"Thanks to the blood of Christ

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Mon May 07, 2018 8:30 am

A preacher on TBN said yesterday,

Thanks to the blood of Christ, his Father becomes our Father.

Didn't Jesus teach his listeners to call God " our Father" even before "the blood" was part of the equation?

So is it really "Thanks to the blood of Christ" that God is Father? Or is God "Father" whether or not Jesus died to "pay for" our sins?

Are we children of God through faith that this is so? Or only because we are adopted by virtue of the "blood of Christ"?

Checkpoint · Post by **Checkpoint** » Sun May 13, 2018 6:17 am

Elijah John wrote:
brianbbs67 wrote: Also, blood sacrifice was how Isreal lived to attain atonement for their sins. Christ was The blood sacrifice that ended the need for Temple sacrifice. Thus, we entered a New Covenant with God(those who accept and follow it). Which He said over and over(OT) would be different than the one with Isreal.
Seems the prophets of Israel did not get the memo. They envisioned a YHVH who was above sacrifice. See Micah 6.6-8, Hosea 6.6, Mark 12.33, Jeremiah 7.20-23, etc. Blood sacrifice was a superflous vestige of a barbaric past.

Is that really what those prophets intended to convey?

Not according to Jesus.

Matthew 9:

12 On hearing this, Jesus said, â€œIt is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.

13 But go and learn what this means: â€˜I desire mercy, not sacrifice.â€™ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.â€�

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Sun May 13, 2018 6:36 am

Elijah John wrote: Seems the prophets of Israel did not get the memo. They envisioned a YHVH who was above sacrifice. See Micah 6.6-8, Hosea 6.6, Mark 12.33, Jeremiah 7.20-23, etc. Blood sacrifice was a superflous vestige of a barbaric past.

MARK 12:33 (NIV)
To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.â€�

To say that YHWH is above sacrifice implies to me that you are trying to say that God does not value sacrifice, however Mark 12:33 sayys that love is "more important" than burnt offerings and sacrifices" meaning that they were indeed important (albeit less so than love). Thus we can conclude that sacrifice is indeed important to God.

JW

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Sun May 13, 2018 6:52 am

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Elijah John wrote: Seems the prophets of Israel did not get the memo. They envisioned a YHVH who was above sacrifice. See Micah 6.6-8, Hosea 6.6, Mark 12.33, Jeremiah 7.20-23, etc. Blood sacrifice was a superflous vestige of a barbaric past.

MARK 12:33 (NIV)
To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.â€�

To say that YHWH is above sacrifice implies to me that you are trying to say that God does not value sacrifice, however Mark 12:33 sayys that love is "more important" than burnt offerings and sacrifices" meaning that they were indeed important (albeit less so than love). Thus we can conclude that sacrifice is indeed important to God.

JW

That is certainly one interpretation, that love is more important, but since that is the case, then doesn't that make blood sacrifice unnecessary?

Several verses render sacrifice superflous....at best. Some verses indicate God does not "eat flesh" or "drink blood". He does not require, nor does He desire blood sacrifice. God's repudiation of animal blood sacrifice in the OT is never tied to the trading one type of sacrifice for another, human for animal, the blood of the Messiah for the blood of lambs and goats.

It is not the blood of the Messiah that renders animal sacrifice superfluous or repulsive to God, but more enlightened ideas of what God wants, instead. Things like love of God and neighbor, reciprocal forgiveness, thanks and praise, obedience, knowing God ("knowledge of God"), and realizing that the ultimate Spirit has no need to drink blood or eat flesh.

And then there's this.

. I desire mercy, NOT sacrifice.

...not "I desire mercy with sacrifice" or "I desire mercy in addition to sacrifice".

Also, if Pauline blood-theology is correct, what Jesus believed, and what Jesus taught, why didn't Jesus take that opportunity in the Mark episode to say something to the effect of "don't worry about making animal sacrifices anymore, my impending death on the cross will make you right with God".?

Instead, there are many important cases where Jesus taught simple repentance and the mercy of the Father, with no mention of the need for blood sacrifice of any kind, human or animal.

The metaphor of the merciful Father is incompatible with the notion of a Deity who requires bloodshed in order to forgive. The bloodthirsty Deity is a Pagan notion, not a Monotheistic one.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Sun May 13, 2018 7:10 am

Elijah John wrote:Except the other verses mentioned render sacrifice superflous....at best.

b]SUPERFLUOUS[/b]
unnecessary, especially through being more than enough.
synonyms: surplus, redundant, unneeded,

QUESTION Is sacrifice "superfluous"?

That would depend on the circumstance. Through the Prophet Jeremiah God made a statement of fact namely that the Mosaic law with its requirement for regular blood sacrifices was not given to the people upon their exodus from Egypt but rather was some weeks after.

Does Jeremiah 7 state that YHVH wants obedience instead of sacrifice?

No, an honest evaluation reveals it does not present such an either or dichotomy. The passsage presents both an explicit chronology of event (God did not demand sacrifice from the Isaelites at the moment of their departure from Egypt) and an implicit priorization (obedience take priority over sacrifice). What it does not do however as imply or state that sacrifice was or would not be required.

Could Jeremiah 7:20-23 be used to support the idea that Jesus' sacrifice was invalid?

No, sacrifice has always been an feature of worship for God's people from the time of the first faithful man Abel, and Jesus sacrifice would become the foundation for salvation for humanity which, according to scripture was completely acceptable to God.

JW[/quote]

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Sun May 13, 2018 7:56 am

[Replying to post 24 by JehovahsWitness]

The point of the Jeremiah passage is that YHVH wants obedience not sacrifice. He was using the time in the wilderness to support his point, not to set time frame scenarios.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Sun May 13, 2018 8:09 am

Elijah John wrote: [Replying to post 24 by JehovahsWitness]

The point of the Jeremiah passage is that YHVH wants obedience not sacrifice. He was using the time in the wilderness to support his point, not to set time frame scenarios.

But does the scripture say that? Or does it not rather say that sacrifice wasn't the first thing God asked of his people?

He was using the time in the wilderness to support his point, not to set time frame scenarios.

We not the Israelites in the wilderness given a set of laws (through Moses) that would require them to make regular blood sacrifices?

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Sun May 13, 2018 1:09 pm

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Elijah John wrote: [Replying to post 24 by JehovahsWitness]

The point of the Jeremiah passage is that YHVH wants obedience not sacrifice. He was using the time in the wilderness to support his point, not to set time frame scenarios.
But does the scripture say that? Or does it not rather say that sacrifice wasn't the first thing God asked of his people?

He was using the time in the wilderness to support his point, not to set time frame scenarios.
We not the Israelites in the wilderness given a set of laws (through Moses) that would require them to make regular blood sacrifices?

Why, then, did Jeremiah (or God through Jeremiah) repudiate the need or the desirablily for blood sacrifice?

Of course I could be wrong, but I see Jeremiah as representing a step of progression from the barbarity of Moses, in a similar manner as Jesus was a step beyond the harshness of Mosaic Law, due to their hardness of their heart. Seems God tolerated the harsher aspects of Mosaic Law (in particular, blood sacrifice) as form of "training wheels" in the Spiritual evolution of His people from the primitivism of a pagan background, to the enlightenment of pure Monotheism. As they became more enlightened(through the help of the Prophets) they shed the wheels, and rode unfettered. Or course, this was also out of necessity with the desctruction of the Temple.

But if you do want to go back to Moses, did Moses ever explain that the animal blood sacrifces were only temporay, until the blood of the Messiah would cover their sins? If so, where?

Did Moses give the Law with the proviso, "don't despair if yoiu cannot keep ithe Law, it's meant only to demonstrate how sinful you are, and thus illustrate your need for the Messiah, who is the only one who can keep the Law in the first place"? If so, where?

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Sun May 13, 2018 1:36 pm

Elijah John wrote:
Why, then, did Jeremiah (or God through Jeremiah) repudiate the need or the desirablily for blood sacrifice?

Are you again refering to Jeremiah 7: 20-23?

Could you explain what words exactly in the text for you represent "repudiation" or the lack of "desirability" of sacrifices?

Checkpoint · Post by **Checkpoint** » Sun May 13, 2018 10:33 pm

[Replying to post 23 by Elijah John]

JW wrote

To say that YHWH is above sacrifice implies to me that you are trying to say that God does not value sacrifice, however Mark 12:33 sayys that love is "more important" than burnt offerings and sacrifices" meaning that they were indeed important (albeit less so than love). Thus we can conclude that sacrifice is indeed important to God.

You opined

That is certainly one interpretation, that love is more important, but since that is the case, then doesn't that make blood sacrifice unnecessary?

Not at all.

It is not merely one interpretation we can take or leave, but the interpretation Jesus gave, the one the Father admonished us to "listen to"[him].

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Sun May 13, 2018 11:04 pm

Checkpoint wrote: [Replying to post 23 by Elijah John]

JW wrote

To say that YHWH is above sacrifice implies to me that you are trying to say that God does not value sacrifice, however Mark 12:33 sayys that love is "more important" than burnt offerings and sacrifices" meaning that they were indeed important (albeit less so than love). Thus we can conclude that sacrifice is indeed important to God.

You opined

That is certainly one interpretation, that love is more important, but since that is the case, then doesn't that make blood sacrifice unnecessary?
Not at all.

It is not merely one interpretation we can take or leave, but the interpretation Jesus gave, the one the Father admonished us to "listen to"[him].

I recall that Jesus quoted Hosea when he said "I desire mercy NOT sacrifice". And Jesus taught forgiveness based on simple repentance, returning to the mercy of the Father, many times, and in many ways. Not tying it to blood in any of these cases:

-The LORD'S prayer
-The beattudes
-The Parables..

Which taken together, constitute the bulk of Jesus teachings.

It was Paul who taught human, blood sacrifice, not Jesus.

So yes, I listen to Jesus not Paul. Why would anyone need Paul to interpret Jesus for them?