Jesus as a Sacrifice??

[bullethead]

Why did the NT writers use Jesus as a Sacrifice when it goes against what is written in the Torah and goes against prophecy?

How could they not know what was required?

 

[bullethead]

The whole concept of the NT is not a continuation of the OT but an entirely new religion that seems designed to change the rules.

 

[Artfuldodger]

The shadows of the Sacrifice were in the Old Testament. Therefore the concept of the New Testament being an entirely knew religion is wrong.

The Jews were blinded as to not see. This was necessary for God to bring salvation to the world.

 

[bullethead]

The shadows of the Sacrifice were in the Old Testament. Therefore the concept of the New Testament being an entirely knew religion is wrong.

The Jews were blinded as to not see. This was necessary for God to bring salvation to the world.

Sacrifice was in the Torah no doubt, but a person as a sacrifice ESPECIALLY the way Jesus was treated and because Jesus was not sacrificed by the Jews go against all their prophecy.
New religion needed new rules because in no way was it a continuation of or did it follow the old religion.

 

[gemcgrew]

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

 

[bullethead]

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

Geez, who would have thought that religious books say things like that??
Next you will say that The Braves team souvenir stand is partial to Brave's Fans...

I am just among the Natural man crowd. I am certainly not one them special people. I never got to ride the blue bus to school.

 

[bullethead]

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/mes...ite-called-the-refine-t3786.html#.TsWb58Mr2nA
This is from post #11 from the link above:
The Torah makes it clear that Jesus was NOT a sacrifice acceptable to G-d. Torah tells us that a sacrificial ritual must be administered by a Priest (see Leviticus Chapters 1-7).
According to the accounts in the Greek Testament (GT), Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers (Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:33; John 19:18, 23).
Torah further tells us that the blood of the (chatat / sin) sacrifice had to be sprinkled by the Priest on the veil of the sanctuary and on the altar in the Temple (e.g., Leviticus 4: 5-6).
The Christian bible clearly shows this was not done with Jesus.
Then Torah tells us that the (chatat / unintentional sin) sacrifice must be without any physical defect or blemish (e.g., Leviticus 4:3).
According to the various accounts in the GT, Jesus was beaten, whipped, and dragged on the ground before being crucified (Matthew 26:67, 27:26, 30-31; Mark 14: 65, 15:15-20; Luke 22: 63; John 18:22, 19:1, 3).
Moreover, as a Jew by birth, Jsus was circumcised on the eighth day after being born, a ritual that leaves a scar ("sign of the covenant").
According to the Christian bible, circumcision is tantamount to mutilation (Philippians 3:2, Galatians 5:12).
Torah says that the Passover sacrifice be a male-goat, be offered on an individual (per household) basis (Numbers 28:22), not as a communal offering.
According to the Christian bible, Jesus death (termed a sin sacrifice) expiated the sins of mankind (Romans 6:10; Hebrews 9:12, 10:10, 10:18 ).
Torah goes on to say that the Paschal Lamb was NOT to be offered for the removal of sins. It was a commemorative/festive offering (see also under items 4 above and 6 below). A more appropriate time for a sin offering would have been on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement; Numbers 29:11 [individual sin-offering male goat]; Leviticus16:15 [communal sin-offering male goat]).
The sacrificed Paschal Lamb had to be roasted and eaten, and in the first instance in Egypt its blood was used to mark the side-posts and lintel of the doors (Exodus 12: 7-8 ).
There is no record in the Christian bible that Jesus was eaten or that his blood was put on the door posts (lest it be suggested that Christianity promotes cannibalism).
Torah says that the sacrificial sin offering could only atone for unintentional sins, with few notable exceptions as stated in Leviticus 5:1-6, 20-26 [Leviticus6:1-7 in Xian Bibles]; [e.g., Bambidar / Numbers 15:27-31] . Torah teaches that sacrifices can only atone for sins committed PRIOR to the offering of the sacrifice. No sacrifice could ever atone for sins committed AFTER the sacrifice was offered. Thus, no sacrifice could ever atone for people born after the sacrifice was offered.
Torah vehemently FORBIDS human vicarious atonement (e.g., Exodus 32:31-33; Numbers 35:33; Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:29 [30 in a Christian Bible]; Ezekiel 18:4,20; Psalms 49:7). Human sacrifices are strictly forbidden in Torah (e.g., Leviticus18:21, 24-25; Deuteronomy 18:10; Jeremiah 7:31, 19: 5; Ezekiel 23:37, 39).
Per Torah,Jodav, the death of Jesus could never atone for any sin, much less all sins of all people for all time? NOT AT ALL, NEVER! The story is pagan in its entirety and breaks all the laws of Jewish sacrifice

 

[Artfuldodger]

Leviticus 4:3 starts; "'If the anointed priest sins," Jesus never sinned. Regardless of what the Law stated, Jesus fulfilled the "Law." Also Jesus is the Priest.

Jesus was born under the Law, Philippians 3:2, Galatians 5:12 were after the sacrifice. Also, not even the same word is used in those two verses for "mutilate."

Jesus had no broken bones, thus he was without physical blemish in regards to a Jewish sacrifice.

Before Jesus sacrifices were temporary. Thus they only covered past sins. None of the other sacrifices ever recovered from their deaths.

 

[Artfuldodger]

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/mes...ite-called-the-refine-t3786.html#.TsWb58Mr2nA
This is from post #11 from the link above:
The Torah makes it clear that Jesus was NOT a sacrifice acceptable to G-d. Torah tells us that a sacrificial ritual must be administered by a Priest (see Leviticus Chapters 1-7).
According to the accounts in the Greek Testament (GT), Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers (Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:33; John 19:18, 23).
Torah further tells us that the blood of the (chatat / sin) sacrifice had to be sprinkled by the Priest on the veil of the sanctuary and on the altar in the Temple (e.g., Leviticus 4: 5-6).
The Christian bible clearly shows this was not done with Jesus.
Then Torah tells us that the (chatat / unintentional sin) sacrifice must be without any physical defect or blemish (e.g., Leviticus 4:3).
According to the various accounts in the GT, Jesus was beaten, whipped, and dragged on the ground before being crucified (Matthew 26:67, 27:26, 30-31; Mark 14: 65, 15:15-20; Luke 22: 63; John 18:22, 19:1, 3).
Moreover, as a Jew by birth, Jsus was circumcised on the eighth day after being born, a ritual that leaves a scar ("sign of the covenant").
According to the Christian bible, circumcision is tantamount to mutilation (Philippians 3:2, Galatians 5:12).
Torah says that the Passover sacrifice be a male-goat, be offered on an individual (per household) basis (Numbers 28:22), not as a communal offering.
According to the Christian bible, Jesus death (termed a sin sacrifice) expiated the sins of mankind (Romans 6:10; Hebrews 9:12, 10:10, 10:18 ).
Torah goes on to say that the Paschal Lamb was NOT to be offered for the removal of sins. It was a commemorative/festive offering (see also under items 4 above and 6 below). A more appropriate time for a sin offering would have been on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement; Numbers 29:11 [individual sin-offering male goat]; Leviticus16:15 [communal sin-offering male goat]).
The sacrificed Paschal Lamb had to be roasted and eaten, and in the first instance in Egypt its blood was used to mark the side-posts and lintel of the doors (Exodus 12: 7-8 ).
There is no record in the Christian bible that Jesus was eaten or that his blood was put on the door posts (lest it be suggested that Christianity promotes cannibalism).
Torah says that the sacrificial sin offering could only atone for unintentional sins, with few notable exceptions as stated in Leviticus 5:1-6, 20-26 [Leviticus6:1-7 in Xian Bibles]; [e.g., Bambidar / Numbers 15:27-31] . Torah teaches that sacrifices can only atone for sins committed PRIOR to the offering of the sacrifice. No sacrifice could ever atone for sins committed AFTER the sacrifice was offered. Thus, no sacrifice could ever atone for people born after the sacrifice was offered.
Torah vehemently FORBIDS human vicarious atonement (e.g., Exodus 32:31-33; Numbers 35:33; Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:29 [30 in a Christian Bible]; Ezekiel 18:4,20; Psalms 49:7). Human sacrifices are strictly forbidden in Torah (e.g., Leviticus18:21, 24-25; Deuteronomy 18:10; Jeremiah 7:31, 19: 5; Ezekiel 23:37, 39).
Per Torah,Jodav, the death of Jesus could never atone for any sin, much less all sins of all people for all time? NOT AT ALL, NEVER! The story is pagan in its entirety and breaks all the laws of Jewish sacrifice

The human sacrifice thing? Good question. Jesus was most definitely human.

My question would by "why was/is a sacrifice necessary?" Reminds me of the old movies where they had to throw living things in a volcano to appease the Gods.

Why would a God require a living or dead sacrifice? Especially blood, why not a living plant?

 

[Artfuldodger]

Maybe a sacrifice should be one's most prized possession. It could be a human or animal but what about money? Maybe a bass boat or a rifle?
His truck. His job. His pride. His place in society.

What could one really give to a living God to appease him?

 

[gemcgrew]

I am just among the Natural man crowd. I am certainly not one them special people. I never got to ride the blue bus to school.

Whether you are special or not will be evidenced in time. In either case, you serve a special purpose.

You are currently strengthening the believers by affirming what the Bible says about you.

 

[bullethead]

The human sacrifice thing? Good question. Jesus was most definitely human.

My question would by "why was/is a sacrifice necessary?" Reminds me of the old movies where they had to throw living things in a volcano to appease the Gods.

Why would a God require a living or dead sacrifice? Especially blood, why not a living plant?

It's not a good question. It is part of the rules of the Torah. No humans for sacrifice.

 

[bullethead]

Maybe a sacrifice should be one's most prized possession. It could be a human or animal but what about money? Maybe a bass boat or a rifle?
His truck. His job. His pride. His place in society.

What could one really give to a living God to appease him?

He seemed to be happy with goats for thousands of years

 

[bullethead]

Whether you are special or not will be evidenced in time. In either case, you serve a special purpose.

You are currently strengthening the believers by affirming what the Bible says about you.

Did I miss my name being mentioned in the bible? It does not say anything about me but only makes general statements that leaves it's believers to interpret it how they want to in order to fit them.
What the bible does say specifically is what can and cannot be sacrificed and a human does not fit within the rules. That is what we are talking about.
I seem to be able to see such things within the bible more clearly than those who supposedly are not foolish.

 

[Israel]

I have long been provoked (and remain so) by Jesus words here:


"Even as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up..."
and
"That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life."

Review the incident as need be if one cares to, also to consider the matter of Nehushtan (of what that brazen serpent became to the people). An idol.

The image of what had poisoned the people by its bite (serpents moving among them) was remedied when this image was lifted up and those who obeyed to its "looking upon" were healed. And so Jesus also says

That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

First the matter of Moses' instruction needs light. Why lift up the image of the very thing (for healing) that is the cause of the troubles?

Naturally my own inclination is more toward "thanks, but I'd prefer not to be reminded (of the very thing by which I am dying) by this thing being put in plain sight".
Wouldn't it make more sense to (so to speak) raise an image of a "holy" hypodermic needle and a vial that says "God's antivenin"? "look upon this and believe...and live!"
That's my natural inclination. Which matters not at all, of course, because those were not the instruction, nor remedy.

Therefore when Jesus says His lifting up is as likewise to the lifting of the bronze serpent, (in the wilderness) I am pressed to ask..."huh"?

Fear and fears are a powerful thing. God knows. A brother wrote this in regards to the Lord's appearing amongst us:

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Another wrote, or at least was written in another place:

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

"In the wilderness".

A wilderness is where a man experiences little reliance on convenience, or convenient resources. One might even say that those things are where all conveniences...are stripped away. A man might come to face just how much/little he really has there of "resource".

A man might even be pressed to face fear and fears that in other circumstance...were kept (seemingly at bay)...by both convenience and conveniences. (Is this hard to understand?)
Dying "in the wilderness" is not viewed there as a "possible thing", one might even say its reality there is quite pressing.

I am persuaded no believer is unfamiliar with some form of wilderness experience.

And no less persuaded many others are no less persuaded they have experienced some to some extent. Some have even sought them "to see what they are made of"...and those that return in some success of a self reliance shown there hold this as their testimony. "I beat there what appeared overwhelming odds and opposition".

Yes, many come back with a story of victory of what they consider "having faced the abyss".
Yes, they do.

 

[bullethead]

I have long been provoked (and remain so) by Jesus words here:


"Even as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up..."
and
"That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life."

Review the incident as need be if one cares to, also to consider the matter of Nehushtan (of what that brazen serpent became to the people). An idol.

The image of what had poisoned the people by its bite (serpents moving among them) was remedied when this image was lifted up and those who obeyed to its "looking upon" were healed. And so Jesus also says

That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

First the matter of Moses' instruction needs light. Why lift up the image of the very thing (for healing) that is the cause of the troubles?

Naturally my own inclination is more toward "thanks, but I'd prefer not to be reminded (of the very thing by which I am dying) by this thing being put in plain sight".
Wouldn't it make more sense to (so to speak) raise an image of a "holy" hypodermic needle and a vial that says "God's antivenin"? "look upon this and believe...and live!"
That's my natural inclination. Which matters not at all, of course, because those were not the instruction, nor remedy.

Therefore when Jesus says His lifting up is as likewise to the lifting of the bronze serpent, (in the wilderness) I am pressed to ask..."huh"?

Fear and fears are a powerful thing. God knows. A brother wrote this in regards to the Lord's appearing amongst us:

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Another wrote, or at least was written in another place:

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

"In the wilderness".

A wilderness is where a man experiences little reliance on convenience, or convenient resources. One might even say that those things are where all conveniences...are stripped away. A man might come to face just how much/little he really has there of "resource".

A man might even be pressed to face fear and fears that in other circumstance...were kept (seemingly at bay)...by both convenience and conveniences. (Is this hard to understand?)
Dying "in the wilderness" is not viewed there as a "possible thing", one might even say its reality there is quite pressing.

I am persuaded no believer is unfamiliar with some form of wilderness experience.

And no less persuaded many others are no less persuaded they have experienced some to some extent. Some have even sought them "to see what they are made of"...and those that return in some success of a self reliance shown there hold this as their testimony. "I beat there what appeared overwhelming odds and opposition".

Yes, many come back with a story of victory of what they consider "having faced the abyss".
Yes, they do.

Human sacrifice is against the Torah.
Period
The rules do not change no matter how much people need them to or how much filabustering is done to prolong the inevitable.

 

[Israel]

And he said, 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.












And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

 

[bullethead]

And he said, 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.

Oh darn you got me.
Please continue with the rest of the passages where it details how Isaac was sacrificed and what happened because of it.... if Thine would do that for me I wouldst appreciatist mucheth.

 

[Israel]

Do I? have you?

 

[bullethead]

Pleaseth Readeth,

In The Binding of Isaac, Religious Murders & Kabbalah, Lippman Bodoff argues that Abraham never intended to actually sacrifice his son, and that he had faith that God had no intention that he do so. Rabbi Ari Kahn (on the Orthodox Union website) elaborates this view as follows: Isaac's death was never a possibility — not as far as Abraham was concerned, and not as far as God was concerned. God's commandment to Abraham was very specific, and Abraham understood it very precisely: Isaac was to be "raised up as an offering", and God would use the opportunity to teach humankind, once and for all, that human sacrifice, child sacrifice, is not acceptable. This is precisely how the sages of the Talmud (Taanit 4a) understood the Akedah. Citing the Prophet Jeremiah's exhortation against child sacrifice (Chapter 19), they state unequivocally that such behavior "never crossed God’s mind", referring specifically to the sacrificial slaughter of Isaac. Though readers of this parashah throughout the generations have been disturbed, even horrified, by the Akedah, there was no miscommunication between God and Abraham. The thought of actually killing Isaac never crossed their minds.