Animal Sacrifices

[praise_yeshua]

Heb 9 handles all that - i.e. why Jesus' offering was BETTER THAN what the O.T. priests did with their bloody ceremonies.

And NO, "covering something doesn't stop it from stinking", but it DID make it possible for God to continue dealing with His "Chosen people" looking forward to JESUS' SIN OFFERING (Isa 53:10) which ELIMINATED SIN in those who put their FAITH in it, completely.

God is not afraid of sin. Sin has never stopped God from loving humanity.

I'm challenging how this "doctrine" is "framed" and "constructed". It is important to see it for what it is. Nothing more than ritual that was designed to show the futility of such processes. They perfected nothing. There was a remembrance every year made for ALL THE SINS of humanity.

These "rituals were added".... They were never meant to provide anything other than self awareness of guilt.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'm not avoiding it.
You accused me of mocking you.
I then asked if that was your answer.


You didn't read what I stated?
This is not going well.


I'm still here.

I read where you posted it. I did the same with Lev 17.

You're still not answering. How did it make you feel when I asked if YOU had read it?

This is not going well for you.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

God is not afraid of sin. Sin has never stopped God from loving humanity.

I'm challenging how this "doctrine" is "framed" and "constructed". It is important to see it for what it is. Nothing more than ritual that was designed to show the futility of such processes. They perfected nothing. There was a remembrance every year made for ALL THE SINS of humanity.

These "rituals were added".... They were never meant to provide anything other than self awareness of guilt.

Yup, that's the PRIMARY purpose of the "LAW" - to make SIN visible.

 

[SteveB]

I read where you posted it. I did the same with Lev 17.

I'm beginning to wonder.

You're still not answering. How did it make you feel when I asked if YOU had read it?

I'm still here!
Would you like me to leave?
You've made this into an argument you need to win at all cost, and you're about to pay that cost.
If i was unduly offended, i would have left already and picked a few choice words to leave behind.

This is not going well for you.

Thankfully I don't need to win.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'm beginning to wonder.


I'm still here!
Would you like me to leave?
You've made this into an argument you need to win at all cost, and you're about to pay that cost.
If i was unduly offended, i would have left already and picked a few choice words to leave behind.


Thankfully I don't need to win.

You're simply avoiding the fact that questioning if someone has read something is nothing more than pettiness. You know it is. You started of this conversation with pettiness. That isn't my problem it is YOUR problem.

You've doubled down on this several times now. I give it back to you and you refuse to acknowledge the obvious.

I don't need to win. I'm simply dealing with your false claims.

As far as "choice words"... I never expected otherwise. Out of the mouth the heart speaks.......

 

[SteveB]

I'm thinking at this point that the OP has chosen to blow off any view that differs with their's.
I'm not particularly bothered by this, but I honestly thought... or maybe hoped... that this environment would be different from what takes place on CARM.

Human nature plays out exactly as Paul describes.

I do not want to be engaged in an ever devolving situation where it gets as ugly as this is getting.
So... @praise_yeshua , I'm walking away from this because it's clear to me now that you are not here to engage in mutual respect and learning.

I stated my views, and specifically, with biblical support, in response to your op.

Post in thread 'Animal Sacrifices' https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/animal-sacrifices.551/post-38849

Don't waste your time responding.
It'll merely be a tantrum, and I'm not going to waste your time to engage in arguing with you.

Grace and Truth be with you,
IN Christ.

 

[Dizerner]

Wow, you're the tantrum, no you are, no you are, etc. etc.

Definitely a little of Carm spirit came here.

 

[SteveB]

Wow, you're the tantrum, no you are, no you are, etc. etc.

Definitely a little of Carm spirit came here.

Which is why I'm stepping off.
Had I known this was going to start, I would have avoided this op like the plague.

 

[civic]

Unfortunately its the nature of the beast with online forums. As hard as we here might try to keep it respectful and not have it personal at times it rears its ugly head.

There are times where I wonder if things can ever change because of our human nature.

But I'm the eternal optimist and always have hope and believe that people can change and want to do the right thing.

The golden rule is what I hope becomes the norm and not the exception to the rule.

I know when my wife says something unkind I choose not to respond. It takes two to tango as they say. Its hard to argue by/with yourself

I need to keep myself in check because my nature( my natural bent) is to win the argument at all costs. And I can troll with the best of them which is another thing I must keep in check. I'm good at poking the bear to my own demise.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Which is why I'm stepping off.
Had I known this was going to start, I would have avoided this op like the plague.

You're the one that started it. I simply called you on it.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Wow, you're the tantrum, no you are, no you are, etc. etc.

Definitely a little of Carm spirit came here.

Like you're not guilty of it yourself. You're not the arbitrator of ethical conduct.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Unfortunately its the nature of the beast with online forums. As hard as we here might try to keep it respectful and not have it personal at times it rears its ugly head.

There are times where I wonder if things can ever change because of our human nature.

But I'm the eternal optimist and always have hope and believe that people can change and want to do the right thing.

The golden rule is what I hope becomes the norm and not the exception to the rule.

I know when my wife says something unkind I choose not to respond. It takes two to tango as they say. Its hard to argue by/with yourself

I need to keep myself in check because my nature( my natural bent) is to win the argument at all costs. And I can troll with the best of them which is another thing I must keep in check. I'm good at poking the bear to my own demise.

He mentioned "choice words"....

What a upstanding man.

 

[civic]

He mentioned "choice words"....

What an upstanding man.

I was just speaking in general to everyone including myself not pointing out any one person.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I do not want to be engaged in an ever devolving situation where it gets as ugly as this is getting.
So... @praise_yeshua , I'm walking away from this because it's clear to me now that you are not here to engage in mutual respect and learning.

Notice the "parting shot".....

I stated my views, and specifically, with biblical support, in response to your op.

No you didn't. You started by question if I had read a verse from the Scriptures. I dealt with your lack of substance relative to the OP.

Don't waste your time responding.
It'll merely be a tantrum, and I'm not going to waste your time to engage in arguing with you.

Grace and Truth be with you,
IN Christ.

You don't get to tell me what to do. You don't control my responses.

 

[Dizerner]

Like you're not guilty of it yourself. You're not the arbitrator of ethical conduct.

Do you think catching me in guilt makes it not true anymore?

Or that I'm simply no longer "worthy" to point it out.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Do you think catching me in guilt makes it not true anymore?

Or that I'm simply no longer "worthy" to point it out.

I've never pointed it out to you. I've never tried to control how you respond to anything.

If you want to discuss PM me.

 

[Obadiah]

The ancient Israelites took sin far more seriously that many people today do. Consider the impact of carrying out the instructions given for burnt-offering sacrifices.

(Lev. 1:3–5): “If the animal you present as a burnt offering is from the herd, it must be a male with no defects. Bring it to the entrance of the Tabernacle so you[a] may be accepted by the Lord. 4 Lay your hand on the animal’s head, and the Lord will accept its death in your place to purify you, making you right with him.[b] 5 Then slaughter the young bull in the Lord’s presence, and Aaron’s sons, the priests, will present the animal’s blood by splattering it against all sides of the altar that stands at the entrance to the Tabernacle.

• The psychological impact. If you were a Hebrew at the time of Moses, you had to do the killing of your animal sacrifice. You had to place your hand on the animal’s head as you slit its throat and felt its life drain away, all the while knowing that the animal was symbolically dying in your place.

• The financial impact. The required sacrifice for the burnt offering was a bull, which was to be among the best of your herd. No doubt you had other animals for food and trade. Still, no rancher likes to lose even one animal, particularly a prize bull. So the sacrifice involved a financial burden, a tangible reminder of the penalty of sin. Even those who could not afford bulls had to make sacrifices in line with their means (Lev. 1:10, 14; 5:7, 8).

• The social impact. As you slaughtered your animal, you were accompanied by other worshipers slaughtering their animals. As you listened to the death cries of cattle, sheep, and birds, you realized that every person around you—your relatives, your neighbors, even your leaders—were sinners who needed God’s forgiveness.

• The spiritual impact. Overall, the sacrificial system reminded you that sin stood between you and God, and that the penalty for sin was death. You were also reminded of God’s mercy, in that He accepted the death of an animal instead of your own death.
In short, regular animal sacrifices made it difficult to regard sin lightly. We do well to remember the ultimate substitutionary sacrifice that the animals’ deaths represented, one far more precious, the very body and blood of Jesus Christ.



Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary

 

[civic]

The ancient Israelites took sin far more seriously that many people today do. Consider the impact of carrying out the instructions given for burnt-offering sacrifices.

(Lev. 1:3–5): “If the animal you present as a burnt offering is from the herd, it must be a male with no defects. Bring it to the entrance of the Tabernacle so you[a] may be accepted by the Lord. 4 Lay your hand on the animal’s head, and the Lord will accept its death in your place to purify you, making you right with him.[b] 5 Then slaughter the young bull in the Lord’s presence, and Aaron’s sons, the priests, will present the animal’s blood by splattering it against all sides of the altar that stands at the entrance to the Tabernacle.

• The psychological impact. If you were a Hebrew at the time of Moses, you had to do the killing of your animal sacrifice. You had to place your hand on the animal’s head as you slit its throat and felt its life drain away, all the while knowing that the animal was symbolically dying in your place.

• The financial impact. The required sacrifice for the burnt offering was a bull, which was to be among the best of your herd. No doubt you had other animals for food and trade. Still, no rancher likes to lose even one animal, particularly a prize bull. So the sacrifice involved a financial burden, a tangible reminder of the penalty of sin. Even those who could not afford bulls had to make sacrifices in line with their means (Lev. 1:10, 14; 5:7, 8).

• The social impact. As you slaughtered your animal, you were accompanied by other worshipers slaughtering their animals. As you listened to the death cries of cattle, sheep, and birds, you realized that every person around you—your relatives, your neighbors, even your leaders—were sinners who needed God’s forgiveness.

• The spiritual impact. Overall, the sacrificial system reminded you that sin stood between you and God, and that the penalty for sin was death. You were also reminded of God’s mercy, in that He accepted the death of an animal instead of your own death.
In short, regular animal sacrifices made it difficult to regard sin lightly. We do well to remember the ultimate substitutionary sacrifice that the animals’ deaths represented, one far more precious, the very body and blood of Jesus Christ.



Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary

Nelson was my first Bible dictionary/ commentary

 

[koberstein]

There is much misunderstanding when comes to animal sacrifices under the Old Covenant. Traditional Christians usually teach that the offering of the blood of animals provided a "covering" to mankind. Which isn't true. There are no Scriptures that even imply such an application. We know that God has never taken pleasure in the blood of animals. Never.

So what is it about "animals sacrifices"? What was the value of animal sacrifices?

It really is simple. So simple that, that unless you truly put Christ first, you will never know why. Which is the danger of Messianic Judaism. While they "claim" to extol the value of Jesus Christ, they deny it in their theology. Christ always takes a "backseat" to their "love" for what condemns them. It is rooted in their lack of self awareness and their lack of value in Jesus Christ.

Animals were unwillingly subjected to the "plight" of man. The very things crafted by God to help man..... SUFFERING for man. Man, himself, was required to execute judgement against innocent animals for their own sins. Which is an allegory to Christ willingly subjecting Himself to the judgement of men in the Crucifiction. There was ZERO merit in the atoning value of animals. There was never any doubt that the ONLY actual merit of the shedding of blood would be found in God dying for humanity. The selfless sacrifice of animals was so design that man might use his own self awareness to gather just a little sense of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ long before it ever took place.

Animal sacrifices were to ancient Jews what prayer services are to their modern descendants:
the most popular expression of divine worship. About 150 of the Torah's 613 laws deal with
sacrifices. Maimonides, the greatest medieval Jewish philosopher, believed that animal sacrifices
were instituted to wean people from the ancient and horrific practice of human sacrifice. In fact,
when God stopped Abraham from sacrificing Isaac (Genesis 22:11-13), the patriarch immediately
sacrificed a ram instead.
The most famous sacrifice was the one offered on Passover, and known as the Paschal lamb.
It commemorated God's deliverance of the Jews from Egyptian slavery. A Jew would bring a
lamb to the "Temple/Beit ha-Mikdash in Jerusalem, and give it to a priest, who would slaughter
the animal, sprinkle its blood upon the alter, and burn its entails and fat. The remainder would
be returned to the person who had donated the lamb. The animal was then taken back to the
donor's family which would eat the lamb, along with matzah, bitter herbs and other foods.
The festive meal was interspersed with lengthy discussions of the Exodus from Egypt. The roasted
shankbone that Jews still place on the Seder plate on Passover commemorates this Paschal lamb.
In general, some parts of the sacrificed animal were reserved for the priests to eat; others were given
to the person who brought the sacrifice. One kind of sacrifice, however, involved the animal being
wholly burned, and came to be known in English as a holocaust.
Only kosher, domesticated animals---cattle, sheep, goats, and birds---could be used for sacrifices.
The rabbis explained: "The bull flees from the lion, the sheep from the wolf, the goat from the tiger."
Said the Holy One, blessed be He, 'You shall not bring before Me such as pursue, but only such
as are pursued' (Vayikra Rabbah 27). By law, the sacrificed animals had to be without blemish
(Leviticus 3:6 and 22:17-25)

Shalom

 

[koberstein]

There is much misunderstanding when comes to animal sacrifices under the Old Covenant. Traditional Christians usually teach that the offering of the blood of animals provided a "covering" to mankind. Which isn't true. There are no Scriptures that even imply such an application. We know that God has never taken pleasure in the blood of animals. Never.

So what is it about "animals sacrifices"? What was the value of animal sacrifices?

It really is simple. So simple that, that unless you truly put Christ first, you will never know why. Which is the danger of Messianic Judaism. While they "claim" to extol the value of Jesus Christ, they deny it in their theology. Christ always takes a "backseat" to their "love" for what condemns them. It is rooted in their lack of self awareness and their lack of value in Jesus Christ.

Animals were unwillingly subjected to the "plight" of man. The very things crafted by God to help man..... SUFFERING for man. Man, himself, was required to execute judgement against innocent animals for their own sins. Which is an allegory to Christ willingly subjecting Himself to the judgement of men in the Crucifiction. There was ZERO merit in the atoning value of animals. There was never any doubt that the ONLY actual merit of the shedding of blood would be found in God dying for humanity. The selfless sacrifice of animals was so design that man might use his own self awareness to gather just a little sense of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ long before it ever took place.

Messianic Judaism does not deny Yeshua in our theology. YHWH, Yeshua, and the ruach ha-kodesh (Holy Spirit)
which comprises the Holy Trinity (hashilush hakadosh) is the main component to our theology.