PDA

View Full Version : Sacrafices



Jeffinator
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:36 AM
I understand God made man kind sacrifice animals for their sin, but every time I read it, it just kind of feels a little archaic and barbaric. I was looking into a little research on other older religions like that of Native Americans, Aztecs..etc. And they felt they needed to sacrifice blood too, I mean even the golden calf that the Jews made while moses was on the mountain they sacrificed things to. So when the bible mentions how man used to have to sacrifice animals it kind of sounds more like something man did out of carnal nature like we feel like we have to in order to please God or as other religions put it "please the Gods". So, is there real justification for it can anyone spread a little light on this for me as far as why God thought this was the best answer at that time?

NotMyOwn
Apr 22nd 2009, 02:36 PM
It doesn't matter whether it sounds barbaric or not, God instituted animal sacrifice as an example of what was to come. Either we have to follow the law to the letter, which we have already failed at, or a sacrifice of our lives through our own death or that of the perfect sacrifice would have to be offered up.

Sacrifices in other pagan religions were to gods of their own, which of course are not real.

Athanasius
Apr 22nd 2009, 03:31 PM
I understand God made man kind sacrifice animals for their sin, but every time I read it, it just kind of feels a little archaic and barbaric. I was looking into a little research on other older religions like that of Native Americans, Aztecs..etc. And they felt they needed to sacrifice blood too, I mean even the golden calf that the Jews made while moses was on the mountain they sacrificed things to. So when the bible mentions how man used to have to sacrifice animals it kind of sounds more like something man did out of carnal nature like we feel like we have to in order to please God or as other religions put it "please the Gods". So, is there real justification for it can anyone spread a little light on this for me as far as why God thought this was the best answer at that time?

The animal sacrifices never actually covered sin. They pointed to Christ, that's who covered their sin.

My_King
Apr 22nd 2009, 11:25 PM
I do NOT remember the person who wrote the commentary about this, so forgive me for not being able to back up my source......

I read once that Animal Sacrifices for the Jews was also a way to feed the Levites and the Priests, who had no land of their own. Plus, during the Holy Feasts held throughout the year, all of the Jews would travel to Jerusalem to worship and "sacrifice" their animals. If you think about that - there would have been MANY people at these feasts. They also took their servents and children with them - think of all the people that needed fed.

So in a "way" - these sacrifices can be viewed as a pot luck?

This man who wrote the commentary said in his article that God is quite practical. His commandements and guidelines always were for our benefit somehow or another.

(Sorry I can't remember who wrote this.....)


PS - (edited) - He also wrote about the animal sacrifices being a sign for Christ as well.....and other things, NOT just about food and feeding lots of people! Just thought I'd mention that.

Jeffinator
Apr 23rd 2009, 06:23 AM
The animal sacrifices never actually covered sin. They pointed to Christ, that's who covered their sin.

I get that but why have the animal sacrifices to begin with then? Like what about in Genesis it says "Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of." Gen 22:2 (KJV)
Even humans could be burnt offerings or sacrifices to God? They didn't even used the word sacrifice but used offering meaning God wanted an animal or human to die as a gift for Him. Thats just how it kinda comes off to me.

Lordistruth
Apr 23rd 2009, 08:57 PM
The animal sacrifices never actually covered sin. They pointed to Christ, that's who covered their sin.
scripture examples??

Dani H
Apr 24th 2009, 05:12 AM
Does sin sound all kinds of fluffy and rosy to you?

The sacrifice has to match the seriousness of that which it is being sacrificed for. Which was mostly the point, as an object lesson of "hey, look at the butchery of this innocent animal, understand how destructive sin is, and that it really really really leads to death, and quit sinning and disobeying Me".

MLC
May 6th 2009, 02:18 AM
If you sin you face eternal separation from God. That is to be spirtually dead, the ultimate death. That is the wages of sin, death. One reason the animals were sacrificed was to enforce the idea. These animals were being killed because of the Israelites' sin. But the sacrifice of animals did not forgive sin, or else Christ wouldn't have needed to come. There was still that wall of separation between man and God, no matter how many animals were killed. It was an inferior copy of what was to come, just like so many other things in the old testament. Israel was an inferior version of the church, the temple was an inferior version of modern servants of God.

Just like those animals died for the sins of man, so Christ died for the sins of man. But the sacrifice of the animals simply pointed to a better future in Christ. It was meant to prepare the way.

Also, God didn't want Isaac to be sacrificed, it was simply God testing Abraham's faithfulness, to see if he was willing to make the same sacrifice God would one day make. Keep in mind, Isaac was not sacrificed, because if he was that would have been an abomination to God. Isaac was sinful, and couldn't forgive sin, only Christ could accomplish that.

ZAB
May 6th 2009, 03:32 PM
scripture examples??

Hebrews 10:1-14 "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."

Athanasius
May 6th 2009, 05:21 PM
Thanks Mr. Bridges :)

ZAB
May 6th 2009, 05:30 PM
Haha, you're welcome. Sorry to impose on your comment; I couldn't resist.
Thank God for His precious antitype!

Athanasius
May 6th 2009, 05:31 PM
It's alright, I had apparently forgotten about the thread so it's just as well :) You posted the scripture I was going to as it is.

manichunter
May 6th 2009, 05:37 PM
What is missing is that not all of them were animal sacrifices or were for sin. One of them had no animal or blood involvement. Three of them were not offered for atonement for sin, only two were.

Hence they symbolized different prophetic things regarding Jesus. They do not all teach us about sin or trespasses.

ZAB
May 6th 2009, 05:44 PM
Dear Jeffinator,
I think it may help you to study the epistle to the Hebrews. All throughout, the writer (most think to be Paul) presents the Old Testament economy and it's "shadows" and replaces them with the New Testament "substance" and truth. Jesus is seen as the "superior Son". He is superior to all that went before; He is the fulfillment. The Bible says, "to Him all the prophets witness" (Acts 10:43) in order that "in all things He might have the preeminence (Col 1:18). Your comment about Isaac being potentially offered up fits this category as well. Jesus, in type, was the ram caught in the thicket, His death providing eternal atonement in our stead. To be honest, there are types of Christ in every single Old Testament book of the Bible. Crazy huh? Thus, it can rightly be said, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote - Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph" (John 1:45). God bless you.

Dani H
May 6th 2009, 05:56 PM
Hence they symbolized different prophetic things regarding Jesus. They do not all teach us about sin or trespasses.

Not to derail anything but I would personally like for you to do a thread on that some time. Minus all the Jewish words, of course. ;) Seriously, I would love to read that. Anything that points to Jesus and leads to a deeper understanding of Him, is a blessing in my book. :hug:

Athanasius
May 6th 2009, 06:34 PM
What is missing is that not all of them were animal sacrifices or were for sin. One of them had no animal or blood involvement. Three of them were not offered for atonement for sin, only two were.

Hence they symbolized different prophetic things regarding Jesus. They do not all teach us about sin or trespasses.

Perhaps you could start a thread on this some time, Old Testament sacrifices have captured my interest.

Teke
May 6th 2009, 09:13 PM
I understand God made man kind sacrifice animals for their sin, but every time I read it, it just kind of feels a little archaic and barbaric. I was looking into a little research on other older religions like that of Native Americans, Aztecs..etc. And they felt they needed to sacrifice blood too, I mean even the golden calf that the Jews made while moses was on the mountain they sacrificed things to. So when the bible mentions how man used to have to sacrifice animals it kind of sounds more like something man did out of carnal nature like we feel like we have to in order to please God or as other religions put it "please the Gods". So, is there real justification for it can anyone spread a little light on this for me as far as why God thought this was the best answer at that time?

It's just the way God created us. He created us with a desire to worship. And because of this mankind has been worshipping, setting up altars, for all of mankinds history.

Because we are created from matter (meaning we are material beings) that is also how we express ourselves. Emotion and action hand in hand.
It is natural for us.

Native Americans had a reverence for all of God's creation. So when they killed an animal they also said a prayer, thanking God for His gift in providing for them.

So you could say sacrifice works both ways. A synergy going on between God and man, a fellowship. He gives to us from His love for us, and we are thankful to Him. That is the definition of the eucharistic gathering of the church, in worship to God. IOW that is the right way to worship God.

Here (http://www.therain.org/appendixes/app43.html) is an appendix from the KJV Companion Bible on Offer and Offering which gives more detail on the sacrifices from the Hebrew wording.

Scruffy Kid
May 7th 2009, 02:18 AM
Thanks for your good and honest questions, Jeffinator!! And for persisting in asking when the answers don't really satisfy you.

Sacrifices
I understand God made man kind sacrifice animals for their sin, but every time I read it, it just kind of feels a little archaic and barbaric. I was looking into a little research on other older religions like that of Native Americans, Aztecs..etc. And they felt they needed to sacrifice blood too, I mean even the golden calf that the Jews made while moses was on the mountain they sacrificed things to. So when the bible mentions how man used to have to sacrifice animals it kind of sounds more like something man did out of carnal nature like we feel like we have to in order to please God or as other religions put it "please the Gods". So, is there real justification for it can anyone spread a little light on this for me as far as why God thought this was the best answer at that time?

The animal sacrifices never actually covered sin. They pointed to Christ, that's who covered their sin.
I get that but why have the animal sacrifices to begin with then? Like what about in Genesis it says "Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of." Gen 22:2 (KJV)
Even humans could be burnt offerings or sacrifices to God? They didn't even used the word sacrifice but used offering meaning God wanted an animal or human to die as a gift for Him. Thats just how it kinda comes off to me. You have gotten a lot of good answers, which say lots of what I'd say, but I want to approach this from some different angles.

Let's start with the Mt. Moriah events: the "sacrifice of Isaac".

What God had Abraham do was an enactment of Christ's crucifixion.
Abraham takes his son, his only son, and takes him to a mountain where that son must be killed as a sacrifice. Isaac carries the wood on his back, just as Christ carries His cross to the place where He is crucified. Isaac, wholly innocent, wholly trusting in his dad, wholly obedient even to the point of death, goes to be slain by God's command.

The parallel between Christ and Isaac is born out in different ways in various details of the story. Abraham tells Isaac "The Lord Himself will provide a sacrifice" -- just as God does indeed, in giving His own Son for us provide the sacrifice. Isaac is saved because God provides a substitute at the last moment, just as we are saved from the condemnation and death our sins naturally bring upon us because, when the time was right, God sent Jesus, the lamb of God, to be the sacrifice for our sins. The mountain, Mount Moria, is traditionally identified as Mount Zion, Jerusalem, or the mount of Calvary, so that Isaac is indeed going to be sacrificed where Jesus later was sacrificed. Abraham is giving the thing most precious to him, his only son, just as God gave what was most precious to Him, His only Son. Isaac is the miraculous son of promise, born to a woman who could not bear a child, being barren and also 99 years old, just as Jesus is the miraculous son of promise, being born to a woman who could not bear a child, a virgin.

God provides these images, these powerful examples, from the earliest point in the history of salvation, so that through Abraham, father of faith, the hearts of His faithful people are prepared for the true and great sacrifice, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross.

While the "sacrifice of Isaac" (which does not take place, of course) is the paradigm sacrifice, the model sacrifice in the OT (the Tanach), the things which are true of Isaac's sacrifice are true of the whole matter of animal sacrifices in the OT. Where Jesus gave His life for us, an animal gives his life in the sacrifice, for instance. Where the animal sacrifice must be without blemish, so Jesus was a sacrifice without blemish. In the great OT event which signifies God liberating His people from slavery in Egypt -- which prefigures God freeing us from the slavery of our sins -- the Israelites are spared the death which otherwise comes upon the nation as they eat the passover meal with a lamb whose blood is put upon the doorposts of their home, just as the blood of Christ is what saves us from the death that is the natural consequences of our sins. Thus, the whole physical and symbolic context which is set up in the system of animal sacrifices prepares us, in many complex ways, for what Christ does for us.

But of course, this leads us to the deeper question, why did Christ have to die for us? Why is Christ's death on the cross the means of God saving us.

That question is a very deep one, and one important answer to it -- that Christ paid the penalty for our sins -- will be familiar to you, I suppose.

But there are many other reasons, as well. Jesus takes upon himself our sins. These sins lead to our death, our alienation from God the source of Life, not just because of a punishment is called for, but also because our sins, by their very nature, are rejections of God and of the good life and goodness of heart that God wants to give us. If we are to receive the life that God wants us to have, eternal life, sharing in the very life of God the Holy Trinity, the life of love, we must die to our sins. But dying to our sins is not something we are good at! Because we have messed-up our nature, we are addicted to our wrong attitudes, thoughts, and deeds. We need to let go of these things in order be able to receive God's life (for they are antithetical to God's life). But we do not have the strength, nor the purity of heart, to let these things go. Rather, we have to die to ourselves.

Jesus, in dying in our place, does for us the thing we need to do, but are too weak and wrong-hearted to do. He is willing to die to himself, to give up His life for the will of God, and for our sake -- even though there is no evil within Him that needs to perish. By doing this, Jesus receives into himself our brokenness and sin, and puts it to death. He also enables us to enter into His act of self-denial, His act of giving up His will to God the Father.

The physicalness, the pain, the ugliness, the death, and the blood -- the primative and brutal aspect which you, properly and understandably, are repelled by in animal sacrifice -- is, however, the very realness of our sin and its pain, ugliness, death, and woundedness. Moreover, the very carnage, the very bodily effort, agony, ugliness, and waste and brutality of what Jesus undergoes is the full entry of his whole human person, body and mind, into the struggle against sin, like a soldier who is willing to give his life for his country, and for his friends and comrades. Thus the horrible aspect of sacrifices, and of Jesus's sacrifice, is the full and horrible reality of our brokenness, our lostness, the brutality of human history and of our own addictions and sins. What Jesus does is fully real: it encounters, graphically and concretely, the full misery, brokenness and destruction which, through our sins, has overtaken the human condition, and overcomes it.

The images of battle -- the soldier, the dying, the guts torn out -- which we get in animal sacrifice and in Jesus's sacrifice also are so concrete and real because there is a real war which is going on: God's battle and Christ Jesus's battle on our behalf, against the forces of evil, against the Evil One, the devil and accuser of the brethren, who desires to destroy us out of hatred for us and for God. Jesus' confrontation with the devil on the cross is what frees us from the power of the Evil One: it is a replay, but with greater decisiveness and power, of Jesus's struggle against the devil in the wilderness after his baptism.

Also, the outpouring of life that occurs when Christ dies, and His blood is shed for us is the enactment of the fact that God, at great cost, is pouring out His life into our little lives. The death that we have brought about in our world and in our lives is overcome by the greatness of life that is in God. But because our sin is real, and a real part of us, and because it is us, sinners that each of us is, and not some fictitious human beings, that God intends to save, God's gift of life to us is real and costly: an outpouring of his own life, akin the blood which pours from Christ's veins as He saves us. Taking humanity into the very life of God, and bringing His eternal life into our hearts, places a demand on the most Holy and the most precious -- Christ, God's own son -- which is an element of His sacrifice on the cross.

All these dimensions and aspects of the depth and realness of Jesus's victory -- Jesus's bloody struggle for our liberation from sin, hell, death, and the devil -- are present in physical form in his passion, death, and resurrection.

(Do I understand all this? No, of course not. It's far greater than my comprehension, even if I were ten, a hundred, a thousand times holier and more innocent and stronger of heart and mind than I am. But through the concrete way God has expressed Himself, and acted on our behalf, I can begin to understand, bit by bit, more of his goodness, realness, and love.)

The whole process and imagery of animal sacrifice in the OT is a means by which God prepares us to receive the true sacrifice, the sacrifice of His Son to save us from our sins.

At least that's how I see it.

In friendship, :hug:
Scruff

Your Advert here


Hosted by Webnet77