Judaism moving beyond animal sacrifices

[rejoice44]

Um. Wow. Dude, God doesn't prohibit human sacrifice because the person sacrificed has sins. God prohibited it because human sacrifice is an abomination.

Perhaps sacrifice isn't the proper word, rather God's judgment for the penalty of sin. Adam sinned and we all suffer the penalty. Because of sin, Isaac at some point was going to have to die. God was showing Abraham his plan of escape for man. The sacrifice of one who was unblemished, to take the place of the one who was blemished.

Bible doesn't say that Isaac was "saved" anywhere. The whole story is about Abraham being tested, not Isaac being "saved" from sin or whatever.

No, but Isaac was saved wasn't he?

[Fenris]

Perhaps sacrifice isn't the proper word, rather God's judgment for the penalty of sin.

Or maybe God was saying that He does not desire human sacrifice. I know, wacky.

Adam sinned and we all suffer the penalty. Because of sin, Isaac at some point was going to have to die

. Err your point being? We all die.

No, but Isaac was saved wasn't he?

Saved from what? God didn't want Abraham to kill him. Isaac isn't even the central figure in this story.

[keck553]

Maybe you don't understand, I am a lover of Israel because they are God's chosen, but until the day that they accept Jesus Christ as the Messiah they will receive no blessing from God. Every Jew that dies today without Jesus Christ is lost, and will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

That's between 'them' and God. Not one human being in all of history has saved another human being. We proclaim the Good News and God does the rest. It's none of our business how God works out His will in them. It is not our job to convert or judge them. It is our job to proclaim the gospel then be a witness of our Messiah by walking in His footsteps, in lovingkindness, mercy and good works born of our new identity in Him. That is how we glorify God.

[keck553]

Fenris for the most part does not like to hear scripture quoted from the New Testament. The fact is the law never saved anyone, only God's mercy saves, and Fenris has stated that he doesn't want God's mercy, and that he intends to earn his own way.

Not that I need to defend Fenris, but as much as I know about his personal faith, I think you are wrong in your judgement of His faith regarding his desire for God's mercy.

Hey, I don't think MacCabbees or the Wisdom of Solomon is Scripture, but that doesn't mean I don't like it. I think this is Fenris' position on the Gospels and AW.

[Lily]

Can I be really honest?

Sure, everyone else here is.

I would hope so. What I meant was that I would like to have been able to say I thought the article was interesting, made some good points, and I could relate to it. But, I can’t. The article was only interesting in that it made some strange contrast/comparisons with the Mayans. It didn’t back up its main point in a way that really worked. And rather than being able to relate, I was offended by it as one who believes that foremost we must follow God’s direction, regardless of whether it seems irrational or not.

I think it is very bold for the author to want you to share credit for Jewish progress

He pays credit to those who lived centuries or millenia ago. I don't see the problem… Religious Jews do not doubt that the divine hand is in everything that happens. That does not absolve one from behaving in a rational manner and planning ahead. Indeed, the Talmud prohibits one from relying on a miracle. That doesn't mean that we lack faith, it means that we have to do what we have to do and God has to do what he has to do.

Ex 33:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Depart, and go up hence, thou and the people which thou hast brought up out of the land of Egypt, unto the land which I sware unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, Unto thy seed will I give it: 2 And I will send an angel before thee; and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite: 3 Unto a land flowing with milk and honey: for I will not go up in the midst of thee; for thou art a stiffnecked people: lest I consume thee in the way. 4 And when the people heard these evil tidings, they mourned


They didn’t even want an angel to go before them, let alone try to make their way themselves:


16 For wherein shall it be known here that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight? is it not in that thou goest with us? so shall we be separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth.


That’s always what has set Israel apart, their faith and dependence on God to be with and lead them! I understand that, not having the obvious cloud in the midst, you have to discern the correct path. But rather than trying to say that you’re thriving for this or that reason you should be praising God for it and begging for clear direction. Because, in deciding that animal sacrifices are irrational (though God commanded them), it seems that perhaps you’re getting a little anxious in waiting for Moses to come down the mountain. And, in your effort to move forward (without clear direction), it’s almost as if you’re throwing your gold into the fire to fashion your own idol or image of God, so to speak.

Really, every single time they planned it ended poorly?

As far as I can remember. If you don’t think so, then give me one example where the people, aside from God’s/Moses/Joshua’s clear direction, planned anything that worked out for them.

When a temple is rebuilt will you still feel that God is fine with offerings by mind, heart and deed or will that change again?

I have already answered this question.

Yeah, I saw your answer. You acknowledged that in a new temple sacrifices will be offered again. But you didn’t address the point of the question. The article implies that blood sacrifices are irrational, yet you acknowledge that you’ll be doing it again some time in the future. It’s either irrational (and you should never do it again), or it’s not (and you should acknowledge that the only reason you don‘t still offer them is because there is no present temple).

OR, more precisely, acknowledge that the sacrifices were commanded by God and symbolic of the Ultimate unblemished Sacrifice and atonement for the soul.

See, I think you also understand that God would rather we offer of ourselves righteous thoughts, prayers and deeds than for us to have to offer sacrifices for sin.

Since no temple stands at this time, right now yes God would rather deeds than sacrifice.

That’s not what I meant. But by “we“ I meant Christians.

And we should do those things. And if we always and only did those things a blood sacrifice would never be necessary. However, because we do also sin (even unintentionally), a blood sacrifice is necessary. Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that makethan atonement for the soul.

I'm sorry, this quote is out of context.

Thanks for adding the context:

10 “‘I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people. 11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.[c] 12 Therefore I say to the Israelites, “None of you may eat blood, nor may any foreigner residing among you eat blood.”

13 “‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth, 14 because the life of every creature is its blood. That is why I have said to the Israelites, “You must not eat the blood of any creature, because the life of every creature is its blood; anyone who eats it must be cut off.

The chapter is about not consuming blood. It's not about atonement. God doesn't say "one only atones through blood."

The chapter is about not consuming blood, yes. But, in context, verse 11 explains why you‘re told not to - “it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.”

As you know, Christians believe Jesus was the sacrifice that the previous sacrifices had foreshadowed and symbolized.

No way, really?

Let me think about it for a second….



Umm, yeah, really.

So you basically say that we've moved beyond animal sacrifice. Jews say the same thing, though for different reasons.

No, I’m saying we haven’t. We still see the need, only we realize the need has already been met. For those who have yet to enter into relationship with God, they will also need to realize that an animal, even Divine/human, sacrifice is necessary, and accept that Jesus was that sacrifice.

You, on the other hand, claim to see no need, you’ve moved beyond it. And, shouldn't you be concerned about having that mind set? If you promote the idea that focusing on/offering animal sacrifices is irrational, now, who will believe that it's necessary in the future? And when they don't, it will be the fault of those who promoted the idea that it wasn't necessary.

I find it very interesting that you will accept these solutions:

Well, why not? They're based on biblical verses.

You know as well as I do that we can make a case for anything using Bible verses improperly.

Let's not get into a "why Jews aren't Christian" discussion. The original topic stands well enough on it's own.

Ok.

From the article:

Rebecca Costa’s argument is that whatever the causes, the Mayan collapse, like the fall of the Roman Empire and the Khmer Empire of 13th-century Cambodia, occurred because problems became too many and complicated for the people of that time and place to solve. There was cognitive overload, and systems broke down…The first sign of breakdown is gridlock. Instead of dealing with what everyone can see are major problems, people continue as usual and simply pass their problems on to the next generation. The second sign is a retreat into irrationality. Since people can no longer cope with the facts, they take refuge in religious consolations…”

I can’t relate to the point of the article at all. I don’t the think the demise of any nation is because their problems become to complex and they begin to act irrationally. It’s because of sin and because they worship the wrong god.

Joshua 24:20 If ye forsake the LORD, and serve strange gods, then he will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that he hath done you good.

21 And the people said unto Joshua, Nay; but we will serve the LORD.

22 And Joshua said unto the people, Ye are witnesses against yourselves that ye have chosen you the LORD, to serve him. And they said, We are witnesses.

23 Now therefore put away, said he, the strange gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the LORD God of Israel.

24 And the people said unto Joshua, The LORD our God will we serve, and his voice will we obey.

The first passover lamb wasn't irrational, it was commanded and of necessity. And, for any who hope to abide in a relationship with God, it's still commanded and necessary. And in love and mercy, He has provided it of Himself, already.

Blessings...

[Ta-An]

Christians said that man once had to sacrifice animals, but that time is past.

So do Jews.

WaCKY!

What according to the Jews (other than an absent temple) is the reason?
For sacrifices took place in the desert... Why the need of the Temple

[Ta-An]

Not a sin sacrifice.

.

A protection against death (Sin causes death.)... The blood that protected them (Passover related) against the Angel of Death.... but for everyone, not just for the firstborn.

[dan]

Who's sacrificing animals? Do tell.

Midwest, Mountain, and Eastern Jewish sects are still sacrificing animals, according to my source. Are the Jews experiencing a schism?

[Fenris]

I would hope so. What I meant was that I would like to have been able to say I thought the article was interesting, made some good points, and I could relate to it. But, I can’t. The article was only interesting in that it made some strange contrast/comparisons with the Mayans. It didn’t back up its main point in a way that really worked. And rather than being able to relate, I was offended by it as one who believes that foremost we must follow God’s direction, regardless of whether it seems irrational or not.

But the author cites biblical verses. He claims we are following God's directions.

That’s always what has set Israel apart, their faith and dependence on God to be with and lead them! I understand that, not having the obvious cloud in the midst, you have to discern the correct path. But rather than trying to say that you’re thriving for this or that reason you should be praising God for it and begging for clear direction. Because, in deciding that animal sacrifices are irrational (though God commanded them), it seems that perhaps you’re getting a little anxious in waiting for Moses to come down the mountain. And, in your effort to move forward (without clear direction), it’s almost as if you’re throwing your gold into the fire to fashion your own idol or image of God, so to speak.

No one said animal sacrifice was "irrational". Quite the opposite. The author says that it served definite, rational purposes by leading one to repentance. Then he shows how other activities may fill a similar function. And cites biblical verses to prove it.

As far as I can remember. If you don’t think so, then give me one example where the people, aside from God’s/Moses/Joshua’s clear direction, planned anything that worked out for them.

I have a better idea. Why don't you tell me some of these plans that ended poorly.

Yeah, I saw your answer. You acknowledged that in a new temple sacrifices will be offered again. But you didn’t address the point of the question. The article implies that blood sacrifices are irrational

Again, it says nothing of the sort.

OR, more precisely, acknowledge that the sacrifices were commanded by God and symbolic of the Ultimate unblemished Sacrifice and atonement for the soul.

Shrug. Jews don't conclude that from the bible. Yes, I know Christians do.

The chapter is about not consuming blood, yes. But, in context, verse 11 explains why you‘re told not to - “it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.”

Does it say "one can only atone through blood"? No, it does not.

No, I’m saying we haven’t. We still see the need, only we realize the need has already been met.

Ok, have it your way.

Wes till need sacrifice. Christians believe it was met by Jesus. Jews believe it can be met via other human activity.


Better?

You know as well as I do that we can make a case for anything using Bible verses improperly.

Not really a good point. Anyone can say it to prove anything.

I can’t relate to the point of the article at all. I don’t the think the demise of any nation is because their problems become to complex and they begin to act irrationally. It’s because of sin and because they worship the wrong god.

That's what causes nations to collapse? Not sociological or historical processes?

The first passover lamb wasn't irrational, it was commanded and of necessity.

Again this word "irrational". I never used it.

And, for any who hope to abide in a relationship with God, it's still commanded and necessary. And in love and mercy, He has provided it of Himself, already.

The passover sacrifice was not a sin sacrifice. Just saying.

Blessings.

[Fenris]

Midwest, Mountain, and Eastern Jewish sects are still sacrificing animals, according to my source.

Uhm who............?

[Fenris]

A protection against death (Sin causes death.)... The blood that protected them (Passover related) against the Angel of Death.... but for everyone, not just for the firstborn.

Not in the bible.

[John 8:32]

Midwest, Mountain, and Eastern Jewish sects are still sacrificing animals, according to my source. Are the Jews experiencing a schism?

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't there only one place on earth that the Service of God could be performed?

[Fenris]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't there only one place on earth that the Service of God could be performed?

Deuteronomy 12:13 Be careful not to sacrifice your burnt offerings anywhere you please. Offer them only at the place the LORD will choose in one of your tribes, and there observe everything I command you.

That would be Jerusalem, of course.

I still don't know who these "Midwest, Mountain, and Eastern Jewish sects" are.

[keck553]

You should remember this statement well.

We Christians should all remember it very well, especially in light of Hebrews, chapter 10 + 11 (how much more we are accountable to Mt. Zion than Mt. Sinai).

[rejoice44]

Not that I need to defend Fenris, but as much as I know about his personal faith, I think you are wrong in your judgement of His faith regarding his desire for God's mercy.

Why don't you ask Fenris whether he said, "If he didn't earn it, he didn't want it", in regards to God's salvation? Unless he has since changed his mind, I am sure he will tell you the same thing.