JFJ Forums

I am a Christian not of Jewish heritage. I am currently immersed in a debate elseware with some Jewish about, guess what,... the Messiahship of Jesus. I'm trying to remain in the arena of the old testament and the issue of the sacrifice has come up. I will list the objections below in hopes that someone here with a more intimate knowledge of the sacrificial system in Judiasm can help me.

Here you go...sorry its long...

"this blood of Jesus thing is human sacrifice and that
is an abomination in Judaism blood is not needed for
atonement and here are the trules of sin sacfrices
verses this Jesus's Blood:
At the time of Jesus’ death, the Second Temple was
still standing in Jerusalem and the Hebrew Bible was
the Scripture in force. What follows are ten reasons
why the death of Jesus on the cross could not have
been a valid sacrificial offering. When you study the
SOURCE Document, the Hebrew Bible you learn that it:

1. Requires that a sacrificial ritual be administered
by a Priest (see Leviticus Chapters 1-7). According to
the accounts in the New Testament (NT), Jesus was
crucified by Roman soldiers (Matthew 27:35; Mark
15:24; Luke 23:33; John 19:18, 23).

2. Requires that the blood of the (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). New Testament evidence clearly
shows this was not done.

3. Requires that the (sin) sacrifice be without any
physical defect or blemish (e.g., Leviticus 4:3).
According to the various accounts in the NT, 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, Jesus was circumcised on
the eighth day after being born, a ritual that leaves
a scar ("sign of the covenant"). According to the NT,
circumcision is tantamount to mutilation (Philippians
3:2, Galatians 5:12).

4. Requires that the Passover (sin) sacrifice, a
male-goat, be offered on an individual (per household)
basis (Numbers 28:22), not as a communal offering.
According to the NT, Jesus’ death (termed a “sin
sacrifice”) expiated the sins of mankind (Romans 6:10;
Hebrews 9:12, 10:10, 10:18).

5. Directs 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]).

6. Requires sacrificed Paschal Lamb to be roasted and
eaten, and it’s blood used to place markings on the
side-posts and lintel of the doors (Exodus 12: 7-8).
There is no record in the NT that this was done (lest
it be suggested that Christianity promotes
cannibalism).

7. States 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 Christian Bibles]; [e.g., Num
15:27-31] .

8. 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.

9. Strictly 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).

10. Strictly PROHIBITS human sacrifices (e.g.,
Leviticus18:21, 24-25; Deuteronomy 18:10; Jeremiah
7:31, 19: 5; Ezekiel 23:37, 39).

So, as you can clearly see that the death of Jesus
could never atone for any sin, much less all sins of
all people for all time? NOT AT ALL, NEVER!

atonement by other other means

If, however, he cannot afford two doves or two young
pigeons, he is to bring as an offering for his sin a
tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He
must not put oil or incense on it, because it is a sin
offering. He is to bring it to the priest, who shall
take a handful of it as a memorial portion and burn it
on the altar on top of the offerings made to the
Eternal by fire. It is a sin offering. In this way the
priest will make atonement for him for any of these
sins he has committed, and he will be forgiven. The
rest of the offering will belong to the priest, as in
the case of the grain offering. [Leviticus 5:11-13]


Say to the Israelites: `When a man or woman wrongs
another in any way and so is unfaithful to the
Eternal, that person is guilty and must confess the
sin he has committed. He must make full restitution
for his wrong, add one fifth to it and give it all to
the person he has wronged. [Numbers 5:6-7]

..if my people, who are called by my name, will humble
themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from
their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and
will forgive their sin and will heal their land. [2
Chronicles 7:14]

But if from there you seek the Eternal your God, you
will find him if you look for him with all your heart
and with all your soul. [Deuteronomy 4:29]

He prays to God and finds favor with him, he sees
God's face and shouts for joy; he is restored by God
to his righteous state. [Job 33:26]

Turn from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it.
[Psalm 34:14]

The Eternal is close to the brokenhearted and saves
those who are crushed in spirit. [Psalm 34:18]

Y'shua was Preist of another order.

The veil was torn from top to bottom.

That was part of the sacrifice.

Y'shua is of a higher authority.

The blood of Y'shua must be applied individually by faith.

It was for salvation.

Do that in rememberance of Y'shua.

Y'shua's sacrifice covers all sins.

That's what makes Y'shua's sacrifice different.

No one could ever do what God has done Himself. Only Y'shua can do that.

Ditto from #9.

So, as you can clearly see that the death of Jesus can atone for all sin of all people for all time. There is no attonement by any other means.

Shalom that comes from the Prince of Shalom!

First of all, when Christians try to converse with non-believing Jews, we have to realize that we are speaking two different languages, even when we use the same words.  

Secondly, the Jew is taught in trusting in a "covering" for sins, not a full atonement.  This covering is like the skins of the half and half Temple / Tabernacle during Eli's ministry.  There were 4 solid walls, and a tent of skins from the Old Sanctuary Tent for its roof.  When we pull back the reasoning for the "kapar" of "covering atonement" of the sin offering, to them, its like the revealing of the horror of WWIII in John's book of Revelation.  They view it with the abhorrence that the pans of judgement are about to be poured out on them.

Thirdly, they judge from the rose colored glasses of the Law.  As a Gentile, I can build an altar of Earth in a virgin place, and if I chose, I can legally offer up a sacrifice to HASHEM, if I go through a proper procedure.  The Jew cannot.  His sacrifice can only be accepted in the Land of Israel.

Fourth, the atonement of which Christians speak hearkens to the atonement of all, for intentional and unintentional sins.  Abel offered up the firstlings and fat of his flock for both of these, in the very "presence of HASHEM", outside the Garden of Eden (cf. Genesis 4:16 w/Gen. 3:22-24).  This sacrificial system of atoning for both unintentional and intentional sins was instituted by HASHEM Himself (Gen. 3:21), for the sins of Eve (Gen. 3:16), and the sins of Adam (Gen. 3:17) for obeying the voice of another or of their own selves over the Voice of HASHEM.  In Genesis 4:11-12, we see that Cain's intentional sin was met with the ruling from HASHEM Himself, that Cain's sin was the same type of sin as his father Adam's (Gen. 4:11-12 w/ Gen. 3:17-19).  The Jew, on the other hand, feels shackled to only an a "covering" for unintentional sin.  The Liberty of Christ often frightens him/her.

Fifthly, unless they are well versed in the N.T., which most are not, you will want to then tread lightly with those well-versed only in the Torah and Talmud.
      So when you discuss this sacrifice of atonement, you will want to stress points of clarity along the lines discussed above.  Is this helpful?  

Another point you may want to bring up.  In Genesis 49:10, if we accept Moses as the "Lawgiver" between the feet of the direct lineage of Jacob, and that by Mosaic Law, the people should be ruled until the coming of Shiloh (you might want to ask): "Has the right of rule in the rod or "shevet" ever ceased over the people?"  
              
In circa A.D. 7, when Jesus came up to Jerusalem in Luke 2:41ff. and was examined by Hillel (who brought back the Torah to Israel) for His (Jesus') Bar Mitzvah preparation, following the Passover, the rod or Shevet to enforce the death penalty was taken away from Israel (its rabbis, and priests) later in that same year for the first time since the propecy of Genesis 49:10.  Therefore, in eretz Israel, the rod of the Mosaic Law was removed by Roman decree, so that only the staff should remain.  If Jesus wasn't Shiloh, then the scepter departed in A.D. 7 without a successor. And when was Jesus discovered at the Temple with the most elite and learned men of the Torah of that Day?  On Firstfruits, 23 years prior to His resurrection, in which He spent 3 nights and 3 days in the Earth: fulfilling the Proverb - "Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right." (Proverbs 20:11)  Those 3 nights and days were spent in fulfilling the Torah, going about in doing His Heavenly Father's work.
              
Although we saints have also contended in times past of the right of Kingship still remains on royal successors (in this prophecy of Ge. 49:10), even as it remains on the house of Aaron for priesthood, the counter-missionaries stress the 500 year gap prior to Jesus, and ignore the over 1900 year gap for the priesthood after Him.  Yet, no one challenges the lineage of the Kohen.  However, it is best to steer of this quagmire, unless you have the tractor treads of knowledge to easily ride out of it.  Can you use this also?  Has this been the kind of tool that you can use?  

First: i'm not a theologian nor a Jew, but I have discussed these subjects on other fora (JforJudaism, Messiah Truth); but I'll give you what I have, as short as possible.

1. In general: I don't think you will  be able to convince your opponents, but you may discover the richness of the Word of God as a benefit to your own faith.

2. The life and death of Jesus is NOT a Levitical sacrifice, but a sacrificial life and death according to the order of Melchisedek (this may need study). Jesus as the Lamb of God': this must be seen, imo, as an image and shadow of a heavenly and spiritual reality. Jesus ' life and death: His whole life, was sacrificial. He gave everything to the end, bore the judgement of God, in order for His people to 'escape  the hell of Egypt', that is the imprisonment/slavery of sin. To try to apply the
literal Levitical prescriptions of an animal sacrifice to the holy sacrifice of Jesus is absurd, and only shows the huge deception of Judaism and the blindedness of their reading of Scripture (sorry to say this). They are right in this: that God certainly rejects human sacrifice, as they portray it, it is an abomination. But God does not reject 'sacrificial living and dying'; Scripture is full of sacrificial living/dying: people willing to give their life, their blood, in humility to save others (needs study too).

3. The HT (Hebrew Text) is to be understood in a spiritual and metaphorical way from the point of view of the GT (greek text, New Testament). The HT is filled with signs, images, metaphors of the reality of the life, death and ressurection of Jesus: He fulfills, that is makes complete, the Word/prophecy/Law of the HT. This argument is from a Judaism-perspective weak: all that we (Christians) got is 'signs, shadows, and spiritual metaphors'. I say: only those who listen to the Spirit will be able to understand the deeper meaning of the HT. The (Orthodox)Jews stick to their mostly literal and 'earthly' reading of scriptures, often based on the oral Law, given by rabbinical tradition (Talmud and other).

4. Their messiah is a flesh and bone political messianic figure, human in all respects (also sin), who will bring worldpeace, and will also wipe out all the enemies of Israel (all the 'Amelekites'). This is political religious messianism and is a very dangerous kind of ideology, imo. (We have seen those 'saviours' in history before).

Aad

Some wonderful posts people!

Excellent post Aad and others. What baffles me is why is there so much confusion when God's (still unraveling) plan has been so clearly laid out? The new testament perfectly completes the old. They go hand in hand. There are to be no animal sacrificies after Jesus came. Jesus simplified the law for all of us! Didn't Abraham prophetically say "GOD HIMSElF WILL PROVIDE THE LAMB"? AND HE DID. It can't get any simpler than that.

And Yes, there can be no such thing as an authoritative Oral Torah. Exodus 34: 27 clearly says : And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. Rabbinic tradition has overthrown the authority of the written word.Human authority cannot replace divine authority. The rabbis are blindly mimicking what their forefathers did without critically examining the truth and the word of God.


The jewish people have always loved Jesus. They came in the thousands to hear him preach. It's the Rabbinical authority which is the source of all  confusion!!!


regards,
in christ,
Nick

Seekmosttoprophecy:
Thank you. I really like the foreshadowing of the Communion/Last Supper..."this is my body...take this and eat...". Beautiful.

Brianroy: Thank you as well. The first post I got, the second one I will need to chew on a bit. I not sure I fully understand all that pertains to answering the question..."Has the right of rule in the rod or "shevet" ever ceased over the people?"  If you could point me to some further materials to study this that would be great.

Aad2: Again, thank you. I couldn't agree more with point #1. Point #2 I want to definitely dig deeper into that. References or more info would be great. Point #3 I agree, that becomes an argument over points of view, metaphorical vs literal, which can go on and on and remain unresolved. Definitely requires revelation from the Spirit. Point #4 seems to be their strongest sticking point, that Messiah will be a man and of no divine nature. Seems to be one of the more difficult objections, I have read some of the material offered on this site.

Tanachreader: Couldn't agree more!

Thank you all.

In Christ Jesus

Rashi:
"THE ROD SHALL NOT DEPART FROM JUDAH: From David and on thereafter.  These are the leaders of exile in Babylonia who dominate the people by (or with) the rod;
             [the "rod" or "scepter" is the Hebrew word: SHeVeT]
      for it is by royal authority that they are appointed.  {Cf. Sanhedrin 5a}.

NOR A LAWGIVER BETWEEN HIS FEET: Disciples / Students (who are) the rulers
              [literally the "Nasi", which are not only translated as princes, captains, rulers, and leaders; but also as "vapors", to which allusion of clouds or vapors without water that Jude 12 referred to]  
        of the Eretz Israel.   {i.e., who are native Israelites}.

UNTIL SHILOH ARRIVES: King HaMesshiach, for it is to him that the Kingship belongs, and thus did the Onkelos interpret it
              [the Targum Onkelos says, 'Until the Messhiach will come,
                for the kingship is his.'];
         and a Midrash agadah, 'Shay Lah', it saying, 'An increase of produce [as from out of the ground] as a gift to the revered one.' "

                
The counter contention can be found in those such as Tovia Singer's postings at OutreachJudaism.org   In their zeal to deny Christ, they often must destroy the validity of the same Scriptures they seek to deny us.  If a bible scholar attacks the Bible, and says it is this way, but don't check it out from any other view, then we need to turn away, and stop our ears.  I'm not sure if Tovia realizes it or not, but in his contention is that Bible prophecy repeatedly fails, such as in Genesis 49:10, that is de facto also disarming his legal right to return to Israel and for all Jews to reclaim the Land.  As an ardent Zionist, though a Gentile and Christian, I denounce such a stubborn philosophical position as what he and others have taken in detriment to Israel and their birthright.  One day, it will sink in, and he'll hopefully realize his mistake in this particular regard.  You may still bless the man, but dismantle the error; and in that way, win a friend where there was once an adversary.  Shalom.