Do christians worship God (not Jesus)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aadil77
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 379
  • Views Views 41K
Thanks for replying Keltoi.

From a Christian standpoint, nothing we do can earn our place in Heaven. It is only God's mercy that allows us to achieve salvation.

I'm glad we can come to an agreement here! This is what we believe as well, that our Good deeds cannot gain us entry into paradise, only Allaah's Mercy can.

God's mercy came in the body of Jesus Christ, who paid the ransom for sin. That doesn't give Christians free reign to sin at will, it only gives us the opportunity to achieve salvation through faith in Christ and a life dedicated to God.

So, from this viewpoint, do Christians not get punished by law then? Because Jesus has already atoned for your sins? [This is a genuinely serious question]

 


So, from this viewpoint, do Christians not get punished by law then? Because Jesus has already atoned for your sins? [This is a genuinely serious question]


Here's what the Bible says to that effect: 'For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chasteneing, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he who the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye *******s, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spiritis, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastenening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.' Hebrews 12: 6.

So if you sin as a Christian God has ways of getting your attention, and will chasten you for it. I should know this, as I myself have had to deal with some very adverse circumstances relating to sins I commited when I first accepted Christ.
 
Greetings Fedos,

Regardless of Jesus atoning for your sins, the law still punishes Christians, does it not?
 
I'm sorry that does not make any sense either. The atonement bit. Why would Jesus die on the cross to atone for our sins? Would it not make much more sense that we be held accountable for all our actions; be rewarded for good ones and get punished for bad ones? Isn't that the whole purpose of life that makes sense? That life is a test and you will get rewarded and punished according to the deeds that you do?

Because if we are merely held accountable for our sins, then the result of that would be our condemnation NOT our salvation NOR redemption. Given that God in his infinite mercy loves us and desires that none should perish, he has provided a means for our salvation. However, he requires his work to accomplish it for we cannot save ourselves. When people ask for justice, justice is that all (even the best of us) go to hell. Because of God's mercy and Jesus' work on the cross, that is no longer necessary.
 
Greetings Fedos,

Regardless of Jesus atoning for your sins, the law still punishes Christians, does it not?

No. We are not under law.
Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin. But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. (Romans 3:20-22a)

BUT... this does not mean that Christians have permission to sin. Quite the opposite. It means that we too are to be made righteous, just as God is righteous, so there should be no sin in our lives. The difference is that rather than trying to prove our righteousness so that God might be pleased with us and accept us --something that we believe no one can do-- that Christians are called to live righteously not to earn God's favor, but in response to God's unmerited favor.
What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? (Romans 6:1-2)

Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace. (Romans 6:12-14)

You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. (Romans 6:18)



Of course, for those who have not accepted God's gift of grace in Jesus Christ, they would still be under the law --as would Christians who seek to live in their own righteousness rather than God's. Though which LAW you are referring to might be problematic because the Law received by Moses was not for all people, but a part of God's covenant with the Jewish nation. Behind that was something often referred to as the Noahedic law or covenant and natural law. But these are harder to quantify with precise regulations. In any event, we return to the reality that none of us can keep these laws well enough to measure up to God's standard of perfection and so we are not saved by doing what the law requires but rather condemned by falling short of God's holiness which is the final standard for all.
 
Last edited:
ICE is a form of water just as Jesus is a form of GOD. Jesus has the same nature as the Father and the Holy Ghost. Ice is not a fluid. unlike water and water vapor. It is a solid. Ice has the same formula as that of water and water vapor.

Ice is H20
Water is H20
Water Vapor is H20

but it's all in all one formula. H20


Oops! Choking Hazard!....

in Quran:

Human are made from clay and water. Even Jesus are made from clay and water...the soil of the earth.the holy spirit that mention not a spirit...is a Light(Nur)..God has puts the Light into jesus A.s. and born in the womb of Mary.Son of MAry please. Not Son of God, God neither begetteth nor he is be begotten...
 

Suffiyan007, you are getting on my nerves. I am trying to have a peaceful discussion. Please stop it with your rude remarks. Thanks.


Grace Seeker, I will respond to your comments later InshaaAllaah (God Willing). I have to go now.


Peace.
 
Suffiyan007, you are getting on my nerves. I am trying to have a peaceful discussion. Please stop it with your rude remarks. Thanks.


Grace Seeker, I will respond to your comments later InshaaAllaah (God Willing). I have to go now.


Peace.


Allahaismarladik. I'll be glad to continue our pleasant conversation when you return. إن شاء الله
 
Last edited:
Dear Grace Seeker

Bro, i am not rude, i just wanna have my point to tell my view about the God Religions,and Serene get into nerves...i dont mean it...! hmm! why not we shakehand, "PEACE TO BE WITH YOU AND I ASLO BE WITH YOU"...no more fighting or debating...
 
Dear Grace Seeker

Bro, i am not rude, i just wanna have my point to tell my view about the God Religions,and Serene get into nerves...i dont mean it...! hmm! why not we shakehand, "PEACE TO BE WITH YOU AND I ASLO BE WITH YOU"...no more fighting or debating...



Suffiyan, I didn't say you were rude. I said that I was having a pleasant conversation with Serene. I understand you feel passionately about your faith and want to share it. Most of us here do. I also don't think we are fighting. But debating, I imagine we will debate each other many times.

That doesn't mean I don't wish you peace; I do. السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته
 
Because we as human beings are incapable of earning our salvation alone. There had to be an atonement. That atonement came in the body of Jesus Christ.
Are you referring to OT animal sacrifice? Can you provide a Biblical quote where an atonement is required and where God can't just forgive sin of His own accord? What atonement was there paid for the forgiveness of the Prodigal Son?
 
What atonement was there paid for the forgiveness of the Prodigal Son?


It is a good question, after all this is Jesus' own parable which I understand to be a story about the abiding faithfulness and mercy of the father in the story teaching us about the mercy of God. So, I don't know why blood atonement was required, but the author of Hebrews (a writer apparently well-versed in the Old Covenant) tell us "In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews 9:22, since you requested a verse). Sometimes things just are the way they are. Like why would God have required circumcision, the prohibition against eating pork, or many other regulations that were part of the Old Covenant. We might later figure out and suggest some reason for them, but does there really have to be one? Isn't it enough to know that this is the way that God ordered things to be for us. I like to know why as much as the next person (OK, my dad will tell you that's not true, I like to know even more than most), but sometimes we also have to learn to accept what God has ordered simply because it is God who ordered it, and we serve him, not he us.
 
Please, pardon the interruption, Ukhti Serene.
It is a good question, after all this is Jesus' own parable which I understand to be a story about the abiding faithfulness and mercy of the father in the story teaching us about the mercy of God.
Yes, that is my take on it as well that the prodigal son was utterly debased by his sinful life and came to live as a servant in his father's service. He did not come expecting, nor did he even ask for, forgiveness, yet the father went out and "killed the fatted calf" to celebrate the return of his long lost son. I believe that this was spoken by Jesus as a parable for how God responds to us when we sincerely repent and turn to Him in repentance. Note that the father did not say to his servants upon his son's leaving, "Go and kill the fatted calf so that, if he returns one day, I will then be able to forgive him."
So, I don't know why blood atonement was required, but the author of Hebrews (a writer apparently well-versed in the Old Covenant) tell us "In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews 9:22, since you requested a verse).
This passage spoke of the use of blood to inaugurate new covenants, e.g. Moses and the first covenant, "This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded you." I understood this passage to mean in the sense of an anointing oil for a new king not in the sense of cleansing sin. Do you have a quote from the OT as a precursor for the final sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for the forgiveness of sin?
Sometimes things just are the way they are. ...but sometimes we also have to learn to accept what God has ordered simply because it is God who ordered it, and we serve him, not he us.
I just wanted documentation in the Bible for the requirement of a blood sacrifice before God can forgive sin. What about Nehemiah 9:17 ...but You are a God of forgiveness, Gracious and Compassionate (interesting > ar-Rahmani ir-Raheem) slow to anger and abounding in lovingkindness; and You did not forsake them. or Psalms 79:9 Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of Your name; and deliver us and forgive us our sins for Your name's sake. and Luke 11:4 the Lord's Prayer ... and forgive us our sins ... or Luke 24:34 But Jesus was saying, "Father forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." In none of these instances was there any mention of blood sacrifice.
 
Do you have a quote from the OT as a precursor for the final sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for the forgiveness of sin?I just wanted documentation in the Bible for the requirement of a blood sacrifice before God can forgive sin.

Here's the quote: ' 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.' Leviticus 17: 11.
 
Here's the quote: ' 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.' Leviticus 17: 11.
Actually, that passage within context was referring to those who eat or consume blood. In the New American Standard version ends with "...for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement." A better passage is Leviticus 16:15-19, but then it talks in 16:20-22 of a live goat offering to be released in the wilderness to "bear on itself all their iniquities to a solitary land".

Fedos, what comments do you have for the Prodigal Son parable. This has always been one of my favorite passages because I felt that it was an anaology for God's Mercy and Forgiveness to those who repent of sin and "come home" to worship Him.
 
Actually, that passage within context was referring to those who eat or consume blood. In the New American Standard version ends with "...for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement." A better passage is Leviticus 16:15-19, but then it talks in 16:20-22 of a live goat offering to be released in the wilderness to "bear on itself all their iniquities to a solitary land".

Oh ok. I didn't know that. I'm actually a baby in Christ, for varying reasons.

Fedos, what comments do you have for the Prodigal Son parable. This has always been one of my favorite passages because I felt that it was an anaology for God's Mercy and Forgiveness to those who repent of sin and "come home" to worship Him.

Well, as I said, I'm still a baby in Christ, my growth has been stunted for sinning when I first accepted the Lord as my savior. From what I gather, that would be a good understanding of the passage. I guess it would then depend on what a person viewed as God's way or what is the true path of salvation that God has established.

You mentioned something earlier about what passages were there in the Old Testament that pointed toward Jesus dying for the sins of the world, or shedding his blood. The passages in Isaiah I think are a good picture of what the savior would have to ultimately do:

'Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?

For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form of comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we shouldd desire him.

He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows (on the cross): yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

He was taken from prison and from judgement: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering to sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.'
 
Mustafa, I'm going to have to plead ignorance. I don't know why God thought it necessary to order blood sacrifice in the OT to begin with. And therefore it would be just speculation as to why the cross (versus some other form of atonement, like standing on one's head) might have been seen as necessary in establishing a New Covenant. I just know that these things are reported first as necessary and second as the means for the propitiation of sins.

While you ask for answers from the OT, I find that we don't always have answers there, sometimes the answer is in the New Testament. For instance, the story of Cain and Abel in Genesis:
Genesis 4

2b Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. 3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD. 4 But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.
6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."

8 Now Cain said to his brother Abel, "Let's go out to the field." And while they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him.
Why did the Lord look with favor on Abel and his offerieng, but not on Cain and his offering? Genesis doesn't tell us. But in the New Testament we have answers:
By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. (Hebrews 11:4)

And why did he [Cain] murder him [Abel]? Because his own actions were evil and his brother's were righteous. (1 John 3:12)


As the "lamb of God", Jesus' sacrifice would mirror all of the other sacrifices that had been offered for generations. Though perhaps we should really speak in the reverse -- the OT sacrifices were a type reflecting the true atoning sacrifice that Jesus would himself make one day as the perfect Lamb who takes aways the sins of the world spoken of first by John the Baptist and later in Revelation.

So, I think that if there is an answer for your question as to why blood sacrifice, it may not be found in the Old Covenant, but in the New Covenant:
Hebrews 9

11When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. 12He 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, having obtained eternal redemption. 13The 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!

15For 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.

16In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19When Moses had proclaimed every commandment 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. 20He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep." 21In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

23It 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. 24For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. 25Nor 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. 26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.


I don't think this actually answers your question. When I read this, what I get out of it is a statement that this is the way things are, not an explanation of why things are the way they are?

The argument present in Hebrews seems to be that the sacrifices of the old covenant are ineffectual because they don't really do away with sin since they have to be offered over and over. But in contrast Christ's sacrifice is once for all and is able to secure a redemption that is valid for all of eternity. But it is still merely assumed that blood sacrifice is required as a given.
 
My point is less about why blood sacrifice is apparently required than it is that Christians seem to place a limitation on God's ability to straight away forgive sin (may Allah forgive me for even saying this). What I am hearing is that there must be a blood scrifice as atonement (Merriam-Webster's > reparation for an offense or injury) for that sin and without that atonement the sin must be punished. I have provided evidence from the Bible that God does in fact forgive sin without the need for a blood sacrifice and my arguments have not been refuted. I rely upon the Mercy of Allah for the forgiveness of my sins (Allah's Mercy at Judgment Day) while Christians rely on the blood of Jesus for the atonement of theirs (God's Mercy already bestowed at Calvary).
 
My point is less about why blood sacrifice is apparently required than it is that Christians seem to place a limitation on God's ability to straight away forgive sin (may Allah forgive me for even saying this). What I am hearing is that there must be a blood scrifice as atonement (Merriam-Webster's > reparation for an offense or injury) for that sin and without that atonement the sin must be punished. I have provided evidence from the Bible that God does in fact forgive sin without the need for a blood sacrifice and my arguments have not been refuted. I rely upon the Mercy of Allah for the forgiveness of my sins (Allah's Mercy at Judgment Day) while Christians rely on the blood of Jesus for the atonement of theirs (God's Mercy already bestowed at Calvary).

A question I often asked is "why animals?" The answer is quite simple really. Animals are innocent of any human sin. It is a process of substitution. I understand that your question is more about the Christian view of God's need for atonement rather than the process of atonement, but I feel it is important to understand the reasoning for it before questioning the why of it.

As to the question of why God "cannot" simply forgive out of mercy, it might be helpful to think of God in terms of a judge, in the legal sense. I think we would both agree that God delivered Law(in the theological sense), and expects all of Creation to abide by that Law. Why would God simply ignore His own Law and still expect that Law to be followed? Is this making sense? If there are no consequences for sin, what use is there in avoiding sin? I think we both agree that there are and must be consequences for ignoring God's Laws.

So then the question becomes, if I follow all of the Laws of God(which from a Christian perspective is very nearly impossible)do I get the ticket to Heaven? I suppose if one was able to follow all of God's Laws, as he or she knew them, they would indeed be rewarded justly. However, we both know that people are weak and will sin almost daily. What about them? Are they automatically destined for Hell? As a God of justice and mercy, God saw fit to forgive us our sinful nature and not allow our weakness to doom us entirely. By the blood of Jesus Christ, our sinful nature has been forgiven. In the legal sense we are on probation. Without the Savior, Jesus Christ, we would remain "lifers", so to speak, without the possibility of parole.

I hope that wasn't too rambling to make sense of. :)
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top