MDB Bible Study

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Lemmie

Forgiveness (a bandage or covering) is an Old Testament thing - That's why they had to keep sacrificing animals over and over and over.

Isn't that why the sacrament is taken, over and over?

In most (all?) Bible based Christian churches, the sacrament (small s) is simply done to remember Jesus and the Last Supper. In my church, we do this about once a month. This has nothing to do with forgiving sin and/or salvation.

The Roman Catholic church has an entirely different view of this and it's called the "Holy Eucharist"

Healing - The complete removal of sin (Being set free of the bondage/chains that sin places us in) is entirely what is at the cross. It was the ultimate and last sacrifice needed for the human condition - That's why Jesus said "It Is Finished."

If it were really finished, why do people have to continue to confess and seek forgivness?

"It is finished" - means that Jesus has provided the ultimate sacrifice of all sin - He (God the Son) has willingly taken our place and has completely removed (not covered) the sin that we own. In doing so, we are made right standing with God through the Savior, Jesus (This righteousness has nothing to do with us) - By the Grace of God comes salvation.

These arguments are illogical.

They are not arguments - this is MDB Bible study (No arguing allowed) :)

Thanks for contributing to the Bible study.

[_Ceeboo]

Duplicate

[_honorentheos]

this is MDB Bible study (No arguing allowed) :)

You do realize MDB and no arguing are contradictory concepts, right?

[_huckelberry]

God has been forgiving people since Adam so it is silly to say he could not do so without atonement.

Are you really suggesting that since an imaginary thing has been happening since the imaginary existence of an imaginary person, it is therefore silly to put conditions on this imaginary thing?

no

[_huckelberry]

Honorentheos, I do not know any Christian group which does not consider repentance an ongoing thing which for us humans is never complete in this life.

I like your statement of your former view of people relation to atonement. It might have a little Mormon color but holds close the general Christian view.

[_Some Schmo]

Okay, let's frame it differently. Let's say you open the ark of the covenant with your eyes open, but right at that moment, you cry out to Jesus for forgiveness. Does your face get melted then? Are you screwed if you've got a swastika anywhere on your person?

I guess I'm asking what's the line for Jesus.

[_honorentheos]

Huckelberry, it was in that light that I viewed the LDS understanding of the various phased of resurrection. Alma 41 says something to the effect that we will be our own judges, suggesting that in the presence of the resurrected Christ one would necessarily acknowledge both His divine sacrifice and one's own true relation to it. One couldn't take it or lie to ones self at that point. And that one's life pursuits would ultimately be restored but perfectly to us so to have spent ones life in service and pursuit of coming to know God, i.e. seeking eternal life, was ultimately what divided the celestial from other resurrections. The temple played into it as both enabling the sealing of a person in the pursuit of a celestial marriage as well as providing unique opportunities to emulate Christ through finding the lost and standing in so they could receive what they weren't able to receive on their own.

For all of the faults of Mormonism I don't thin no it lacks in theological possibilities for depth and coherence. They just aren't codified or necessarily the necessary end point for someone who is looking for it. I suspect it is more mirror than anything, given my back what one hopes to find. Like looking in the Bible or foreshadowing of Jesus in the Old Testament, one is cherry picking what to focus on and anachronistically assigning meaning that isn't likely the original intent of the author or authors. Frankly, if Christians focused on that rather than assuming the Bible held objective, timeless truths on subjects such as marriage equality or when life begins vs. a woman's right to dictate choices related to her body I'd have little reason to care. If it makes a person try to be a bit kinder, or extend a hand rather than a finger, then cool.

[_honorentheos]

Okay, let's frame it differently. Let's say you open the ark of the covenant with your eyes open, but right at that moment, you cry out to Jesus for forgiveness. Does your face get melted then? Are you screwed if you've got a swastika anywhere on your person?

I guess I'm asking what's the line for Jesus.

Silly Schmo, it's steadying the ark that gets you killed. Well, that and being an enemy to Israel. You end up dead either way long before you are able to open it. Unless you can convince the Israelites to worship idols, then it's just a box with some old rocks with scratch marks on them and you're free to do whatever you want with it, no face melting involved.

[_Some Schmo]

There's another long lost tidbit in biblical lore that nobody ever talks about.

When people first went to see Raiders of the Lost Ark, we were pretty damn sure it was about Noah's boat. As we now know, we were all deceived.

Was this god's plan all along? Does this point to Jesus?

[_Chap]

The important thing in reading the Bible is to start by believing the right stuff, then read the right bits of text and hear the right explanation (ignore the stuff that doesn't fit in). Then it all becomes clear!

It's just like when people who expect Jesus to appear at any moment are frequently blessed by visions of the Lord,

on a potato chip:



or on an orange:



But if you do not look with the eye of faith, and if you do not look at the potato chip the right way round, or slice the orange in the wrong direction, you'll just see all kinds of potatoey or fruity stuff with no obvious connection to anything much. Same thing when reading the Bible, really. You have to look at the right parts, with the right story already in your head, ignore the rest, and there it is!