Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins

quote:

---

Please note that Brian is not saying he agrees with it or even rendering an opinion - he is just communicating what the Bible claims/says:

---

Yes that is a basic summary of what the Christian Bible claims.Unfortunately it has nothing to do with the argument presented in the OP.The Hebrew Bible does not support the part about God sending his only son to suffer.My contention is that sacrifices were not required for atonement of sins, plus the guidelines given don't even apply to all sins. Therefore, Jesus was not a sacrifice to forgive all sins.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

A yearly sacrifice is spoken of in 1 Samuel. IMO this yearly sacrifice is not the "Day of Atonement."
Reason: Per Leviticus 16, burnt offerings and sin offerings are used on the "Day of Atonement."
Per Leviticus 6:8-11, the burnt offering is burned up completely. No one eats the meat.
Per Leviticus 6:26, the priest who offers the sin offering is the one who eats from the meat, not the person making the offering.A "Fellowship Offering", on the otherhand, is consumed by the one making the offering. The fat is burned as the sacrifice, not the meat. (Leviticus 3 & 7:11-21)

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

It is evident that this topic is too dangerous for discussion. I understand that agreeing with me and delving deeper into the possibilities could send a Christian into spiritual crisis, but I feel that agreeing with me does not negate the moral teachings of Jesus. Unfortunately, those who disagreed didn’t follow through to prove their point.My viewpoint on the Hebrew Bible, is that it is written by Hebrews, for Hebrews, about Hebrews.The lamentations we read from Isaiah and Jeremiah are no different than the type of complaints we hear during protests or government elections. The OT has many verses concerning justice, widows, orphans, and aliens. To list a few: Even best laid plans tend to get corrupted over time.I feel that the extensive sacrificial system grew during the second temple era. Sacrifices made a very impressive show. Personally I feel the sacrificial system served the needs of the priests more than the people.Leviticus 27 set a monetary value for people and animals, etc.
Deuteronomy 18 speaks of the share due the priests.Since the Hebrews were supposedly poor slaves in Egypt, their possessions should be very basic. According to Moses (Ex 10) the Hebrews would be taking their flocks and herds with them. Two months into the desert and (Exodus 16) the Hebrews are out of food, hence the need for manna and quail.Given this scenario, the elaborate sacrificial system of Leviticus would be unreasonable and wasteful.Isaiah 1:11-17 and Jeremiah 7:21-24 state that God did not require sacrifices from his people. Just because God allowed people to make sacrifices to him, doesn’t mean that he required them. Remember, Deuteronomy 12:4 & 31 says You must not worship the Lord your God in their way.Also since in Deuteronomy 12:8 it says You are not to do as we do here today, everyone as he sees fit... apparently the Hebrews weren’t following a given system even after 40 years.In Message 17 I show that the songs of David’s time reflect the belief that God didn’t require or desire sacrifice regardless of the giver’s intentions.In Message 32 show passages from Ezekiel that show that repentance is all that is needed to be forgiven by God. Even in Jonah 3 when God sent Jonah to Nineveh to tell them they would be destroyed, the city survived because of repentance and prayer.The Ninevites believed God. They declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth... By the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let any man or beast, herd or flock, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he had compassion and did not bring upon them the destruction he had threatened.No one has provided me with clear evidence that 1) animal sacrifices covered all sins, 2) repentance was not accepted without animal sacrifice and 3) the Levitical system was functioning in the wilderness or even before the first temple.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Bump, because part of the thread "The Whole Jesus Thing" is heading down the path of this thread and that thread is running out of time.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

In response to my Message 127 of the "Gospel of John" thread robinrohan writes in Message 136

quote:

---

In very early days, animal sacrifice to the gods was supposed to be food for the gods. The gods needed humans as much as humans needed gods.

​

Even in Leviticus, "the priest shall burn it on the altar as food offered by fire to the Lord" (3:11).

---

I'm only discussing Hebrew sacrifice and since the gentleman I quoted stated that Biblical sacrifice was misunderstood, the point is that maybe the idea of food for God is a misconception.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

I contend that Jesus was not an atonement sacrifice for the sins of mankind.You would need to show me in the OT that:

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Welcome to EvC Droxyn,Did you read the entire thread before answering? My impression is that you didn't.Much of what you stated I have already addressed in this thread.I would like to continue this discussion with you once you have read the whole thread and understand my position.Food for thought:
Gen 3:21 was not a sacrifice to atone for sins. Just because an animal is killed doesn't make it a sacrifice.The Book of Leviticus was not written before the first temple.

quote:

---

I guess I'm not sure why animal sacrifices in the OT would have to atone for all sins in order for Christ to be an atonement sacrifice for mankind. If you could maybe please elaborate a bit I will attempt a comment.

---

My Opening Post (OP) Message 1: I contend that the death of Jesus was not an atonement sacrifice to pay for the sins of humanity.The animal sacrifices in Leviticus only covered unintentional sins. (This is covered in this thread)If animal sacrifices were not REQUIRED in the OT to cover sins then Jesus was not necessary as an atonment sacrifice. (Explained earlier in this thread)

quote:

---

It's probably a foul and doesn't count but it seems pretty clear that the NT writers understood the sacrifices of the OT to be a "pointing forward" to the coming Christ.

---

Provide the verses that you feel clearly show that the NT writers understood this.So read the whole thread and we can continue this discussion. Since this is an old thread, if you refer to earlier posts in this thread, please list the number as I did next to the OP above. This provides a link back to the post and people won't have to hunt for the post you were refering to.PD

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

(how do you all have so much time to reply with these lengthy, well researched posts ???)

---

My preference is to type it in a wordprocessing document. I can take as long as I want to work on the post and take breaks when necessary. It also makes it easier to spell check and proofread.Then when you are ready, you can just copy the information into the reply box, hit the preview button to make sure it looks the way you want, make sure your links work, and give it one last read for any oddities. Piece of cake!As for the quotes. There is a Practice Makes Perfect forum where you can practice these techniques.Once you hit the reply button and have the white reply box in front of you, look to the left and click on the dBCodes On (help). (Just above the Smilies link.) That's where the instructions for the various quotes, links, etc. That is the one I use.You will find that short paragraphs are preferred over extremely long ones. What you did in your second post is good. White space (or in the case of this forum, blue space) is our friend. Good Luck!

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

If prayer is sufficient for forgiveness, then what mandates God to die for sins?

---

That, my friend, is the $64,000 question, which has yet to be answered convincingly in this thread.This message has been edited by purpledawn, 03-04-2005 12:10 AM

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

men are not so fogiving and seem to think that someone has to die to fix problems

---

Which is the perfect plot for the story. Jews were already conditioned to sacrifice animals for their sin. A man (especially the messiah) would obviously be more important than an animal and thus the ultimate final sacrifice, now they wouldn't have to sacrifice anymore. IMO, it would not be hard to sell this reasoning to people who were tired of the expensive sacrifical system.From reading the OT though and understanding when the books were believed to be written, I find that the sacrifice for sin atonement was a second temple ritual.There were the sacrifices and offerings for thanks, but not for sin atonement. So the tradition was started by man and ended by man.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

I tell you all this just to let you know that at one time your view was simply the mainline view.

---

That's me, always late! I love history. So many pieces to the puzzle.I skimmed some of the writings considered to be truly Pauline and noticed that his use of sacrifice was more descriptive as opposed to atonement.Thank you very much for the history info.
Now I have a few more tidbits to tuck away in my brain.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

Could it be that these sacrifices were also to put meat on the table?

---

When I was researching for this thread, I did find information that it was a localized way of butchering. There was information that sacrifice for atonement was not the original purpose.Supposedly Judaism does not practice the sacrifices today because the Temple was destroyed. It was the only place allowed for sacrifices. Once it was gone the sacrifices stopped, from what I have read.Ramoss gives a good run down on Early Jewish Sacrifices for Atonement in the Atonement thread.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France