Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins

Are you saying that Jesus is NOT God?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

How many entities do you count here, my friend?1. Father
2. Son
3. Holy Spirit
= tri-unity = trinity

I've already answered your question, Jar. Live with it and move on.

Actually buz, as usual you are simply evading the question, so once again, is Jesus God?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Jar, that you don't like my answer doesn't mean I haven't fully answered your question. What I've answered is what your getting, period. Move on.

Thomas Paine has been challenged by this author:Also, a more detailed rebuttal is to be found here:http://www.tektonics.org/JPH_CN2.html

Back on track. This thread isn't to discuss who Jesus is, but that blood sacrifices were not required by God to forgive sins and that a one time human sacrifice (the messiah) to atone for ALL of humanities sins is not alluded to in the OT.I’m answering this generically so as not to repeat myself and to group the various parts brought out by participants. This one is on the Messianic Prophecy not the sacrificing tradition.Zechariah 9:9 is the only prophecy I have read so far that talks of a coming king. Still there is no mention of a sinless human who must die as a penalty or to make amends (atone) for the sins of humanity.As ramoss stated in message 39:
Remember, to the Jewish population, the messiah was going to be
a spiritual/military leader who frees them foreign occupation, and
establishes a time of peace, prosperity and Torah as the acknowledged
path to God, and the scattered Jews brought home to Israel. The Messiah was not going to be an incarnation of God.So I have yet to see a true prophecy that speaks of a sinless human to be sacrificed (slaughtered) to cleanse, atone, or pay the penalty for the sins of humanity.

---

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

The message concerns the possibility that scribes/people had changed God's requirements.Book of Jeremiah (a prophet of Judah) I understand that God is upset. He says his people DO NOT know his ordinances and that the scribes have turned it into a lie. So what his people are being taught is incorrect. God is telling them there is a problem. Earlier God says he DID NOT speak to their fathers or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Another warning from God that there has been a communication problem through the generations.Now there was a thread several months ago (I haven’t been able to find it), but as I remember the OP set the scenario as a person walking along and a voice called the person by name and the voice said it was God. How would the person have the voice prove it was God?One answer that caught my attention (and again I don’t know who it was) was one that said roughly that if the voice contradicted anything in the Bible that it wasn’t God. The scary part of that thought is that if we fallible humans have screw things up, we aren’t even open to correction directly from God.That’s exactly what God told Jeremiah. So God told Jeremiah that they would not listen to him and that they were a nation that did not accept correction. He also told him that he did not speak about or command sacrifices and that his people did not know his ordinances. Finally, we have the lying scribes, which tells us that God knew there were errors in what was written at the time. The sacrificial system in Exodus and Leviticus is very detailed and very elaborate. Almost too elaborate for a group 3 months across the desert. Sounds more like a system that has developed over time.Deuteronomy in the fortieth year doesn’t have the elaborate trappings.Another difference between Exodus/Leviticus and Deuteronomy is the usage of Mt. Horeb and Mt. Sinai, which are supposedly the same place.Horeb is used 9 times in Deuteronomy. It is used zero (0) times in Leviticus and Numbers. It is used 3 times in Exodus.By contrast Sinai is used 13 times in Exodus, 4 times in Leviticus, 12 times in Numbers, and only 1 time in Deuteronomy.If we knew which name the mountain went by at the time of the Exodus, we would know which part was added later. This is probably another example of the traditions evolved differently while in exile and then blended when they came back together. In 2 Kings it sounds as though the priests and kings lost contact with the Book of the Law These verses give us reason to take a closer look at whether sacrifices were truly intended to atone for all sins even with the right attitude.The next message will be on the sin sacrifices themselves.

---

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

What would you have God do?Please, no replies to this message.Adminnemooseus

---

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
Thread Reopen Requests

Excellent!Thank you very much Adminnemooseus. There are two messages with the similar thought.Messsage 17 and Message 21 at What Would You Have God Do?

---

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

This concerns the sacrifice for sin only, not the other various offerings.Sin: Missing the mark
Sacrifice: slaughter, killI’m discussing sacrifice as in an offering of the life of a person or animal, or of an object, in homage to a deity. I am not discussing sacrifice as in giving up, destroying, etc. of one thing for the sake of another.I find a considerable difference between Leviticus and Deuteronomy when it comes to sacrifices. Again Leviticus is extremely detailed and Deuteronomy is not.Deuteronomy doesn’t mention sin or guilt sacrifices. It does give some death penalties, but not as many as Leviticus. This phrase starts chapter 4 and includes instructions for cases such as: In this way the priest will make atonement for the individual or group for the sin committed and the individual or group will be forgiven. (This sentence summarizes what is written at the end of each example) These all deal with actions and not frame of mind. Sorta like paying a parking ticket. In Chapter 19:20 a man who sleeps with a woman who is a slave girl promised to another man but is not put to death, but can pay the guilt offering. The punishments for disobedience sound familiar and ends with IMO Deuteronomy is more realistic as to what was covered in the wilderness. The sin and guilt sacrifices in Leviticus equate to fines or penalties we have today for infractions. They were the physical penalties used to enforce certain rules. The sin sacrifices did not apply to all crimes. Unfortunately in Jeremiah’s day, the penalties didn’t stop the people from sinning against each other or God.Claiming that Jesus is the final atonement sacrifice for sin, would mean there are no more physical penalties levied on humans for sin. Granted the sacrificial system ended with the destruction of the temple, but we are still fined for our infractions against our society. Cheating, stealing, murder, etc. all carry penalties.I feel the sacrifice was the deterrent and the repentance is what made amends with God. In Jeremiah, God was angry that the sacrifices continued, but repentance stopped. Unfortunately we don't have an example of good behavior without sacrifice. Just like today, bad behavior gets more attention.BTW I found no penalty for not bringing a sacrifice.

---

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

Great thoughts, purpledawn! You brought to mind a principle that we were taught in church a few years back that made sense to me then, and still does. I can't find the exact scriptures that stated it, but the essence of what was taught was that God prefers obedience over sacrifice. Take the example of God loving a cheerful giver. To give cheerfully involves obedience to an inner unction and a heartfelt desire. To sacrifice means giving up something that a person claims as their own. If I spend time with you because I think that I have to, it is a sacrifice and as God looks at my heart, it is in vain. If I willfully spend time with you because an inner unction compels me to do so, it is obedience and it is rewarded!

Exactly!When my father was suffering from cancer (abt 6 yrs) the church he had belonged to since childhood, put him on the call list. No one from this wonderful church family came to visit him until his name came up on their list. The elders didn't call until his name came up on their list and then, when my mother answered the phone, they'd say "Well it is my turn to call, so how's he doing?"When he was well he was very active in the church. My father is one of those people who helps others because he enjoys helping others and was able to. (Jack of all trades type). Once he was unable to go to church anymore or help, he didn't hear from anyone until he showed up on their list.This church wasn't good at practicing what they preach.

quote:

---

To sacrifice means giving up something that a person claims as their own.

---

That's what sacrifice in the church has come to mean in this day and age.Give of your money, time, money, resources, money, etc.

---

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

Then, my original statement stands..The Christian concept says God sent himself down to earth as his own son to sacrifice himself to himself, to save the world from himself.

If you want to call that a rebutel. Most of that mismsah is one giant
rationalistion, and does not address the issues Thomas Paine brought up at all, but rather made strawmans arguements, twists of logic, and attacked Paine personally...