lamb from Genesis 22:7-8 and Exodus 12 and Leviticus chapters 1-6 and 16-17 and Isaiah 53, all of them.
        John 1:29; Isaiah 53:4-12; ransom in Mark 10:45, 1 Peter 1:18-19; 1 Peter 2:22-24

        Like

      • Even if it was “combining”, that is still an error because combining the Passover sacrifice with the Yom Kippur sacrifice makes no sense. The former was a thanksgiving sacrifice, not a sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins.

        But to reiterate Vaqas’ point, the gospel of John makes several direct references to Passover, and only (according to Kennywise) vague allusions to the Yom Kippur sacrifice. The reason for this is quite clear. To the author of the gospel, it was imperative that he try to make Jesus’ crucifixion coincide with Passover. That is why he repeatedly emphasized that it was the Preparation Day for Passover. He was much more concerned with Passover than with Yom Kippur. Ergo, he completely misappropriated the former, and wrongly neglected the latter. The Bible is still wrong. Christianity is still false. Kennywise is still a clown.

        Liked by 3 people

    • @Ken Temple

      Let me ask you again Ken, why do you think the christian bible which connects the passover sacrifice to sin, does not explicitly mention the actual DAY of atonement?

      Like

    • @Ken Temple

      “The new testament emphasis on the Messiah bearing sins, carrying them away is a direct reference to the carrying away of sins of Yom Kippur and Leviticus 16”

      No it isn’t. that’s you’re interpretation, which we can of course discuss, but not my main question. The NT authors have no problem explicitly mentioning the passover sacrifice. What I want to know is why they have a problem with explicitly mentioning yom kippur when its the literal DAY of atonement?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Isaiah 53:6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

        6 All of us like sheep have gone astray,
        Each of us has turned to his own way;
        But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
        To fall on Him.

        Like

      • Isaiah 53:7 NIV

        “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth;
        he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent,so he did not open his mouth.”.

        Jesus spoke many times during his ordeal. Either this is a false prophecy or it has nothing to do with a dying Messiah.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Isaiah 53:8 NIV

        …for the transgression of my people he was punished.

        So was it for just the Israelites’ sins or the sins of the whole world that Kennywise’s weird mangod Messiah died? Isaiah 53:8 says it was only for the former.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. 18 knowing that you were ransomed [ same concept in Qur’an 37:107 and Mark 10:45 and Revelation 5:9] from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold,
    19 but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot.
    20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you
    21 who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

    1 Peter 1:18-21

    Like

    • Jesus was a MAN not a farm yard animal with a tail. Also, human sacrifice is an abomination according to the prophets. Conclusion: Christianity is false.

      Liked by 3 people

    • According to Paul and John, Jesus was the Paschal lamb. This shows that these two nitwits were not “inspired” because the paschal lamb was not sacrificed for the forgiveness of sins. Rather, it was more like a thanksgiving offering. Ergo, Christianity and its creepy obsession with human sacrifice are false and are inspired by Satan.

      Liked by 3 people

    • @Ken Temple

      Ken do you not find it odd that the “lamb of god” would use this ritual to proclaim his deity when the original intent was to separate divinity from the sacrificial lambs? Not to mention of course as was pointed out by QB, that the sacrifice for sin was a different one entirely.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Excellent point brother Vaqas!

        Per Maimonides, the Targum Onkelos claims the sacrifice of the lamb was meant to be a stinging refutation of Egyptian idolatry. Yet, the Christians claim that Jesus was the substitute for the lamb. Christians fall into the same demonic idolatry, except they did it with a man, not an animal. Once again…IRONY (sing-songy).

        Liked by 3 people

  5. Large works have been written on the doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” (the final and only infallible rule for faith and practice) – note: it means “the only infallible rule”, not “the only rule”. There are secondary rules of interpretations, creeds, confessions of faith, systematics, good commentaries, good teachers, pastors throughout history. Only the Bible (OT and NT) is infallible.
    https://www.ligonier.org/blog/top-five-books-five-solas-sola-scriptura/

    Like

  6. This one is a good introduction to the subject.
    James White’s chapter on the early church and Sola Scriptura is very good.

    Like

  7. Yeah, that’s right!

    You don’t have a doctorate Paul Williams, so who are you to claim to be “over” others in your judgements?

    Do you have a Master’s Degree?

    At least I do have an Master’s of Divinity (M. Div) 3 year Master’s degree.

    Like

  8. James White explained all that a long time ago.
    It was a matter of expenses and having to up-root the family. Phds are expensive and one has to invest in uprooting the family and moving to the campus, and spending 7 to 10 years on the project, etc.

    He also debated top scholars who do have their Phds, -ie, Bart Ehrman, John D. Crossan, Robert Price, Shabir Ally, etc.

    His debate opponents have included scholars such as Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, Robert M. Price, Joe Ventilacion[12] and popularizers such as Dan Barker and John Shelby Spong[13] as well as Islamic scholar Shabir Ally and South African Muslim apologist Yusuf Ismail.

    https://www.aomin.org/aoblog/1998/06/01/of-doctorates-and-eternity-2/

    Like

  9. He explained that, it is “ThD” – he explained the whole thing.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: