A Theological Question:

[srm]

I am very well aware of this scipture. Read is carefully. Jesus sweat "as it were blood". Jesus never bled. Look up the original text and you'll see that "profuse sweating" is a term that is often used to describe it.

Where can I see a copy of the original text? The verse is ambiguous at best. It does not preclude that it was blood. In fact it would be an unusual simile. to compare the well know profuse sweat with a not so well known great drops (clots) of blood. People would experience sweating every day...intense bleeding...not so often. Why use such a simile? The word hosei meqans like or as but is does not always mean something actual. At jesus baptism, it says that Christ saw “the Spirit of God descending as (hosei) a dove” (Matt. 3:16; Mark1:10; John. 1:32). Luke says, that an actual dove appeared. He siad that “the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily form, as a dove, upon him” (3:22). The phrase does not preclude that Jesus literally sweated blood. BTW...there are diffeening view among christians not just between Mormon and non-mormon Chriastians.

Oh, and quoting you,

Back to the topic. Jesus did nothing but commit himself to the cross in Gethsemane. He shed no blood, suffered nothing, and paid for no sins.

yet the verse I provided says, Luke 22: 44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

You say he suffered nothing The Bible sayd he was in great agony. Whom should I believe you or the Bible? I'll take the bible.

Jesus is often referred to as a safricificial lamb. Have you ever seen a sacrificial lamb that was not killed? The sacrificial lamb was nothing special until it was actually killed. The cross is the single most important thing in Christianity and mormonism takes away from it.

Of course it is special. It must be first born. it must be unblemished. it must be male.

[Outshined]

Originally posted by Tr2@Apr 5 2004, 03:54 PM

The cross is the single most important thing in Christianity and mormonism takes away from it.

It is not the most important thing in Chritianity. No church should worship an object. The emblem of His sacrifice is his resurrection, not the object of His death. Putting such emphasis on the cross detracts from that. If you need an emblem, use the empty tomb.

When asked what emblem represents the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints if we do not use the cross, President Hinckley replied, "The lives of its members".

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Cal+Apr 5 2004, 03:34 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Apr 5 2004, 03:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Tr2@Apr 5 2004, 02:54 PM

Luke 22:44

I am very well aware of this scipture. Read is carefully. Jesus sweat "as it were blood". Jesus never bled. Look up the original text and you'll see that "profuse sweating" is a term that is often used to describe it.

Jesus is often referred to as a safricificial lamb. Have you ever seen a sacrificial lamb that was not killed? The sacrificial lamb was nothing special until it was actually killed. The cross is the single most important thing in Christianity and mormonism takes away from it.

You are off the topic, but that's ok, it's happens all the time, and I am usually the most guilty one.

As to the meaning of the Cross vs. Gethsemane; No one really knows when, where, and how Jesus accomplished the atonement, and does it matter much one way or the other. That you chose to adopt the cross as the symbol YOU chose to elevate to importance is really quite trivial, isn't it? The cross was a piece of WOOD, for heaven sake. The real symbol of Jesus' sacrifice would be the SACRIFICE ITSELF, not some piece of wood. He could have been stoned to death, or whatever, and the sacrifice would have been complete.

Mormons chose to focus on the essence of the sacrifice itself and not on the physical means employed. The physical means employed (the Cross) was the choice of his persecutors; Jesus' choice was the simple act of laying down his life. Which one should be elevated, the part that Jesus played (his voluntary act) or the part that his persecutors played (chosing to kill him on a cross) ?

Bottom line: The cross is a symbol of Jesus' killers, his very life was Jesus' gift to us. Which should be worshiped?

Great post Cal. :)

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Outshined+Apr 5 2004, 04:54 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Outshined @ Apr 5 2004, 04:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Tr2@Apr 5 2004, 03:54 PM

The cross is the single most important thing in Christianity and mormonism takes away from it.

It is not the most important thing in Chritianity. No church should worship an object. The emblem of His sacrifice is his resurrection, not the object of His death. Putting such emphasis on the cross detracts from that. If you need an emblem, use the empty tomb.

When asked what emblem represents the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints if we do not use the cross, President Hinckley replied, "The lives of its members".

Cool. :)

[Tr2]

It is not the most important thing in Chritianity. No church should worship an object. The emblem of His sacrifice is his resurrection, not the object of His death. Putting such emphasis on the cross detracts from that. If you need an emblem, use the empty tomb.

When asked what emblem represents the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints if we do not use the cross, President Hinckley replied, "The lives of its members".

You are correct, I will re-phrase.

The significance of the cross and everything surrounding it is the most important thin in Christianity. Without the cross, we would all be condemned just because we are living our lives. The object itself is significant, but not as significant as what the meaning is behind it. I do get curious how LDS members give the cross so little attention.

Where can I see a copy of the original text? The verse is ambiguous at best. It does not preclude that it was blood.

Check out any online concordance. This is basic english we're talking about here. When it speaks of the sweat it describes it, "as it were drops of blood". That means it was similar but not. You probably use statements like this every day, as do I (see I did it again).

QUOTE

Back to the topic. Jesus did nothing but commit himself to the cross in Gethsemane. He shed no blood, suffered nothing, and paid for no sins.

yet the verse I provided says, Luke 22: 44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

You say he suffered nothing The Bible sayd he was in great agony. Whom should I believe you or the Bible? I'll take the bible.

I was referring to suffering brought on by others, not emotional or spiritual. Sorry for not clarifying that. Death was required for ALL sacrifices in that time and Jesus did not die in the garden but on the cross. The cross is where the sacrifice was paid, the garden was just a set up for that.

No one really knows when, where, and how Jesus accomplished the atonement, and does it matter much one way or the other.

But you must keep in mind what type of system God had in place. When God's people were to be granted forgiveness or anything of that nature they had to sacrifice something by killing it. check out the OT sacrifices. It's a consistency thing. I don't see how God's ways would be changed for something very similar if not identical to what had been done for thousands of years.

[Setheus]

I think the "Singal most important " part of the attonment was the part where he brought himself back to life after three days!

[Guest Starsky]

If I'm an angel, paint me with black wings.

Setheus...black wings? would you care to share what this means? :)

[Cal]

TR2--Do you not read the posts?

You asked:

The significance of the cross and everything surrounding it is the most important thin in Christianity. Without the cross, we would all be condemned just because we are living our lives. The object itself is significant, but not as significant as what the meaning is behind it. I do get curious how LDS members give the cross so little attention.

If you read my post your CURIOSITY should have been satisfied!

I'll say it again. The cross was the CHOICE of Jesus' persecutors. Laying down his life was HIS CHOICE. Which one merits the attention?

[Snow]

Originally posted by Cal@Apr 6 2004, 06:28 PM

If you read my post your CURIOSITY should have been satisfied!

I'll say it again. The cross was the CHOICE of Jesus' persecutors. Laying down his life was HIS CHOICE. Which one merits the attention?

Cal,

I have had this discussion with Trident and some others before. I'm not saying that Mormons don't believe some extra-rational things (things beyond reason) but some non-LDS Christians have what seems an extra-rational belief in the cross, same with the Bible; like they are both imbued with some supernatural power or authority or characteristic that defies reason.

I'd love to see Trident or someone make a reasonable argument but I think this is one of those defies-reason things for those that believe that way; kind of like how people will send money to televangelists to obtain a prayer cloth supposedly prayed over by a Robert Tilton or Pat Robertson. Doesn't make any sense except to the true-believer.

[Tr2]

I'd love to see Trident or someone make a reasonable argument but I think this is one of those defies-reason things for those that believe that way

A reasonable argument? If we are going by what is reasonable to you then I'd choose not to. I have said it before, I don't want to learn to think like you do.

[Snow]

Come on silly. By reasonable, I mean one that is based on common sense, a scriptural foundation and conclusions based on the same. By the way, momma called and asked be to ask you to come by and give her a sponge bath. So, do you have one - a reasonable argument?

[Cal]

TR2--just answer one question for me----"Did Jesus CHOSE the cross or did the Romans chose the cross?" That is, 'who chose the manner of Jesus' death, Jesus or the Romans?"

PS--please don't act ignorant of history and say the Jews chose it. The Romans were famous for displaying people on crosses for acts (in their minds) of treason or disloyalty to roman law and order. The Jew were NOT known for that practice.

[Tr2]

Cal,

I believe they both chose the cross. Jesus made the decision that He was going to stick to His guns and go through with what (I think) He knew was going to happen to Him. And obviously the Romans would use the cross, their preferred method of execution to enemies of the gov't, on Jesus.

I don't know if this answers your question or not.