Zone1 "...what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ..."

[Hafar1014]

(Col. 1:24) "Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church."

(Acts 9:4) "And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

Our suffering for sin is not the question here. Only Christ can pay the price for sin. But we, because we are His Body, the Church, are going to suffer in this world ruled by Satan.

And we are not suffering because the world hates us. We suffer because the world hates Christ. Were Christ here today as He was in the first century A.D., He would be persecuted still. Thus because we are His Body on earth at this time, it is we who are attacked and afflicted by the world.

But Christ still feels those afflictions also. ''Saul, why persecutest thou me?" (Acts 9:4) Any attack on a believer no matter how small or large, is an attack upon Christ, and He feels it. And He must feel it, until He comes and sets things right.

Quantrill

That explains the Christian violence of the Crusades and persecution of Jews for 1000 years. A religion of love

 

[Hafar1014]

(Col. 1:24) Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church."

(Acts 9:4) And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?"

This is not taking about removal of sin. Only Christ can and has removed the sin.

But, at this time, we are the Body of Christ on earth. And so we too will be afflicted by the world as Christ was afflicted. Were Christ here today as He was in first century A.D. He would still be afflicted by the world. But because we are His Body, we receive the afflictions, and He still feels them. "Why persecutest thou me?" (Acts 9:4)

We should remember when we are afflicted, it is not us they really hate. It is Jesus Christ. And He stll and must feel it till He comes and sets things aright.

Quantrill

I dont hate the Jesus idol I just have no use for him

 

[Quantrill]

That explains the Christian violence of the Crusades and persecution of Jews for 1000 years. A religion of love

Sure does. Only Christians know how to deal with the Muslim problem. Your Jewish problem was brought about because of their murder of Jesus Christ. Their blood is on their head.

I dont hate the Jesus idol I just have no use for him

Nor does He for you.

Quantrill

 

[Meriweather]

The god of Christianity uses threats to compel obedience. Thats not a loving god. Thats the god created by a primitive mind.
There is no original sin in Genesis therefore Jesus never existed. Hes an idol created to support a violent religion as they killed the Gnostics and persecuted Jews for 3000 years. There is no devil or hell.

Where are you getting your information?

The god of Christianity uses threats to compel obedience.

Wrong.

There is no original sin in Genesis therefore Jesus never existed.

Wrong on both accounts.

There is no devil or hell.

Wrong.

Seriously, either link to the source(s) you are quoting when asserting these things, or at least add, "In my opinion."

 

[Meriweather]

I dont hate the Jesus idol I just have no use for him

Are you calling the word of God an idol; are you saying you have no use for the word of God? (That is what it sounds like to a Christian.)

It makes no sense for someone to act like a critique or expert when s/he is not of that faith. It only displays ignorance and bigotry. Present your own faith. I expect you can do that well, but you clearly lack any knowledge or understanding of the Christian faith.

 

[Hafar1014]

Where are you getting your information?


Wrong.

Wrong on both accounts.

Wrong.

Seriously, either link to the source(s) you are quoting when asserting these things, or at least add, "In my opinion."

I can read the Old Testament in Hebrew and as Jew I know what it really means. There is no original sin or fall of man. Its the moral teaching of man and the trial for mans freedom which Adam passed.
The creation of hell is the threat to compel obedience. Come to Jesus or burn in hell. Thats not an invitation thats a threat. There is no hell in the Old Testament. Jews who wrote it dont have hell.

Why there is no original sin.
The fruit form the tree that contains knowledge of good and evil was created for the purpose to teach Adams moral values. It was always gods plan that he eat the fruit. Obeying gods plan cant be a sin.
Before Adam ate the fruit he couldnt even kno9w what sin was. One must be aware to sin.
The whole purpose is for Adam to show his free will by disobeying gods command not to eat the fruit or you will die. That was the test for free will. Adam disobeyed showing he has free will. He also didnt die as that was just a bluff.
After Adam ate the fruit god gave him time to repent which he eventually did.
God wanted humans to choose to come to him not be compelled by a threat so he freed us and allowed us to choose.

Christians distorted this beautiful allegory with the lie of hell and suffering if you dont obey them.

 

[Meriweather]

I can read the Old Testament in Hebrew and as Jew I know what it really means. There is no original sin or fall of man. Its the moral teaching of man and the trial for mans freedom which Adam passed.
The creation of hell is the threat to compel obedience. Come to Jesus or burn in hell. Thats not an invitation thats a threat. There is no hell in the Old Testament. Jews who wrote it dont have hell.

I understand. Before he passed on, I knew a man whose original language was Hebrew, and so I learned the Old Testament from him. While the Hebrew may not call Adam and Eve's disobedience a sin or a fall from knowing only good, 'sin' (or missing the mark) works with English and other languages. In fact, in Hebrew, 'sin' often translates into missing the the mark. Also in Hebrew, there is a difference between unintentional sin/missing the mark and deliberate sin/missing the mark.

The difference between Judaism and Christianity thoughts on sin/missing the mark is that Christianity often uses the analogy of sin leaving its blemish on the soul. Sin is often associated with guilt or something criminal. Judaism (as it was explained to me) has no such belief, that missing the mark means one is in conflict with their soul or essence. This is why Jesus called for repentance which means turning back to God, changing one's mind.

Why there is no original sin.
The fruit form the tree that contains knowledge of good and evil was created for the purpose to teach Adams moral values. It was always gods plan that he eat the fruit. Obeying gods plan cant be a sin.
Before Adam ate the fruit he couldnt even kno9w what sin was. One must be aware to sin.
The whole purpose is for Adam to show his free will by disobeying gods command not to eat the fruit or you will die. That was the test for free will. Adam disobeyed showing he has free will. He also didnt die as that was just a bluff.
After Adam ate the fruit god gave him time to repent which he eventually did.
God wanted humans to choose to come to him not be compelled by a threat so he freed us and allowed us to choose.

Again, I understand you simply cannot wrap your mind around 'Original Sin'. It means that all of mankind, with the knowledge of good and evil, can be tempted towards evil. The example used in Christianity is that after they had attained knowledge of good and evil, they were clothed. The reason for this: Lust. Seeing a naked body can arouse lustful desires, even unwanted lustful desires. With the knowledge of evil, lust is present.

I do not believe God was playing a bluff. As was also a Jewish teaching, Adam and Eve jumped ahead of God's intent. Yes, God wanted mankind to have the knowledge of good & evil, or why else plant the tree. Adam and Eve made a false start (so-to-speak). Think of the other tree in the Garden, also a good creation: The tree of life. God banned Adam and Eve from the garden less they make another false start and eat of the tree of life.

Jews, Christians, and possibly all religion/faith believe that God wanted mankind to choose between good and evil; wanted mankind to choose him, or not choose him.

Christians distorted this beautiful allegory with the lie of hell and suffering if you dont obey them.

You don't know how wrong you are. Recently I was listening to a Catholic priest talking about judgement. What he said was nothing new. (I could probably find the broadcast, but I doubt it would interest you.) He described Judgment as choice, that all our life we are making choices of choosing God or not choosing God. Judgment is coming face-to-face with the choice we have already made. Choosing God, is choosing Paradise or being with God. Not choosing God is choosing to be apart from God--being completely separate from God, is known as 'hell'. I've known this since childhood.

This is why I wish you would keep to presenting only your own religion/faith. Your biggest lie is pretending you know all about Christianity when you know nothing, but pretending you are all knowing when it comes to Christianity. Please stop the ignorance, stop the bigotry. It is unbecoming.

 

[LibertyWeeps]

Jesus was condemned to death. A crown (more accurately described as a 'helmet') was rammed on his head; he was whipped; he was forced to carry his cross; he was nailed to the cross and suffered on it for three hours. He gave his life for the redemption of mankind and the forgiveness of sins. He suffered for this.

So, an affliction is forced torture?

 

[ding]

So, an affliction is forced torture?

Affliction is something that causes pain or suffering. As we suffer through our afflictions we are brought closer to Christ.

 

[Quantrill]

So, an affliction is forced torture?

Of course it is. Who in the world would bring themselves to it.

Quantrill

 

[ding]

Of course it is. Who in the world would bring themselves to it.

Quantrill

Anyone who makes a sacrifice for another.

 

[ding]

There is no original sin or fall of man. Its the moral teaching of man and the trial for mans freedom which Adam passed.

In Judaism, yetzer hara (Hebrew: יֵצֶר הַרַע‎, romanized: yēṣer haraʿ) is a term for humankind's congenital inclination to do evil. The concept is prominent in rabbinic texts and in the works of the Syriac poet Narsai.[1] The term itself is drawn from the phrase "the inclination of the heart of man is evil" (Biblical Hebrew: יֵצֶר לֵב הָאָדָם רַע, romanized: yêṣer lêḇ hā-ʾāḏām raʿ), which occurs twice at the beginning of the Torah (Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21).

 

[Hafar1014]

In Judaism, yetzer hara (Hebrew: יֵצֶר הַרַע‎, romanized: yēṣer haraʿ) is a term for humankind's congenital inclination to do evil. The concept is prominent in rabbinic texts and in the works of the Syriac poet Narsai.[1] The term itself is drawn from the phrase "the inclination of the heart of man is evil" (Biblical Hebrew: יֵצֶר לֵב הָאָדָם רַע, romanized: yêṣer lêḇ hā-ʾāḏām raʿ), which occurs twice at the beginning of the Torah (Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21).

Thats not original sin which Jews do not believe in
Gen 8 21 "As I have done" God will punish the individual sinners and not hold the human family as a body. The term you used does not apply to mankind only individual sinners among mankind not all of humanity.

Orignal sin is the lie used to create a reason fir Jesus and to manipulate obedience with the threat of never ending punishment. This creates a punitive god a cruel god that reflects the the values of the original Christians. The opposite if the God of Genesis

 

[ding]

Thats not original sin which Jews do not believe in
Gen 8 21 "As I have done" God will punish the individual sinners and not hold the human family as a body. The term you used does not apply to mankind only individual sinners among mankind not all of humanity.

Orignal sin is the lie used to create a reason fir Jesus and to manipulate obedience with the threat of never ending punishment. This creates a punitive god a cruel god that reflects the the values of the original Christians. The opposite if the God of Genesis

I don't see a difference in saying "the inclination of the heart of man is evil" or man was born with sin. After all, we are animals.

 

[Hafar1014]

I don't see a difference in saying "the inclination of the heart of man is evil" or man was born with sin. After all, we are animals.

Gen 8 21 "As I have done" God will punish the individual sinners and not hold the human family as a body. The term you used does not apply to mankind only individual sinners among mankind not all of humanity.
Specifically states individuals not all of mankind.
We are not animals speak for yourself. The God of Christ is cruel and punitive.

 

[ding]

Gen 8 21 "As I have done" God will punish the individual sinners and not hold the human family as a body. The term you used does not apply to mankind only individual sinners among mankind not all of humanity.
Specifically states individuals not all of mankind.
We are not animals speak for yourself. The God of Christ is cruel and punitive.

יֵצֶר הַרַע

You most certainly are an animal. All of us are.

"the inclination of the heart of man is evil" = congenital inclination to do evil =man is born with sin

 

[ding]

The God of Christ is cruel and punitive.

There aren't multiple Gods. There has never been multiple Gods.

 

[Hafar1014]

There aren't multiple Gods. There has never been multiple Gods.

Irrelevant the Christian God is cruel and punitive like the men who created him

 

[onefour1]

Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ... (Colossians 1:24)

What do you suppose Paul thought was lacking in the afflictions of Christ?

Here is an AI explanation of the verse:

"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I do my share on behalf of His body, which is the church, in filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. The apostle Paul expresses his joy in his present sufferings, which he endures for the benefit of the Colossian believers and for the sake of the Church, the mystical body of Christ. The phrase "fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ" does not imply that Christ’s atoning sacrifice on the cross was incomplete or that his sufferings were insufficient for salvation. Rather, it signifies that Paul, as a member of Christ’s body, participates in the ongoing spiritual struggle against sin and the world, carrying forward the burden of suffering that Christ began, which remains to be fully lived out by His followers. This suffering is not for the purpose of atonement or redemption, which was completed once and for all on the cross, but for the edification and strengthening of the Church. Paul’s sufferings are described as being in his flesh, emphasizing the physical and personal nature of his trials, which he endures for the sake of the Church. The "afflictions of Christ" are understood as the sufferings endured by Christ’s members in the world, which are considered His sufferings due to the intimate union between Christ and His Church. These sufferings are not meritorious for salvation but serve to build up the Church, confirm believers, and further the Gospel. The context makes clear that Paul’s joy stems from his participation in Christ’s mission and the spiritual benefits that flow from his suffering, not from the suffering itself."

 

[ding]

Irrelevant the Christian God is cruel and punitive like the men who created him

It's not irrelevant at all. It's quite relevant. Other people's religion shouldn't upset you this much.