One of the most natural images for people with a Jewish background was the picture of sacrifice. Animals were sacrificed as part of the regular ritual in the temple, as they were more generally in the ancient world. Sacrificial language is used to explain and comment on the death of Jesus throughout the New Testament. When John the Baptist saw Jesus he exclaimed: ‘Behold the lamb of God’ (John 1:29), Apostle Paul wrote of ‘Christ our Passover lamb’ (1 Corin 5:7), while Peter described Jesus as ‘like a lamb without blemish or spot’ (1 Peter 1:19) and the book of Hebrews went to extraordinary lengths to compare Jesus death with the sacrificial rituals of Judaism and to present it as in some way the fulfilment of them all.

However, this image raises particular questions especially among non believers (Inc Muslims). Some even call it cannibalism. Therefore I have done a bit of research and hope this thread will help us in gaining more understanding regarding this important issue.

WHAT WAS THE LAMB TO WHICH JESUS WAS COMPARED?

The New Testament generally connects Jesus’ death as a sacrifice with the consciousness that our sins had been forgiven, so the most obvious connection of the imagery is likely to be with the various sacrificial procedures of the Old Testament that were designed to procure forgiveness from sin. These sin offerings are well documented in Leviticus 5:15-17

“If one of you commits a sin by unintentionally defiling the Lord’s sacred property, you must bring a guilt offering to the Lord. The offering must be your own ram with no defects, or you must buy one of equal value with silver, as measured by the weight of the sanctuary shekel. You must make restitution for the sacred property you have harmed by paying for the loss, plus an additional 20 percent. When you give payment to the priest, he will purify you with the ram sacrificed as a guilt offering, making you right with the Lord, and you will be forgiven.

We can also refer back to the well known event of the first Passover, at which the people of Israel were delivered from slavery in Egypt, and in which the sacrifice of a lamb played a large part in Exodus 12. In the context of the last supper, Jesus himself made a deliberate connection between his own death and the annual death of the Passover lambs, reminding his disciples that what he was to do on the cross was to be as great a turning point in their own lives as the Passover had been in the experience of their ancestors.

Mark 14:22-25
22 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is my body.”  23 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank from it. 24 “This is my blood of the[a] covenant, which is poured out for many,” he said to them. 25 “Truly I tell you; I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”

My question:

What is the relation and link between the guilt offering in the book of Leviticus, the Passover lamb in Exodus and the sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross?

In my honest opinion, there is no need to choose between these two somewhat different sacrificial images. The lamb of the sin offering and the lamb of the Passover were each regarded as relevant images for the death of Jesus.

WHAT DID THE ACT OF SACRIFICE MEAN?

In the western world, relatively few people have seen an animal sacrifice. Majority tend to think of it as a rather barbarous ritual from an uncivilised past. Even in Africa, some Christian groups tend to frown at such rituals. But those with better understanding know that the real importance is generally located not so much in the physical brutality as in what the action as a whole can be understood to represent or symbolise. Worship in ancient Israel was based on a strong concept of difference between ordinary people and God. This difference could be understood in both spatial and moral terms.

Spatially, ‘ uncleanness’ disqualified people from dealing with the ‘holiness’ that was equated with religious shrines, so that only certain specially equipped people (usually priest) could touch, or even come into close contact with, the presence of God. Morally, ‘sin’ whether deliberate or accidental wrongdoing similarly disqualified a person from acceptance by God. Both forms of alienation were dealt with by the offering of appropriate sacrifices. Not all sacrificial procedures were exactly the same, but a typical sacrifice might begin with the worshipper approaching the altar (representing God’s presence) with the sacrifice, hand placed on the animal’s head. This identified the worshipper with the animal, indicating that what happened physically and outwardly to the animal was understood to be happening to the worshipper inwardly and spiritually.
After that, the animal will be killed, usually according to carefully laid-down regulation. In the context of sin offering, this action itself reflected the seriousness of sin, reminding the sinner that they too deserve to die. The priest would then take the blood of the sacrifice (which now symbolically represented the sinner’s life given up to God) to the altar.  This act of reconciliation or ‘atonement’ indicated that the sin had been dealt with, and God and the sinner had been reconciled to each other. At this point the animal’s body could be placed on the altar in the temple, signifying that the forgiven worshippers were offering their whole being to God. Finally, much of the meat would be eaten in a meal shared with others, thereby showing that sacrifice not only reconciled people to God, but also to one another.

CONCLUSION

This, in general terms, is what we learn from the NT were it describes Jesus’ death as a ‘sacrifice’. The book of Hebrews in particular goes further, however, and argues that there was some inherent connection between the inherited Jewish understanding of sacrifice and the death of Jesus, with Jesus’ death being the actual fulfilment of the OT rites. His death was the reality, the sacrifices the picture.

Hebrew 14:13-15
Under the old system, the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a young cow could cleanse people’s bodies from ceremonial impurity. Just think how much more the blood of Christ will purify our consciences from sinful deeds so that we can worship the living God. For by the power of the eternal spirit, Christ offered himself to God as a prefect sacrifice for our sins

Further study :Hebrews 14:11-28
.
Lets say that again! PREFECT SACRIFICE FOR OUR SINS – Amen

God bless

Jesus He was a scape goat

Sorry but it is not that much of a sacrifice. You may compare it with the sacrifice made by Jephthah's daughter. She actually died with no promise of resurrection.
Contrast this with Jesus who knew he would be resurrected and who felt he was doing it for all humans present and future. Pretty much anyone who knows that they would be resurrected in a few days if they die now for just their immediate family members would do it. Not to speak of for the entirety of humanity till humans cease to be on this planet.

thehomer:

Sorry but it is not that much of a sacrifice. You may compare it with the sacrifice made by Jephthah's daughter. She actually died with no promise of resurrection.
Contrast this with Jesus who knew he would be resurrected and who felt he was doing it for all humans present and future. Pretty much anyone who knows that they would be resurrected in a few days if they die now for just their immediate family members would do it. Not to speak of for the entirety of humanity till humans cease to be on this planet.

Very correct, Wonder why many people think Jesus' death is the perfect sacrifice. A mother who lays her life for her only child has more value than Jesus' death because not only was Jesus aware that he was going to be resurrected after 3 days, he was also going to receive greater glory in return. On the other hand, a mother giving her life for her child has no such guarantee, just the thought of seeing her child live.

The policy that I have adopted on NL is not to engage the following.

1. Skeptics
2. Mockers
3. Athiest

I will tolerate muslims to an extend.

Christian brothers and sisters are my delight.

Why?

Maximize the value of my time spent on NL.

yommyuk:

The policy that I have adopted on NL is not to engage the following.

1. Skeptics
2. Mockers
3. Athiest

I will tolerate muslims to an extend.

Christian brothers and sisters are my delight.

Why?

Maximize the value of my time spent on NL.

Good for you. Burying your head in the sand will not make the problems you've seen go away.

yommyuk:

The policy that I have adopted on NL is not to engage the following.

1. Skeptics
2. Mockers
3. Athiest

I will tolerate muslims to an extend.

Christian brothers and sisters are my delight.

Why?

Maximize the value of my time spent on NL.

Had the early Christians followed your principle, Christianity would have died a long Time ago. Debates are inevitable factor in humanity.

But, what if Jesus' death/ressurection was not a sacrifice per se, but a demonstration of a deeper spiritual truth?

The policy that I have adopted on NL is not to engage the following.

1. Skeptics
2. Mockers
3. Athiest

I will tolerate muslims to an extend.

Christian brothers and sisters are my delight.

Why?

Maximize the value of my time spent on NL.

Then if all you want is just to spew your own little ideas and concepts expecting not to be challenged, then you are better off starting your own church where you can preach your ideas to others unchallenged. This place, as you may have noticed, is not a church, but a FORUM. And fora are for debates and discussions.

yommyuk:

The policy that I have adopted on NL is not to engage the following.

1. Skeptics
2. Mockers
3. Athiest

I will tolerate muslims to an extend.

Christian brothers and sisters are my delight.

Why?

Maximize the value of my time spent on NL.

Jenwitemi:

But, what if Jesus' death/ressurection was not a sacrifice per se, but a demonstration of a deeper spiritual truth?

True.

Let's me make one thing clear to you, from the outset the death of Jesus was not something that could easily be expressed in a logical, analytical terminology. Even if the meaning could be encapsulated in words at all, they would need to be symbolic and pictoral words, language that would use the familar and ordinary to describe a reality that was quite extraordinary. 'Figures of speech' more like.

For that reason, the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ surely has a deeper spiritual connotation which is beyond human comprehension. On that note, I AGREE

Oh yes, it could. That it could not be logically expressed and understood is just your typical religious cop out. That the the purpose of the ritual of death and ressurrection be properly understood by us humans was right at the teachings, themselves, or else they wouldn't have any value, whatsoever. Even if the meaning could be encapsulated in words at all, they would need to be symbolic and pictoral words, language that would use the familar and ordinary to describe a reality that was quite extraordinary. 'Figures of speech' more like.

yommyuk:

Let's me make one thing clear to you, from the outset the death of Jesus was not something that could easily be expressed in a logical, analytical terminology. 

No, it is definitely not beyond human comprehension, at all. It is actually very easy to grasp. The problem is, the message has been grossly twisted beyond recognition by the christian priesthood so that the core message remains hidden from the faithfuls, like you.

yommyuk:

For that reason, the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ surely has a deeper spiritual connotation which is beyond human comprehension. On that note, I AGREE

yommyuk:

The policy that I have adopted on NL is not to engage the following.

1. Skeptics
2. Mockers
3. Athiest

I will tolerate muslims to an extend.

Christian brothers and sisters are my delight.

Why?

Maximize the value of my time spent on NL.

On the whole within reason and with the odd exceptions, I think it is a good policy.

Enigma:

On the whole within reason and with the odd exceptions, I think it is a good policy.

Time is short

Jenwitemi:

Oh yes, it could. That it could not be logically expressed and understood is just your typical religious cop out. That the the purpose of the ritual of death and ressurrection be properly understood by us humans was right at the teachings, themselves, or else they wouldn't have any value, whatsoever. Even if the meaning could be encapsulated in words at all, they would need to be symbolic and pictoral words, language that would use the familar and ordinary to describe a reality that was quite extraordinary. 'Figures of speech' more like.
No, it is definitely not beyond human comprehension, at all. It is actually very easy to grasp. The problem is, the message has been grossly twisted beyond recognition by the christian priesthood so that the core message remains hidden from the faithfuls, like you.

When God makes a demand or requirement, who am I to question him why?
We speak the "word of God" and not for ourselves. If you can get that into your system, you will understand my point and the basis on which I FLOW

yommyuk:

True.

Let's me make one thing clear to you, from the outset the death of Jesus was not something that could easily be expressed in a logical, analytical terminology. Even if the meaning could be encapsulated in words at all, they would need to be symbolic and pictoral words, language that would use the familar and ordinary to describe a reality that was quite extraordinary. 'Figures of speech' more like.

For that reason, the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ surely has a deeper spiritual connotation which is beyond human comprehension. On that note, I AGREE

What you mean is that even you, a human (I think) have no comprehension of what you are talking about

alaper:

What you mean is that even you, a human (I think) have no comprehension of what you are talking about

If you read the topic with a clear head I am sure you will have a good idea of what I am talking about.
Typical skeptic

^^


Out of curiosity, do you believe in the once saved always saved doctrine.

Meaning Jesus has done it all, so even if we sin we will make heaven ?

frosbel:

^^
Out of curiosity, do you believe in the once saved always saved doctrine.

Meaning Jesus has done it all, so even if we sin we will make heaven ?

"Once saved always saved" in relation to the 'grace of God'?

Psalm 118:1

Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good! and his faithful love ENDURES forever.

A resounding Yes with caution

Why the caution

Romans 6:1-2
"Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more of his wonderful grace? OF COURSE NOT! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it?"

Galatians 6:5
"For we are each responsible for our own conduct."

"So if we sin we will make heaven" is a very tricky one for me. But I will leave God to be the Judge of that!
My advice to everyone is to resist sin because the "wages of sin is death"

@yommyuk Hi, Jesus was not a human sacrifice. God is not a demon who accepts human sacrifice. the person who came up with this theology is Paul. please read the articles of faith to understand.

http://234next.com/csp/cms/sites/Next/Home/5500210-182/ARTICLES_OF_FAITH:_Jesus_was_not.csp

Dear All, please be not lead astray by the bogus sacrifice theology of Paul that says the blood of Jesus washes away sin. it is repentance that washes away sin. The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob doesn't accept human sacrifice. please read the words of Jesus to understand the true word of God. Jesus was the one who came down from heaven not Paul. So it is Jesus that has the words of God.

http://234next.com/csp/cms/sites/Next/Home/5493574-182/ARTICLE_OF_FAITH_-_The_keys.csp
http://234next.com/csp/cms/sites/Next/Home/5500208-182/ARTICLES_OF_FAITH_-_The_Myth.csp

dazmillion:

@yommyuk Hi, Jesus was not a human sacrifice. God is not a demon who accepts human sacrifice. the person who came up with this theology is Paul. please read the articles of faith to understand.

http://234next.com/csp/cms/sites/Next/Home/5500210-182/ARTICLES_OF_FAITH:_Jesus_was_not.csp

I will copy and paste , analyse and evaluate the above link.

Jesus is my Saviour.

I am glad that you profess Jesus as your Lord and savior. On that I have no objection.

ok where do I start?

But I know from Jesus himself that he is not responsible for atoning for my sins.

Wrong!

To worship a holy God, one must remove any obstacle that stands in the way. Atonement removes any sin or uncleaness that inhibits proper worship. As I said before the sacrifice in the OT of goats and bulls represented the life of the worshipper, given in his place that he might live. Blood is a symbol of life given by God and was reserved as God's portion of each animal offering. Blood represents life, and the blood of the offering represented the life of the worshipper. God had designated the victim's blood, representing the life of the victim, as the means of atonement.
For greater understanding read (Lev 16) regarding the day of Atonement. On this day, the sins of the community were presented to the Lord by the high priest.

In regards to the New Testment, Jesus became our High Priest. Aaron and the levites are sinners like you and me. So they were not given access to the Heavenly Tabernacle. Even the Angels had no access. Only Jesus.


This is were Apostle Paul gained insight via the Power of the Holy Spirit that revealed the real meaning of the sacrifice Jesus made for all mankind.

Therefore it is the blood of Jesus that brings atonement.

Eph 1:7-

He is so rich in kindness and grace that he purchased our freedom with the blood of his Son and forgave our sins.


Colossians 1:20
'and through him God reconciled everything to himself. He made peace with everything in heaven and on earth by means of Christ's blood on the cross.

Question for you. You said that Jesus is your savior, How and why? What did Jesus save you from?

Jesus' sacrifice was supposed to eliminate the need for all other sacrifices- whether human or otherwise.

isn't God against spilling of blood?


is Jesus not against spilling of blood?

Or he just like to spill his own blood, by force?

@Yommyuk; answer the queshiun?

^^^
explain yourself

Sweetnecta:

isn't God against spilling of blood?


is Jesus not against spilling of blood?

Or he just like to spill his own blood, by force?

@Yommyuk; answer the queshiun?

Proverbs 26:11-12

As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his foolishness.
There is more hope for fools than for people who think they are wise.

Mediate on that

Sweetnecta:

isn't God against spilling of blood?


is Jesus not against spilling of blood?

Or he just like to spill his own blood, by force?

the way the human race is structured, spilling of blood is an integral part of their existence.

that's why Jesus had to come in order to show a better way.

and yes, his own blood had to be spilled so a select few could be saved from this curse which is bound up in the human gene.

the alleged "sacrifice" of Jesus was either first degree murder or outright suicide!


“the Christian God: Blood And Human Sacrifice”:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-651811.0.html

@Tpia@; « #27 on: Today at 12:18:43 AM »
[Quote]Quote from: Sweetnecta on Yesterday at 05:20:09 AM
isn't God against spilling of blood?

is Jesus not against spilling of blood?

Or he just like to spill his own blood, by force?


the way the human race is structured, spilling of blood is an integral part of their existence.

that's why Jesus had to come in order to show a better way.

and yes, his own blood had to be spilled so a select few could be saved from this curse which is bound up in the human gene.[/Quote]Are you sure? The Lord of Jesus sent Jesus hated sacrifices. He will not choose human sacrifice to end all sacrifices. Not the son from His beloved consort Mary [read your Bibles before you respond].

Jesus hate sacrifices. He will not want to end all sacrifices by allowing himself especially considering that he cried, wept, begged in prayers not to even have "this cup" [whatever that cup is] on his head. I do not believe that Yahweh will ignore the demand of His only son from His only consort Mary to be killed.

When they were dragging him Yahweh must have acted at some point in the confusion, especially when they plucked poor guy Simon of Syrene from the road to carry the wooden plank.

My proof; The Jews said they stoned him.

the christian said he was hung on a tree.

Please watch this video: http://www.thedeenshow.com/show.php?action=detail&id=1320


please start from the 14th minutes to say 20th.

then read this; www.christisnotrisen.com/talmudonjesus.html - Cached -

. . .Mar Seraphion wrote in about AD 70 that the Jews executed their wise king. This cannot mean that the Jews forced Pilate to kill Jesus. It must mean they stoned him or executed him themselves. Mar Seraphion also stated that the king lived on in his teaching just as Pythagoras lived on in the statue of Hera (page 26, The Jesus Inquest). This is a clear declaration that the resurrection was thought according to Mar Saraphions sources to be a mystical symbol for Jesus being alive in his doctrine. . . .

@Yommyuk; Chew on this; [Quote]In[b] Deuteronomy 12:30-31[/b], God calls Human sacrifice something that He hates, and an abomination to Him, "for every abomination to the Eternal, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.

In[b] Jeremiah 19:4-6,[/b] God tells us that Human sacrifice is so horrible a concept to Him, that it did not even come into His mind to demand it from His creation, "They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind."


We see the same thing in Psalm 106:37-38, and in Ezekiel 16:20. This means that God would not accept Jesus's death on the cross as a blood sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins. The very idea of that God would accept a human sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins is UnBiblical.[/Quote]now put in you thinking pipe and smoke it before you say anything.

www.whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation4.html -



the below is the most ridiculous; knock yourself out reading it. it is tailor made in its lies for you.

. . . Now, technically, the contradiction does NOT exist, for two reasons: (1) Jesus was obviously not a child when the crucifixion occurred and (2) He was not 'innocent' AFTER the point at which He 'became sin for us' (2 Cor 5.21: God made him who had no sin to be sin for us) and 'He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree'--I Pet 2.24. It is only AFTER this point that God's wrath was poured out upon our Lord.

But there is also MORE data that is relevant to dealing with the bigger theological picture here.

Without trying to show a 'mastery of the obvious' here, let me restate the facts and ask the next level question.

To kill an innocent child as a sacrifice was murder.
To kill an innocent child (in normal circumstances) was murder.
To kill an adult guilty of a capital offense was justice.
To kill an innocent adult was murder.

But the next question is: was it okay for an innocent adult to sacrifice himself/herself (not in the sense of suicide, but in the sense of a substitution)? [Notice that this question is only oblique to the issue of Jesus--He became 'guilty' FOR us, so number 3 above was His situation--deliberately.] . . .

christianthinktank.com/sacra.html

@Sweetnecta,

I have decided not to ignore you because of the issue you have raised according to worldly reasoning makes sense, but spiritually is jumbo jumbo.

In Deuteronomy 12:30-31, God calls Human sacrifice something that He hates, and an abomination to Him, "for every abomination to the Eternal, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.

Yes, Human sacrifice God abhors. Do you know why?

Human blood on its own is full of sin. That is why those who use human blood for ritual purposes always suffer evil consequences. But the "Blood of Jesus" had no sin in it. The blood of Jesus was innocent and pure.

Example: when an armed robber is executed (lets say by firing squard), the blood shed from such body is justified. Meaning those who carried out the death sentence are free from God's judgement. However, if they are innocent, such blood will be a curse on the land on which it was shed. That is the reason why countries like the UK don't carried out the death penalty.

Now, I will implore u to open your brain and take this in.

Applying the above illustration of the innocent and guilty armed robber, l feed you with, read on

Deut 21:22-23
If someone has committed a crime worthy of death and is executed and hung on a tree, the body must not remain hanging from the tree overnight. You must bury the body that same day, for anyone who is hung is cursed in the sight of God ,

We are all sinners and my bible tells me in Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord”

I have received Jesus Christ as my Lord and savior, therefore Galatians 3:13-14 is my portion

But Christ has rescued us from the curse pronounced by the law. When he was hung on the cross, he took upon himself the curse for our wrong doing, For it is written in the Scriptures, “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree” Through Jesus Christ, God HAS blessed the Gentiles (Christians) with the same blessing of Abraham, so that we who are believers might receive the promised Holy Spirit thru faith (Amen)

Unto you who have not accepted CHRIST as your lord and Saviour that curse still remains. Until you soften that your PHARAOHIC heart and accept Christ into your life, that annual “Ileya” meat that you are depending on will not save you from God’s judgement. Because, not accepting Christ is a divine sin.

Psalms 51:16
“You do not desire a sacrifice or I would offer one. You do not want a burn offering.”

But what sacrifice does God desire?

Psalms 51:17
The sacrifice you desire is a broken spirit. You will not reject a broken and a repentant heart. O God.


Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani ---- “My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?”
Enough said.