How to counter the slippery slope?

Faith & Science Conversation
21

[quote=“tokyoguy111, post:20, topic:4322”]
@tokyoguy111 I would in no way view that message [The Miracle of the Panel Truck] as coming from God because God will never contradict His Word.

I respect your view that all of Scripture is the word of God. It is my understanding that this is also the view of the BioLogos team. But on whose word must we rely that Scripture is the inerrant Word of God? It can only be the word of the authors themselves. So in comparison, on what basis do I accept the message related in Panel Truck as true? Not dreams. Not imaginings. Not hallucinations. But rather upon an occurrence that had less than one in a billion chance of happening and which carried a message that one party, Prof. Eric Lien, needed to hear. And this ‘impossible occurrence’ was witnessed by four trained scientists, three of whom were confirmed skeptics. So who do you think sent this message?
Al Leo

22

@aleo

I appreciate your story and accept that such timing would be from God. Tokyoguy111 is right, too, that we do need to test all of our “take-aways” with Scripture. Test the spirits; not all of them are true or good. So while I do think it is amazing that you saw what you needed in such a timely manner, and I do accept your conviction that this came from God, it does not follow that everything we conclude afterwards is from God or that we have taken it in right directions. I also believe that God does use charlatan preachers to reach people who can then have life-changing conversions even though the vehicle of that experience turns out to be a total fraud. I’m not saying that your experience is a fraud. I’m only saying that God may use something to get our attention, but then that “something” will rarely be the last or complete word. In fact maybe it isn’t even a righteous thing or person at all, but God may use it nonetheless. As far as the message itself goes … “Don’t worry”… One can proof-text such things with “consider the lilies of the field; they neither toil nor spin…” or “Be happy” … there are verses instructing us to be joyful. But trying to take such messages and trying to add them into some growing new collection of rules is unwarranted. In fact our desire to turn the Bible itself into just such a thing is part of our modern problem.

So yes, I celebrate with you God’s work in your friends’ lives. It sounds like He delivered a perfectly-calibrated message just at your time of need. But I also think that such a message left by itself would end up being incomplete.

23

I am not sure what you mean, Mervin. The missionaries on Taiwan were teaching their honest interpretation of Acts: 4:12 [salvation is found in no one else (but Jesus)]. Eric had to conclude that if he accepted Christianity, he would admit his parents and other ancestors were damned. He had the chance to accept Jesus as Christ his savior but rejected it. In his position, I would have done the same. The Truck’s message said that, even tho he rejected the missionaries teaching (supposedly from inerrant Scripture), God loved him and he should not worry that his actions had damned him.

At least that is my interpretation.
Al Leo

24

I wasn’t trying to dive into the whole issue of Eric’s prior encounters with missionaries (worthy as such questions are) --just validating your panel truck experience. But speaking then of the whole, now culturally taboo issue of damnation … (I think I’m supposed to be searching for a ‘start a new topic’ button somewhere at this point, but since I don’t see one, I’ll ramble on here…)

So we have this huge present day divide (and it may fall somewhat along conservative/liberal divisions) about hell. First to clear away some bilge and clutter: What we feel or think about something is of no relevance with respect to the truth at hand. I.e. if the missionaries were right and Eric’s ancestors were all damned, then Eric’s admission or acceptance or denial of all that is totally irrelevant with respect to the alleged fact. Now we can dispute the ‘fact’, and perhaps we are right to do so. But we can’t ‘dislike’ it away if once it is established on reliable grounds. If somebody is languishing in a burning building and a fireman can see they are blinded by smoke, he can yell instructions to them about how to reach the only exit. Should the fireman first stop and reflect about how narrow-minded and non-inclusive he is to suggest that there is only one path to salvation? Maybe the person has other preferences about directions they would like to crawl first. Who is the fireman, after all, to be so judgmental? Well, of course this is all silly and the fireman would be cruel to withhold the desperately needed directions.

So the question we have to ask ourselves is: is our situation like this or not? If so, then it is the height of cruelty to withhold from people what they need to hear. I’m not interested in the least in anybody’s politically correct “kindness” of refusing to tell me that I’m headed for a precipice. If indeed I am, then I very much want the truth please. But if not, then it is indeed wrong to plant fear where none is warranted. So what if we have trouble deciding which of these two is reality? Do we then just play it safe along the lines of Pascal’s wager? Why would God go around allowing so many precipices or burning buildings in the first place? What kind of a creation is this with wide paved roads to perdition and only a small hidden door to salvation? It is a fair question. And are we really in a position like the fireman to be seeing so clearly what somebody else needs? Don’t we have just as much smoke in our own eyes as anybody else?

We can shake our fists at the sky like Job and demand some answers, but I think in the end it will boil down to trust and obedience (Job’s final state in that story–still minus the demanded answers though). I think we can safely eschew all the baiting questions like “where is Ghandi right now?” and so forth, because firstly: we don’t know, and secondly: we couldn’t do anything about it if we did, and thirdly: I thought we already served a God who is trustworthy to justly and lovingly see to all of that stuff, so why are we so worried … you would almost think we don’t really believe that last part! So I might have had a different approach to people like Eric than those missionaries did, but I wasn’t there delivering God’s word and they were.

For those who are all worried because they “know what the Bible says” and there is only one answer (theirs) to all of this, I would ask them why they accept some verses and not others. Why will some people have been even doing miracles in God’s name (you can bet those are ones who will have all their doctrines nicely squared away) and yet be told "Away from me …"
Why does Paul at one point affirmingly mention praying for already dead people? (We Protestants should chew on that one for a bit!) In order for us to accept that anybody today has all this eschatology boxed up and nailed down, we would have to stop reading the Bible, because there is plenty in there to demonstrate that when it comes to our eternal future, nobody today knows what the heck they are talking about – or at least not in the details anyway. And Jesus for whatever reason didn’t see it as a big priority that we understand all this when we already have Somebody who we can just trust. It is enough for us to know what we can do here and now, attending to the poor and hungry, ministering to those around us, and trying to make sure we don’t withhold Christ’s love from anyone. Ouch, ouch, and ouch all around. That is quite enough to keep us busy. Happy is the servant who is found doing what he is supposed to be doing when his master returns. And yet at the same time … it isn’t as if our Master was ever absent.

That’s the beauty of parables, isn’t it? They are custom made to make laser-precision points. When we try to turn them into general illumination on other things we’ve suddenly taken an interest in (like whether or not a mustard seed really is the smallest … or do Heaven and Hell really have a chasm between them that you could yell across), they stop working.

Sorry, for all of that I probably still haven’t answered your question. What was it again?

1 Like
25

If anyone in the BioLogos audience can give a reasonable “spin” to Acts 4:12, please do so! I cannot believe it is God’s Word. I believe it has done considerable harm to spreading the Gospel that God is Love. None of the exegeses of Job in the OT would convince me that my God is like ‘a loving Father’. But my life experience does. So that is what sustains me.
P.S. I like your responses.
Al Leo

26

Salvation is found in no other name. To whom and how and when and under what conditions that salvation is offered are up for debate.

And I’m with @Mervin_Bitikofer in thinking that anyone who is convinced they’ve nailed down the definitive answer for all time on those questions should read their Bible harder until they are back in a proper state of humble confusion on the issue.

1 Like
27

John Polkinghorne said something like this–Salvation is found in no other name, whether or not the person being saved knows it.

28

Right. That is the starting point. If the Bible did not claim this, no one would believe it.

It seems though that you take at least some of the Bible as God’s Word. So I wonder how you determine what is and what is not true.

Probably your own judgment, if I were to guess. I understand, but the reality is that this view sets you up as a judge of God’s Word determining what is and is not true. But do you really think that is what God intended when He sent us His Word?

Don’t you think that He intends us to submit to it, believe it, and obey it as opposed to judge it, change it, and make it fit what we want to believe or what is politically correct in the 21st century?

Albert, if you are honest, you really do not know who sent that message. It COULD have been just a coincidence, but it could also have had a different source than God. You will not like my answer, but here it is:

Satan is the Father of Lies. He seeks to keep us from coming to faith in Jesus.

II Cor. 11:14 “And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.” He doesn’t want us to know who he really is in order to deceive us with his message.

So, since the author/sender of that message is unknown, how do we know where it came from?

Again, coincidence IS a possibility, but assuming it was a real message, there are ultimately only two possibilities.

And in this case, it is pretty easy to figure out the source because it does not agree with the already revealed and clear message found throughout the Bible which does clearly identify the source of the message.

I believe every false religion was ultimately started by Satan. Truth is from God, while lies are from Satan and the standard to determine what is true or false, especially in the spiritual realm, is God’s Word.

Like I said, truth is by definition, narrow, but that does not make it bad, politically incorrect, or wrong. Jesus claimed to be the truth and He told us that God’s revealed Word is truth. So, for me, I guess I have to stick with that.

Blessings!

29

Tokyoguy, let’s consider your two possibilities: 1) The 'message was just coincidence; 2) it was from Satan rather than God.

  1. In my 85 years of travel on U.S. highways, this is the 1st instance that I have seen that message as the only writing on a vehicle (and in foot-high blue script, no less) and it had to stop right in front of us, clearly visible to four of us as witnesses–timed to the exact second! I have figured the odds of that being coincidence are less than one in 50 billion. That’s about the same odds as Joshua had in delaying sunset.

  2. As you well know, Jesus was accused of using Satan’s powers to heal the sick. In Matt. 7:16 Jesus counseled people to judge the source of the actions by their fruits. Eric was mislead into believing that the Christian religion taught that his parents and all his ancestors could not attain salvation because they had not acknowledged Jesus as their Savior. As much as he wished to join his Christian wife and children at Sunday services, he could not bring himself to do so, and it was endangering his otherwise blissful marriage. The message on the Truck was clear to him, and he henceforth could join his family in Christian worship.

OK, so where is there a possibility of Satan’s sly machinations? In the way the missionaries interpreted Scripture? Or in the way God’s unconditional love was proclaimed on the back of a truck? Be honest! Which produced Good Fruit?
Al Leo

30

@ Christy @beaglelady

[quote=“Christy, post:26, topic:4322”]
Salvation is found in no other name. To whom and how and when and under what conditions that salvation is offered are up for debate.

[/quote] I was probably in the third grade of a Catholic parochial school before I realized that Christ was not Jesus’ last name. ‘Christ’ was a title, making it more correct to address Him as Jesus the Christ, or Jesus the Messiah. I personally believe that God sent the messianic message to other peoples besides the Jews who received it from Jesus. Perhaps chief Sequoia of the Native Americans and Gautama Buddha are examples of other recipients. We Christians are to be considered fortunate that we received it from God’s Son, but we should not be so smug as to think this gift was exclusive.
Al Leo

31

Didn’t Paul tell the Greeks that he was telling them who their “unknown god” really was?

32

Good point! But Paul was an especially gifted evangelist. The missionaries that taught Eric were prompted by good intentions, but “good intentions” pave the road to “you-know-where”. The Catholic priest who instructed my Mom in second grade strongly implied that all Lutherans had missed the boat to salvation. Even at that age. knowing that her best girl friends were Lutheran and had as much chance of getting to heaven as she did, she ignored him. Teaching religion and morals to ‘absorbent’ minds is a scary business. One can, unknowingly, be doing Satan’s work (as Tokyoguy implied) instead of God’s. Patrick probably agrees with me.
Al Leo

33

Al,

It is hopeless that we ever agree because of the way we look at the Bible. I fully agree with the missionaries who taught your friend that he cannot obtain salvation except through Jesus. In fact, I am one of those missionaries and I live and preach that gospel to Japanese people - who are very good on the surface, but still lost without Jesus. That is the clear teaching of the Bible. Salvation in Jesus only explains why Jesus told us to go into all the world and preach the gospel - otherwise, why would there be a need to spend time, money, and even suffer persecution to do something that is not necessary?

It explains why Jesus had to die - if there had been another way to be saved, the cross becomes unnecessary. There is no other sacrifice which God can accept as payment for our sin.

There is no reason to share your faith with anyone if one can be saved simply by good works, but the Bible says that “by the works of the Law shall no man be justified.”

Al, how good do you have to be to get into heaven? Are you good enough? How do you know? Do you have to worry about that every day? John tells us that he wrote the Book of First John so that we can KNOW that we have eternal life. We have eternal life IF we have believed on the Son and have the Son. And if we do not have the Son of God, we do not have life. I John 5:11-13. And like I mentioned before, there is no other name given among men whereby we are saved. Salvation in no other. Only Jesus offered an acceptable sacrifice to God for our sins - His own perfect sinless body.

So, Al, as it stands now, it seems to me that you are trusting in your own good works to get into heaven. You need to trust Jesus to save you and not depend on your own good works.

I’m lazy, so I copied this from a random church website, but it briefly explains why good works can save no one.
Can I simply be saved by being a good person?

   If God is going to save a person because he has lived a morally good life, then the plan of salvation is no longer valid and there is therefore no more need for God’s grace. If this idea is true, then our salvation is based on works, not grace. This way of thinking demands that God will look at our life and base His decision of our salvation on whether we have been more good than bad. Why then did Jesus die on the cross? Man could have been saved without Jesus simply by being a good person. The problem is that no matter how good we may be, we have all still sinned (Romans 3:23), nor can our good life be equivalent to righteousness (Romans 3:10). [Also, in Isaiah 64:6, we learn that all our good works are as filthy rags in God's eyes. God is not impressed because good works or not, we are still separated from God by our sin.]

We must put on righteousness[become righteous] in order to be found right in God’s eyes. And this demands that our sins be forgiven. Forgiveness is not based on living a morally good life, but rather on living by faith that the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.  [Good works are the result of saving faith and show that our faith is genuine, but good works if not accompanied by faith in Jesus cannot cleanse our sin.].

In the bible, we have an example of a good person named Cornelius. Acts 10:2 tells us that he was “a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always.” But we learn that he was not saved by all of that. In Acts 10:5-6, he is told by God to go get a man named Simon and that Simon would tell him what he must do. In Acts 11:14, we understand that what Simon was to tell him were the “words by which you and all your household will be saved.”

Before, Cornelius was a very good person, but he was still a lost person. After he heard the words that Simon brought to him in order to be saved, he and his household were all baptized for the forgiveness of their sins, according to Acts 10:48.

In closing Albert, even though I doubt it will do much good, here just some of the verses that show us that salvation does not come from being good, from self-effort, or from doing good works:

Galatians 2:21 “I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.”

Romans 3:20-25 21 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD - THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST - FOR ALL WHO BELIEVE. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his GRACE as a GIFT, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 27-28 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.

Romans 11:6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.

Romans 4:1-7 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.”

Galatians 2:16 “nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

2 Timothy 1:9 “who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, NOT ACCORDING TO OUR WORKS, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity, “

Matthew 5:20 "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Al, I hope you will think seriously about these verses. Your eternity depends on it.

It is for all these reasons that I can confidently say that your experience and the message you saw was not from God. In light of all these verses and many others, how could He have made it any clearer?

34

The Phoenicians had a theology where Intentional Sacrifice could save their people.

The Romans called it DEVOTIO:

“Although devotio is an Italian ritual, the idea that a soldier could die for his comrades is also attested in Greek legends. In the first place, there’s the story of the Athenian king Codrus.note Euripides tells how the Theban crown prince Menoeceus sacrificed himself during the siege by the Seven against Thebes.note That self-sacrifice was also a reality at the battlefield, is proved by the seer mentioned by Xenophon.note Perhaps the famous oracle given to Leonidas before the Battle of Thermopylae, that Sparta would either be sacked or regret the death of its king, can be interpreted in this fashion.”

"The oldest story of the battle of Himera is told by the Greek researcher Herodotus of Halicarnassus. The Carthaginian commander built up a large army and navy in the far west of Sicily and started to besiege Himera. Theron, however, held out and Gelon was able to defeat the Carthaginians decisively, probably (but this is not told by Herodotus) because Hamilcar, who expected Greek reinforcements, allowed Greek troops to enter his camp, and discovered too late that they were his enemies. Herodotus adds:

"Hamilcar remained in the camp and made sacrifices to get good omens of success, offering whole bodies of victims upon a great pyre. When he saw that there was a rout of his own army, he […] threw himself into the fire, and thus he was burnt up and disappeared. […] The Carthaginians offer sacrifices to him now, and also they made memorials of him then in all the cities of their colonies, and the greatest in Carthage itself.
[Herodotus, Histories 7.167, tr. G. C. Macaulay.] . . . The self-sacrifice may have been a devotio."

http://www.livius.org/articles/concept/devotio/

35

OK, so there must be some point to you pointing this out.

Are you claiming the writers of the Bible learned about this in the surrounding cultures and made up a story about God and Jesus?

Or, are you saying that since the Romans had this thing called DEVOTIO that God’s plan determined from the foundation of the world before the Romans were even created is invalid and inferior to it?

Just wondering what you are trying to insinuate by bringing this up. It has to be something derogatory about the Bible.

36

I can’t speak to George’s point either, but as I was reading John chapter 5 this morning, it prompted me to more reflection on the humble state of our collective knowledge regarding the eternal destinies of all who have gone before us. Keep in mind that this is not to question the strongly Scriptural message that in Jesus is our only hope of salvation. It is only to question those who would claim to know just who all has (or has not) been a recipient of that wonderful grace.

Excerpted from John 5:

For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.

[end of excerpt]

That second paragraph especially is one of the many (biblical) reasons we shouldn’t be dogmatic at all about the alleged eternal destinies of people like Eric’s ancestors … especially when that creates an unecessary stumbling block to Eric when he hears the good news in his life. I know that we may be tempted to wonder, then: so why all the urgency of spreading the gospel to the living if maybe they have chances to respond to Christ beyond this life? I would respond that it should be sufficient for us to have heard those marching orders from Christ to go and preach the gospel to all nations… and that there shouldn’t be a need to artificially supplement the importance of that with pronouncements of things we can’t really know. As one who is following Christ’s commission (as we all should be no matter where we are), you no doubt have good experience sharing the bread of life that our world is starving for. May we all be motivated to diligence in that labor of love.

1 Like
37

The idea of MARTYRDOM to save one’s people is not a New Testament invention. It was well established in the Roman and Semitic world views.

It would be the Roman/Semitic reformulation in the case of Jesus that would attribute the metaphysical mechanism to be something UNIQUE to the substance of Jesus that makes it work.

George

38

Mervin, point taken. I will never claim to judge any particular person’s eternal destiny. I will simply say what the Scripture says. So I will say that, according to God’s Word, if a person has not confessed Jesus Christ as Lord, he will not be saved. The above passage is in the middle of what you quoted. So simply honoring the Father or believing in the Father would not seem to be enough. When the Bible says “And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.”

So, while you take a passage that says in the end, Jesus will decide or the Father will decide, God has already revealed to us how / on what basis /according to what standard He will decide. If it is simply on our works, then passages like are written above are not true and become meaningless.

And it is not just those two passages. The passages that teach this are numerous and clear and spread through most of Scripture. In light of that, it seems better to see the above verses in this manner:
“This doesn’t mean that we are justified by our good works, or that God is on our side because of our good works, or that we are united to Christ by our good works. It means the reverse: If you are justified by
faith, your faith will produce good works, and if God is on your side, he will empower you to do good works, and if you are united to Christ you will bear the fruit of good works. And in this way, your
good works become the evidence, the confirmation, the verification at the judgment that you were justified by faith alone,…” quote from Dr. John Piper

Al brought up Mt. 7. “So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. I Never Knew You21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’”

I think it is instructive to note here that these people actually did call Jesus “Lord” and they even did good works in his name… And yet, the result is damnation. Why? Because they weren’t truly saved. They didn’t really know Jesus and their “good works” were not accepted by God as a payment for sin.

If these Christian like people will not be saved, it is hard to understand how those in other lands who did good works, but did not know Jesus will be accepted. Again, this explains why God sends us into all the world. It is to preach the gospel. How will they hear without a preacher and how will the preach unless they are sent? the implication is that they will not - therefore we need to be His witnesses both where we live and around the world.

If we take verses out of context or focus just one one particular verse and interpret it in a way that does not agree with the overall teaching of Scripture, we are doing God’s Word an injustice and not “rightly dividing the word of God”.

So, like you said, I will never tell anyone dogmatically where they will spend eternity. However, I can give them my opinion based on what is written in God’s Word. I can say that if they do not know Jesus and have His Spirit living within them, they are still spiritually dead, lost in their sins, and remain separated from God - which is our default state of existence.

My problem with not telling Eric the truth is this. If his parents are OK without Jesus, then so is he. And so are his kids, and all his countrymen who follow their own gods. There would be no reason for Eric to believe in and follow Jesus if he can be forgiven, saved, and redeemed as he is. It removes any need to share our faith with others - like you mentioned, but more problematic for me is what i just mentioned. It removes any necessity for Eric to confess Jesus as Savior and Lord. If he thinks he is fine just the way he is, and doesn’t pursue God, he too may very well be lost and he will probably teach his kids the same thing. So I feel that rather than being afraid to cause Eric stress or discomfort, it is more important for him and his kids that he know the truth. It is too late for his ancestors, but it is not too late for him.

Again, I think of biblical examples like Cornelius in Acts 10 who is described as a god fearing upright man and yet, God sent Peter specifically to tell him the good news about Jesus - implying that he needed to hear and believe in Jesus to be saved.

If God chooses to save Eric’s ancestors, I will be happy. I just do not believe He will based on the passages that do speak about the salvation of the lost. It seems like it would violate much clear teaching of the Scripture.

I wish it were different - I really do. I think it is a big stumbling block for people wanting to believe in Jesus because if they accept Jesus as the way, the truth, and the life, it raises big questions for their loved ones, both living and dead. Who wants to believe that their ancestors might not be in heaven? No one wants to believe that. We do not bring this fact up unless they ask and then we need to share the clear teaching of the Scripture in a loving way. Of course, we can say that in the end, it is up to God, but I do not want to give them a false hope. They need to know what God’s Word says.

39

George, this concept dates back to 600 bc when the book of Isaiah was written.(Is. 53) It dates back to the whole sacrificial system of the Old Testament given to the Jews through Moses. In fact, it finds it’s earliest reference in Genesis 3 where God killed an animal to make skins to cover Adam and Eve. An innocent animal was killed for their sin. The early patriarchs all offered sacrifices to God. Jesus is the sacrificed lamb, the one true sacrifice, the sacrifice that all the sacrifices of the OT prefigured.

So, if the idea is also found in the Roman and Semitic cultures, I would say they were the ones who borrowed it from the Bible. Besides all men proceeded from Noah and so at some point in the past, all men had a knowledge of the true God and would have been familiar with the idea of sacrifices.

Even if you reject that idea, which I’m sure you do, the fact that Romans also had some concept of martyrdom to save one’s people is neither here nor there. God’s plan to save the world was set before the foundation of the world. Like I said, even if you reject that Scriptural teaching, it does not mean that the Jews got this idea from the Romans. They had their own unique culture. They hated the Gentiles - all Gentiles. Well, maybe hate is too strong, but they had laws that kept them separate from Gentiles. They looked down on them for the most part. Why would they take a concept from Roman culture and incorporate it into their culture and beliefs? It doesn’t make sense.

But the fact that you even propose such an idea shows that you do not understand the nature of God’s Word. Or at least that you reject it as God’s Word. You view it as man’s word. I’m afraid that is the foundation of all your errors. As long as you look at God’s Word in that fashion, you will never hear what he is trying to say to you through His Word. He is calling you to Himself, but you are rejecting His Son and the sacrifice he made on your behalf.

40

Aren’t you talking about SACRIFICES of some other life?

What is the oldest Biblical support for MARTYRDOM as a way of winning divine favor for one’s people?