Posted on 01/12/2006 7:42:57 AM PST by Alouette
As was His nature. However, personal forgiveness does not change one's objective standing before the bar of justice. I can personally forgive the killer of my child, but that killer still needs to stand before judge to make satisfaction.
At His first appearance, Jesus did not come as judge (John 12:47), so His comments from the cross cannot be taken in an objective, judicial sense. At His second coming, however, Christ will judge all those for their deeds, and whoever is not found to be "in Christ" will suffer eternal punishment (Acts 17:31).
The apostate Jews of Jesus's day also suffered temporal punishment when that nation was judged of God by the agency of the Roman armies. The keys to the kingdom and the designation "holy nation" were transferred from the physical descendents of Abraham to Christ's spiriral heirs, the church.
"So Jesus said to them, 'Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.'" (Matt. 19:28)
Fear of what or whom?
for they know not what they do,or "are doing", meaning, in crucifying him, which was the case of many of them, and of their rulers; they did not know that Jesus was the Messiah, nor the prophecies concerning him, nor the evil they were committing in putting him to death: not that their ignorance excused their sin; nor was it without sin; nor does Christ use it as a plea for pardon, or found his intercession upon it, which is always done upon his own propitiatory sacrifice; but this is mentioned as descriptive of the persons Christ prays for, and points out a branch of his priestly office he exercises, in having compassion on the ignorant, and them that are out of the way; (John Gill's Exposition of the Bible; Luke 23:34)
Ummm. Jesus is.... God.
He is judge, jury and executioner. If he asks for your forgiveness, it is done. Period.
The Jews who delivered up Jesus to the Romans and the Romans who carried out the sentence will not be judged on those specific deeds (unless you believe Jesus lied in a moment of weakness). He will remember them no more. It is for their other deeds that they will have to answer.
There is no cliff mentioned in scripture regarding this incident.
Secondly, the scripture in Acts says "headfirst". A hanged body does not fall headfirst.
Witnesses may often see things differently. One may say the day was sunny, another may say there was cloud cover. Only one may be right.
Finally, we do not know for sure whether these were first hand witnesses or this was information passed on over the years like the old game of "telephone" the facts are diluted. I believe in both cases, the Books were written after the fact.
You've stiched together a conclusion that is not found in the scriptures. Your theory may be correct or it may be in error. But it is not supported in the writings of the scriptures.
And yes, there are others.
In this case the verses need no elaborate commentary. Jesus asked for their forgiveness. The sin shall not be charged to them. Not that they will not be charged with every other sin they committed, but this one was "on the house".
It is inferred.
Secondly, the scripture in Acts says "headfirst". A hanged body does not fall headfirst.
The greek word does not state that it was "head first". It has been translated as "headlong" from a word which means a proned position. Assuming it was headfirst, if he was hanging and his feet hit ground first and then he went over a cliff, his body would have inverted and he would have gone headfirst. There is no contradiction there.
Witnesses may often see things differently. One may say the day was sunny, another may say there was cloud cover. Only one may be right.
It depends on their own location and the time of observation. The descriptions here are not mutually exclusive. They can be and have been logically reconciled.
And yes, there are others.
Bring 'em on. Start a thread.
So in other words, you actually haven't read the Dictionary of Christianity in America, you're just citing the text and footnotes you found in someone else's work. Nice.
In case you didn't know, Frank Schaeffer - who used to go by the name Franky Schaeffer - has an axe to grind when it comes to both Orthodoxy and Protestantism. Or so my friends in the Greek Orthodox Church tell me. Perhaps you've heard of Franky's more famous (and theologically consistent) father - Francis A. Schaeffer? You'd do far better to read Francis' books than to quote from his son's.
Where? When you start letting inferences go, then suddenly you begin having a living document.
The greek word does not state that it was "head first".
My error. It is headlong. But still means head before the rest of the body. Please give me the Greek word.
It depends on their own location and the time of observation. The descriptions here are not mutually exclusive. They can be and have been logically reconciled.
Again, it's not what scripture says. Again,
Here's a spin different from yours:
How did Judas Iscariot Die?
This one is pretty simple once all the facts
are understood, but until then, it's a little
confusing.
Judas was the apostle that just before Jesus
was crucified, Judas decided to turn in Jesus for
BLOOD MONEY. He made a deal with the high priests
where he would get paid 30 pieces of silver in
exchange for pointing out where and who Jesus was
so the soldiers could then take and arrest him.
Soon after Jesus was arrested, Jesus was deserted,
beaten, mutilated and then crucified.
Judas knew that they'd do this to Jesus, but he
was thinking of the money rather than what they'd
do to his good friend Jesus. In letting his greed
take him over, Judas ended up losing all his
mercy and kindness concerning him.
After Jesus died, Judas went back to the temple
and told the priests he didn't want the money
any more and tossed it back in the temple. Judas
then went and hanged himself and died. See Mat 27
for the entire account of this.
The high priests didn't want the money since it
was the "price of blood" or BLOOD MONEY. So since
they didn't want to put the money in treasury, they
decided to use it to buy the field that Judas would
be buried at.
What then causes people concern is that later in
Acts, Judas seems to be dying by a different manner,
specifically:
Ac 1:16 Men and brethren, this scripture must
needs have been fulfilled, which the
Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake
before concerning Judas, which was guide
to them that took Jesus.
17 For he was numbered with us, and had
obtained part of this ministry.
18 Now this man purchased a field with the
reward of iniquity; and falling headlong,
he burst asunder in the midst, and all
his bowels gushed out.
19 And it was known unto all the dwellers
at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is
called in their proper tongue, Aceldama,
that is to say, The field of blood.
At first glance this verse set seems to be
saying that Judas fell and split open his guts
when he landed, turning the field to blood.
But when the verses were written was that what
they really meant?
No, it was not.
A couple of items concerning what's being said:
1. Falling was a common concept used to denote
"falling from God" or leaving God. Judas in
turning in Jesus, he's then rejected the
ARM OF GOD.
2. The "bowels" were where the Hebrews considered
the MERCY and KINDNESS to reside, similar to
our thinking of the heart as where mercy
kindness and tenderness resides: "broken heart",
"tender hearted", "heartless", etc... For the
Hebrews, those concepts were described with the
"bowels", not the heart.
Essentially, the verse set is saying in their
terms of the day, that Judas fell recklessly from
God, lost all his mercy and kindness and turned
in his good friend Jesus. His having done so, that
purchased the field he was buried at with said
BLOOD MONEY, the "price of blood" giving that
"field of blood".
For those not wanting to read the verse set this
way, they're then left with reconciling THREE physical
impossibilities:
1. Judas in hanging, he would be falling feet first
not head first.
2. If Judas is assumed to be falling head first,
he'd split open his head, not his guts.
3. Judas in falling from a tree he could hang himself
from, he'd not have enough impact to split open
his guts anyway.
In other words, the Acts verse set can't describe
an actual physical falling, but it can describe
Judas's falling from God... his SPIRITUAL falling
from God after losing all his mercy and kindness.
Therefore the two accounts do in fact align:
* Matthew describes how Judas PHYSICALLY died.
* Acts describes how Judas SPIRITUALLY fell from God.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Sound familiar? Note what the author included at the bottom of the page, which you omitted from your cut-and-paste:
Note: The above information was written by John P. Boatwright and is freely given. The information is simply my opinion based on how I perceive the content discussed. Anyone reading such should use their own judgement as to whether or not the information has any value to them. You may copy portions of the above opinions as long as a reference to this page is included and no text within said portion is altered. If copied to another medium other than the internet, include the entire text. The above content may change over time.
It was explained as another spin. Correct? Who knows.
They're not denominations, per se, but those awho dhere to different eschatological beliefs inhabit different denominations. There is no entirely unified belief in Protestantism, no central governing authority on faith and morals, and no way to apply universal definitions for the matter of discernment.
Unfortunately, unity at the foot of the cross is nothing more than claptrap if everyone believes something different while they're standing there. You, yourself, said that the denominations are divided over "non-essential" issues, which is the only evidence necessary that Protestantism is not guided by the Holy Spirit.
We accept your testimony that you know the Lord and will allow you to sit at our communion table any day if you know Jesus.
So a mentally handicapped person is deprived of salvation unless he can confess that Christ is his savior?
Jesus said "eat my flesh, drink my blood". All arguments end there.
Yes. We are living in the end times.
b'shem Y'shua
I agree with you on this point. The second, "view from the ground" rendition does not rule out hanging. I read a medical analysis (I'm sorry, i don't have the source) which indicated that a body hanging for several hours in that heat would likely eventually slip from the noose and gastric distension would cause, esentially, a spilling of guts in hitting the ground. If it were a long fall from a cliff, even more so.
Okay - for kicks - let's say there's only TWO Protestant denominations on the entire earth. That's still proof that Protestantism violates Christ's prayer for unity and could not be possibly guided by the Holy Spirit. That's incontrovertible. The Reformation was an elective split, not a compulsory one.
And then there's the Orthodox Churches....
Don't go calling my church Gnostic...the holes in your sect of Christianity are large enough to drive a truck through.
159 posted on 01/12/2006 9:01:37 PM MST by AlaninSA
According to the London Times, a campaign led by Monsignor Walter Brandmuller, head of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Science, is aimed at persuading believers to look kindly at a man reviled for 2,000 years.Correct me if I'm wrong , but I read that to meanMgr Brandmuller told fellow scholars it was time for a “re-reading” of the Judas story. He is supported by Vittorio Messori, a prominent Catholic writer close to both Pope Benedict XVI and the late John Paul II.
Signor Messori said that the rehabilitation of Judas would “resolve the problem of an apparent lack of mercy by Jesus toward one of his closest collaborators.”
He told La Stampa that there was a Christian ( read Roman Catholic) tradition that held that Judas was forgiven by
Jesus and ordered to purify himself with “spiritual exercises” in the desert.
How do you read it?
b'shem Y'shua
"Yes. We are living in the end times.
b'shem Y'shua"
It does seem so. Especially how crazy this country has gotten in just a short period of time. At least, I don't think we've got too much longer as a country. We seem to do everything to insult God. I'm sure Christ isn't too far behind...
Absolutely. We all suffer for disunity. JP II and B16 have bent over backwards to continue dialogue with the Orthodox. One of the biggest obstacles has been Patriarch Alexy of Russia who absolutely refuses to receive the Pope for a visit, and refused to attend JP II's funeral...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.