And as to the principle of vicarious punishment and atonement, it has been the touchstone of JWs since 1879 when Russell separated from those who published "Herald of the Morning" and began to publish the first editions of the Watchtower. It has been understood that way of the Old Testament sacrifices and applied to Christ in that fashion ever since. You can probably Google Russell's comments about it easily.
David_Jay
JoinedPosts by David_Jay
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
David_Jay
Yes, I did. And it is the Watchtower view, not Judaism's or Christianity's.
For instance, the Jewish view is described here at http://www.jewfaq.org/m/qorbanot.htm and other places on the Internet and in written Jewish sources.
Being a Sephardic Jew myself I can testify that Jews did not see the sacrifices according to what you wrote, but the JWs did, and they influenced your reading. You just don't realize it yet.
So yes, it is the Watchtower view, even what you wrote.
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
David_Jay
Again, even the idea that you present of the Old Testament is shared basically by the religious traditions that contributed to Watchtower-ism. It is the JW idea that I am saying is completely wrong.
They say God demanded sacrifices in the Temple to cover over sins, and they still have you convinced that this is so. Is it not written: "Do I eat the blood of bulls or drink the blood of he -goats?"--Psalm 50.13.
If the "wrath of a vengeful god" was satisfied by blood sacrifice, it was not the God of the Old or New Testament , as the JWs teach. Have you never read the Scriptire that says: "It is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats take away sins." And again the Scriptures say: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire."--Hebrews 10.1-7.
If Scripture teaches that God does not eat the blood of sacrifices nor even desires these, then why the sacrifice of Christ? Again the Scriptures answer, that "you may come to share in the divine life." (2 Peter 1.4) If God offers a life that grants "divine life," what other source can it have but God?
The death of a perfect man cannot offer a share in God's life. Only that of God can do so. And God does not need his own life. He offers it for humanity for humans "to share in the divine life." That is the Good News, not what the Witnesses have sadly taught you.
Besides, why would you defend the Watchtower view? And what is better news than being offered a "share in the divine life"? If the Gospel the JWs preach is less than that, how is that the Good News? It is not. It is another, accursed gospel.
-
11
Adam buried at the foot of Christ's cross. Are you kidding me.
by James Mixon ini heard this on "the story of god".
his blood trickle down through the rocks into adam giving.
him life.
-
-
David_Jay
It may seem that way, but the idea of Adam being buried there and everything else I explained is older than the New Testament, at least until you get to the part of Jesus being put to death at Skull Place.
The fact that it is post-Biblical even in Judaism shows that it is an independent view as well. Golgotha is a real location, and things just worked out that way as history unfolded (or allegedly did).
Remember, this stuff is discussed even in the Talmud and Church Fathers, often in passing. So it wasn't as if they were trying to make things fit the Bible as we know it today. The Church Fathers had yet to canonize the Christian Scriptures and the Jews did not even believe in Jesus as the Messiah, so no one (especially the Jews) was trying to agree with the Christian Scriptural record. Some parts of the Bible were not even written before this tradition began.
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
David_Jay
All the Scriptures you quote are correct, but none of them, not one says that they are payment to God for sins, as if God is demanding shed blood or needs blood.
What the texts are talking about is that the shedding of blood, or offering of life (remember that blood represents life in the Bible) of Jesus is in order to heal people from the effects of sin.
Remember, all these things are to ransom us from the effects of sin, not from God. God was not holding us in exchange for ransom, sin was. It is written: "God bestowed on us the precious and very great promises, so that through them you may come to share in the divine nature."--2 Peter 1.4.
The Gospel is that people are saved from a mortal nature to share in a divine, incorruptible immortal nature.
Again, I am only stating that the Watchtower view of God demanding blood to release us from sin is not the same message Chrsitianity has taught since the beginning. The Gospel is about sharing in God's very eternal life, not about settling an argument between God and the Devil.
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
David_Jay
By the way, the theological exegesis I am speaking about has a name: divinization. There is no equivalent to in Watchtower-ism, so as a faithful JW I was unaware of it.
The teaching is very ancient, namely that the atonement of Christ makes it possible for humanity to share in and be raised to the divine nature, sharing the very life of God by means of the sacrifice of Christ. There is even a Wikipedia article about it.
Since JWs don't believe Jesus is God, they offer the "God demands blood to satisfy his own thirst for justice" story. What Christianity has taught since its beginnings are different than what those blind guides known as the Governing Body ignorantly peddle.
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
David_Jay
You misread me. I stated not before the NT was "written," but before it existed, meaning before its canonization.
What has become known as the Liturgy pre-dates the canonization and perhaps even some of the later compositions of the New Testament. The oldest extant forms are from the Liturgy of St. James, considered the first bishop of Jerusalem, and these predate even the earliest formulations of the Trinity doctrine.
The various liturgical texts used antiphonal formulas, some of which appear in Pauline epistles (which is where Paul may have taken them from). They, along with other ancient non NT texts, contain some of the data I was referring to.
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
David_Jay
A well-written article, but my comments are based on the Gospel as explained in the Church Fathers, the pre-New Testament liturgical texts of Orthodoxy, theology and commentary of Catholics, Protestants, and that prayer of Pope John Paul II.
I here go on record that I am not advocating the views, claim that I believe in them at all or in part, nor reject any, nor that they are better or worse than Cofty's.
I am merely pointing out how ignorant I was of the exegesis Christianity was preaching for 2000 years when I was a JW, and how bankrupt their particular take on the story is.
-
11
Adam buried at the foot of Christ's cross. Are you kidding me.
by James Mixon ini heard this on "the story of god".
his blood trickle down through the rocks into adam giving.
him life.
-
-
David_Jay
While not official doctrine or theology by any means, the location of Golgotha got its name from a series of Jewish traditions.
First and foremost, as Scripture states, the name of the area means "Place of the Skull." This is due to the Jewish tradition that the skull of Adam, having been in the possession of Melchizadek (who is identified with Shem, son of Noah), was laid to rest there after the flood.
The area was the later location of where Abraham attempted to offer up Issac, and where the Temple was eventually built. The sacrifices of the Temple were considered by many Jews as a perpetuating of the sacrifice God provided Abraham in exchange for his son, and it ended up being the place, right outside the upper west wall of Jerusalem where the Romans executed criminals.
This is why in many ancient artist renditions of the Crucifixion you see a skull and crossbones at the bottom of the cross. This represents Adam's bones, and it is illustrative of the teaching on the redemption of humanity which Christians believe occurred on Good Friday.
However, though some Christians may misunderstand the details, their mistakes do not represent any actual doctrine or teaching in either Judaism or Christianity. It represents a historical legend, nothing more, and can be found in both Talmudic writings and those of the Church Fathers.
-
42
Did Jesus really suffer? Really?
by purrpurr inso over the course of three days he had a trial which doesn't seem to have bothered him much.
he got whipped ok that would have been agony and then put on a torture stake/ cross/ whatever yes that would have been hell.
but he was on it for a day and the whole thing lasted for three days.
-
-
David_Jay
The intention is to show how bankrupt the Watchtower Christology is, first and foremost.While there is no intention to advocate that what I wrote somehow recommends that non-theists adopt something along the lines of my post, I cannot take credit for the "happy-clappy spin," as you put it.
Having thoroughly imbimbed and promoted the Kool-Aid of the Governing Body of the Jehovah's Witnesses for two decades, from the 1980s onward, I was totally of the opinion that the JWs had the correct and generally accepted view of the Jesus story, that as the JWs served it, this version of the Christian mythology was generally accepted as a ransom story, about providing a dead victim to set the scales of justice aright before the mighty God Jehovah who was doing this becuase someone ruffled his feathers by challenging his sovereignty.
Around ten years after disassociating from the Jehovah's Witnesses, I came across the annual Christmas prayer of the Catholic pope, who at that time was Pope John Paul II. I believe it used to be printed every year in newspapers, if memory serves me right.
Far more poetic than what I described above, the prayer mentioned these points I touched on and more. He said something along the lines of "God became man in order to sacrifice his life so that man can have the eternal life of God," or something along those lines.
I had never been a Trinitarian, not before becoming a Witness or after leaving. So I only knew what the Watchtower had taught us about the subject. But the prayer of the Pope had me curious. What was he talking about? That was nothing like the Incarnation I had learned from the Watchtower (I still held that some of the views of the Witnesses were true, so at that time I had not bothered to revise my education on what Trinitarians believe).
I wrote the above post because it is what the Trinitarian doctrine is about. I learned that the Witnesses were very off base and liars about even that. Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants don't believe that Jesus gave up his life as a sacrifice to cover Adam's sin, as a sacrifice to appease God, but as an act of redemption, as an offering to humanity.
The theology is very ancient, but it goes like this: Adam's life led to the death of humanity, but Jesus' death led to their life. Adam died by eating fruit from a living tree, humanity lives by "eating the flesh and blood" from the dead tree of the cross. Adam, in an attempt to be like God, gave death to his children, but God, in his attempt to become human, gave life to humanity. The sacrifice of the Jews were animals offered to God, but the sacrifice of God was the life of his Incarnate Son as an offering to humans.
Again, I am sure many of you believe it is nonsense, either way. And I would not argue with you nor claim your view wasn't right, I was merely pointing out that what the Witnesses believe is so backward and empty compared to actual Christianity, that their exegesis is more ignorant than the mythology. They can't even understand what many consider little more than a fairy tale right. They are like poor readers, unable to understand even the most rudimentary of simple children's tales.
Essentially they have turned what others see as a beautiful story into one of a bloodthirsty divinity who, becuase of his pride being hurt, has to have the most perfect of humans suffer and die. I came up with neither "spin" on the tale, but I am rather embarrassed that for almost 20 years I peddled the stupid version.