Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins

I contend that the death of Jesus was not an atonement sacrifice to pay for the sins of humanity.In Isaiah and Jeremiah God says he did not and still didn't require sacrifices. Above God says to learn to do well etc. In other words get along and help those less fortunate.Below in Isaiah 66:3 God says he doesn’t like sacrifices of any kind. Jeremiah 7:24 below even says that they went backward and not forward. So even from God viewpoint they should have matured away from sacrifices and hadn’t. In Jeremiah 8:8, God says that his people do not know what behavior he truly wants from them and that the scribes are not as honest and infallible as we are lead to believe. They apparently could and did mess with the word. Since God did not require sacrifices to atone for sins, Jesus could not be an atonement sacrifice. The only real atonement for sin seems to be for us to request forgiveness from the one we have sinned against and make restitution. As we forgive those who trespass against us... I have yet to find any true messianic prophecy that claims any anointed one was to die so that God would forgive the sins of humanity.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

When I was born my Dad was off fighting a war. There was Mom, my Grandmother (Nixie), and a maid that came in and helped once in a while. The male father figure in my life was Tata (long a’s because I had trouble saying Taylor), an older gentleman that helped around the house and that taught me much of what I now know is important. Like many little kids, my horse (Blackie) and I often got in trouble. It was usually Blackie that caused the problem; he tended to be careless and often knocked things down when wheeling around as horses sometimes do. Once he was galloping around the yard and ran through the garden (at that time most everyone had a garden. They called them Victory Gardens for some reason) and trampled the plants that Tata had just spent hours placing lovingly in the ground. A whole day’s work was destroyed in only seconds.Yet Tata, Mom and Nixie all forgave him. They did tell me to try to keep Blackie under control, and that sometimes, horses need to be reined in.Now I didn’t think much about it at the time, I was only a child even if I was the man of the house, but Tata suffered for Blackie’s sins (and I guess my sins as well because I really should have reined him in). They had never promised to forgive me. And Mom had never promised to have Tata suffer for my sins, but never the less, he did.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

So what was it for? Perhaps this is because the sacrifice is not meaningful in itself. Sacrifices were performed ever since the first sin. Maybe you should ask, "why did Able's sacrifice count and not Cain's?" The humble attitude of acknowledging one's sin before God is what it was all about. The sacrifices began as a symbol to teach the people the one who would remove the sin.I don't believe God was angry at the people addressed in the passages listed because they were giving sacrifices, but because they were performing it as a meaningless ritual instead of acknowledging their sins to God. Sure, God could have cared less about the sacrifices themselves, it is the state of mind that counts. Since they were in they wrong state of mind they were vain hypocrits and God showed his disapproval. God required only ONE sacrifice. Christ died ONCE for the sins of ALL humanity. The animal sacrifices were only symbols of the atoning sacrfice to come. Does Isaiah 52-53 count?

I'm not real clear on what you are trying to say.The adults understood that you don't punish a horse for doing a very normal activity of running through plants. Orderly gardens just don't mean anything to animals. All they could do was repair the mess.I'm guessing you said you were sorry and they accepted your apology.I don't see any sin in the story.Some history on the Victory Garden

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

There is no need for there to be a promise or even reference in the Bible to Jesus suffering for us, dying for our sins. Just as my parents, God found a way to forgive us our sins.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Why couldn't God have done just as your parents did and just flat out forgiven you? Why a sacrifice at all?lfen

Sometimes, in order to make a point, it is necessary to make it standout, make it bold, make it memorable.Christ's death and resurrection has certainly been all of those.But I certainly understand what you mean. Many a time when GOD's worked to get my attention I've felt it might have been easier for him to just send a telegram instead of an earthquake. But unfortunately, most of us are pretty hardheaded. We listen to the louder voice and often miss the quiet loving whisper GOD usually uses. In this case I guess GOD felt the message should be writ large and bold.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

purpledawn,I am very interested in this thread. I think the notion of sacrifice is a very primitive belief that for reasons I can't understand, and I'm hoping this thread might shed some light, has a deep pull for the human mind. Like all these ancient things it's not a simple straightforward concept but rather has different manifestations.I know sacrifice was practised by the Jews and Greeks. Perhaps it's based on childhood dynamics of guilt, punishment, forgiveness and atonement with the parents.What is interesting to me in the scriptures you quote is that there was dissent about the practise of sacrifice in the religion at that time. I hadn't been aware that there had been prophets that objected to that practise.lfen

Sometimes, in order to make a point, it is necessary to make it standout, make it bold, make it memorable.Christ's death and resurrection has certainly been all of those.But I certainly understand what you mean. Many a time when GOD's worked to get my attention I've felt it might have been easier for him to just send a telegram instead of an earthquake. But unfortunately, most of us are pretty hardheaded. We listen to the louder voice and often miss the quiet loving whisper GOD usually uses. In this case I guess GOD felt the message should be writ large and bold.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Jar,Comparing and contrasting the two great icons of east and west: Christ nailed on the cross and the seated Buddha.Jesus was supposed to have been poor and lived a brief life barely beginning his teachings before his crucifixion which was intended to be a dishonorable death. His image on the cross is one of torment and suffering but forgiving those who condemned him (though in history those who claimed his cause would fail at that and would persecute Jews, witches, heretics, etc)The Buddha was supposed to have been born in wealthy circumstances and pampered by his father who wanted him to succeed him as Maharaja of their little land. He gave up wealth and power and after his awakening he taught over for over 30 years until his death. He was honored and loved and established what appears to be a peaceable reform of the Hinduism of his time. His icon is one of sitting in serene peace radiating compassion. With a few exceptions (those being Japan and I believe Ceylon) historically buddhists have avoided killing or harshly treating those who differed from them. In the main buddhists have successful practised nonviolent compassion.It's hard for me to reconcile the two approaches though I suppose it can be done. It does seem that in Judaism those who favored sacrifice to God won out over those who counseled it as not being necessary, at least in the Christian lineage. Yet I am fascinated that purple found passages favoring the abandoning of sacrifice. The example of Buddhism would further support the notion that sacrifice is not necessary for getting our attention, though it certainly does get attention.In every war there are fathers who sacrifice their sons, and though Christianity holds the doctrine of the just war there have been quite a few of them. I suppose our intervention in Iraq is an offshoot of the doctrine. I have to suspect that the violent nature of the sacrifice doctrine has influenced this.I wonder if purpledawn will be able to construct another interpretation of this. If Jesus was not a sacrifice to forgive sins, what was he?lfen

Please remember that Christ's death is only part of the message. The sacrifice is only part, the message includes Christs life, his death and ressurection.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

So what was it for?

---

That would be another thread topic.

quote:

---

Sure, God could have cared less about the sacrifices themselves, it is the state of mind that counts. Since they were in they wrong state of mind they were vain hypocrits and God showed his disapproval.

---

I would say he was more concerned with their actions.

quote:

---

God required only ONE sacrifice. Christ died ONCE for the sins of ALL humanity. The animal sacrifices were only symbols of the atoning sacrfice to come.

---

The scriptures quoted in the OP show that God did not demand or require the sacrifices to forgive sin or watch over the Israelites. He had no use for the sacrifices. They served no purpose. He wanted people to live in harmony.Since God did not demand or require sacrifices of any sort to forgive sins, then God would not require the death of one man for that purpose.Isaiah 52-53 was written in past tense.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

It does not say this.He hated these sacrifices becaue they were being hypocrites. They were giving sacrifices to him but not really repenting in their hearts of their sins. They kept on sinning.Ex 29:28 When an offering is given sicerely with the right attitude, it is pleasng to God.You ignored the tons of passages where god commands sacrifices. THe passage you did quote from are where God is angry at them for not really taking the sacrifices seriously. I am not quite sure about this passage, but from reading the previous chapter I think God is referring to sacrifices to false idols in this section. This passage is DEFINITELY about false gods, as see in the previous verses. This does not say the scribes were messing with the word. This says the scribes copied it but no one read it - poeple ignored it and did not follow it. That is why the scribes copied in vain. What the heck are you talking about?! Read what the Bible says!
Ex 29:36 And if who you sinned agaisnt is dead? No forgiveness? That would stink. Isaiah 62-63. And you support this by ignoring passages that contradict your theory, and by ignoring the context/misunderstanding other passages in order to make them seem like they help your theory.

---

Pray for mercy from... PUSS! In boots. (Don't forget the Spanish accent!)

quote:

---

Just as my parents, God found a way to forgive us our sins.

---

That is my point.God did have a way to forgive our sins. We apologize to the person we hurt, they forgive us and he forgives us. Then we don't make the same mistake again. He asked that we treat each other well.He didn't require sacrifices then and he didn't require Jesus to die so that he could forgive people.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.