Blood Sacrifice

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheInquisitor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheInquisitor

Guest
Hebrews 10:4 - For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

God was pretty clear in the Old testament that the animal sacrifices atoned for their sins. This doesn’t make sense. Can someone help me out here?
 
Hebrews 10:4 - For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

God was pretty clear in the Old testament that the animal sacrifices atoned for their sins. This doesn’t make sense. Can someone help me out here?
It wasn’t the blood of bulls and goats but the associated repentance and obedience?

Chuck
 
Hebrews is New Testament. The Old Covenant is over. Jesus made one sacrifice for all time. No more animal sacrifices are needed, they won’t do any good. That whole chapter has a heading that pretty much sums it all up: One Sacrifice instead of Many.

usccb.org/bible/hebrews/10
 
Yea, but he’s talking about sacrifices in the Old Testament right? Is he saying that sacrifices in the Old testament didn’t atone for sins when the Old testament said they did?
 
Hebrews 10:4 - For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

God was pretty clear in the Old testament that the animal sacrifices atoned for their sins. This doesn’t make sense. Can someone help me out here?
I think God must have known what He was doing when He required this. During captivity in Egypt, they came to believe in the gods of the people there which were bulls, goats, frogs, etc. When they were led out (ex-hodas) or Exodus, God wanted them to no longer consider those animals as gods but only Him as their covenental God. Therefore, He required those animals they were becoming to believe in to be sacrificed to show they were no longer of godly importance. It is like a bad habit. You have to not do it so many times to couneract all the times you did it that formed the behavior. But as you know, they fell off the wagon so to speak and made another bull to worship when Moses was gone.

mdcpensive1
 
Inquisitor, you seem to struggle with the ideas of atonement, sacrifice, blood and forgiveness. I have noticed that you have started a few threads on the topic in the past several weeks.
Hebrews is New Testament. The Old Covenant is over. Jesus made one sacrifice for all time. No more animal sacrifices are needed, they won’t do any good. That whole chapter has a heading that pretty much sums it all up: One Sacrifice instead of Many.

usccb.org/bible/hebrews/10
Richard points you where you need to go. I would suggest making a study of the Old Testament sacrifice and the Book of Hebrews, or at a miminum making a very slow and deliberate read of Hebrews. I believe that only Revelation is a more difficult than Hebrews but it is readable if one takes their time and reads it slowly and deliberately.

The author of Hebrews argues that the sacrifices under the Old Covenant are merely copies and shadows of the heavenly things to come, and contrasts the fact that the High Priest has to enter the sancturary with blood every year as an indication of the ineffectiveness of the blood of bulls and goats to remove sin as compared to Jesus’ sacrifice which was “Once for all.”
It wasn’t the blood of bulls and goats but the associated repentance and obedience?

Chuck
Chuck hits it perfectly. Sacrifice without contrition, repentance and obedience is useless to God. The Psalms do more than just hint at this.

For you do not desire sacrifice or I would give it;
a burnt offering you would not accept.
My sacrifice, O God, is a contrite spirit;
a contrite, humbled heart, O God, you will not scorn.

(Psalm 51:18-19)


Even in the midst of the Old Testament law and sacrificical temple worship, the Pslams hint at the heavenly things to come, the real sacrifice of Jesus, as opposed to the sacrifice of bulls and goats under the old covenant.

The whole idea of sacrifice of animals vs the sacrifice of Jesus is not comprehensible outside of the idea of old vs new covenant. Your answer lies in praying that God gives you light, and maybe a study of the old and new covenants and the book of Hebrews.

-Tim-
 
Inquisitor, you seem to struggle with the ideas of atonement, sacrifice, blood and forgiveness. I have noticed that you have started a few threads on the topic in the past several weeks.

-Tim-
I’ve been struggling very much. These struggles happened right before my confirmation too 😦 please pray for me.
 
Hebrews 10:4 - For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

God was pretty clear in the Old testament that the animal sacrifices atoned for their sins. This doesn’t make sense. Can someone help me out here?
D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 3-4. But in them a remembrance of sins is made every year. For it is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats sins should be taken way. The sacrifices of the former law, even that great sacrifice on the day of expiation, when victims were offered for the ignorances or sins of the priests, and of all the people, were only types and figures of Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross, it was impossible that they themselves should take away sins, like that one oblation of Christ, though in them was made a remembrance of sins, and of the same sins for which so many victims had been offered. (Witham)
 
I’ve been struggling very much. These struggles happened right before my confirmation too 😦 please pray for me.
I can tell. You have started several threads on the topic.

Tonight I go to adoration and will pray.

Trust God. Everything else will fall into place.

-Tim-
 
D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 3-4. But in them a remembrance of sins is made every year. For it is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats sins should be taken way. The sacrifices of the former law, even that great sacrifice on the day of expiation, when victims were offered for the ignorances or sins of the priests, and of all the people, were only types and figures of Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross, it was impossible that they themselves should take away sins, like that one oblation of Christ, though in them was made a remembrance of sins, and of the same sins for which so many victims had been offered. (Witham)
I just don’t understand. It said in the Old testament that was how they made their Atonement. God seemed to guarantee it. How can I reconcile this?
 
Inquisitor,

Don’t give up.

Here from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
(c) Sacraments of the Mosaic Law. . . St. Augustine says the sacraments of the Old Law were abolished because they had been fulfilled (cf. Matthew 5:17), and others have been instituted which are more efficacious, more useful, easier to administer and to receive, fewer in number (“virtute majora, utilitate meliora, actu faciliora, numero pauciora”, Reply to Faustus XIX.13). The Council of Trent condemns those who say that there is no difference except in the outward rite between the sacraments of the Old Law and those of the New Law (Sess. VII, can. ii). The Decree for the Armenians, published by order of the Council of Florence, says that the sacraments of the Old Law did not confer grace, but only prefigured the grace which was to be given by the Passion of Christ. This means that they did not give grace themselves (i.e. ex opere operato) but only by reason of the faith in Christ which they represented — “ex fide significata, non ex circumcisione significante” (Summa Theologiæ I-II:102:5)
In other words, you could consider the sacrifices as conditions for receiving sanctifying grace (which even then flowed from the anticipated Merits of Christ) when coupled with the appropriate interior repentance and contrition. Our sacraments aren’t merely conditional, but actually infuse grace.

That help at all?
VC
 
Inquisitor,

Don’t give up.

Here from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

In other words, you could consider the sacrifices as conditions for receiving sanctifying grace (which even then flowed from the anticipated Merits of Christ) when coupled with the appropriate interior repentance and contrition. Our sacraments aren’t merely conditional, but actually infuse grace.

That help at all?
VC
Thanks :), I’m fighting tooth and nail at this point lol.

So, where can we see this in the Old testament? At least hinted at or whatnot.
 
Thanks :), I’m fighting tooth and nail at this point lol.

So, where can we see this in the Old testament? At least hinted at or whatnot.
Keep fighting!

What part do you mean (i.e. what hinting what?). If you look at that Catholic Encyclopedia article I linked you’ll see a list of examples. For instance, circumcision and the paschal lamb.

VC
 
I just don’t understand. It said in the Old testament that was how they made their Atonement. God seemed to guarantee it. How can I reconcile this?
I think you are troubled by the semantics.

To atone is to make up for, to make ammends, or to make reparation.

We have to understand the covenant mentality of the Old Testament Jews. Covenant was everything to the Jews.

Covenants create family bonds, and God made a covenant only with the Israelites. Only the nation of Israel was part of God’s family by virtue of the covenant God made with Israel. God even calls the nation Israel “My chosen son.”

The covenant which God made with Isreal at Mt. Sinai was entered into freely by the nation of Israel.

So Moses went and summoned the elders of the people. When he set before them all that the LORD had ordered him to tell them, all the people answered together, “Everything the LORD has said, we will do.” Then Moses brought back to the LORD the response of the people. (Exodus 19:7-8)

The covenant which Israel freely entered into with God came with a blessing for being faithful, reward for obeying the rules, and a curse for being unfaithful and disobeying the rules.

**See, I have today set before you life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of the LORD, your God, which I am giving you today, loving the LORD, your God, and walking in his ways, and keeping his commandments, statutes and ordinances, you will live and grow numerous, and the LORD, your God, will bless you … If, however, your heart turns away and you do not obey, but are led astray and bow down to other gods and serve them, I tell you today that you will certainly perish; … I call heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. ** (Deuteronomy 30:15-19)

In setting before Israel all the rules and regulations of the covenant, including the 613 commandments in Leviticus 17 through 22, Moses was defining sin. For a Jew under the covenant with God, sin was defined as obeying the covenant laws given to Israel by Moses. If one broke the law of Moses (as intepreted by the various Rabbis), then one was a sinner. If one obeyed the laws of Moses, then one was righteous. The Laws of Moses which were part of the covenant made with God were what defined sin.

When one transgressed the law of Moses and thereby violated the covenant - sinned - it brought a curse upon him. The sinner might have to be seperated from the community so that the curse did not fall on all the people. The covenant set before Israel said that the punishment for breaking the rules (sinning) was death. Every covenant came with both blessing and curse, and the curse for breaking the covenant with God was death. This is where sacrifice came in.

When an Israelite made a sin offering, the sinner and the priest would lay their hands on the animal and pray, transferring the sin of the sinner to the animal, and then the animal would be killed. In this way the sin was expiated, or atoned. Reparation was made, the sin was made up for, and the demands of the covenant for a death were fulfilled.

But the Israelites always fell back into grave sin, worshipping foreign Gods and marrying women from other nations, taking some of the spoils of battle for themselves and not destroying it totally as God commanded, and sending spies to see how strong the armies of their enemies were when God himself said that he will deliver the enemies into their hands. And so sacrificed had to be repeated.

Christ’s sacrifice however, was “Once for all” and is not repeated.

Ever notice how at Mass, at the most dramatic moment, the priest holds up Jesus and says,

***Behold the Lamb of God. Behold him who takes away *the sins of the world.

Ever notice that the priest says that Jesus takes away the sins of the world? He says, “Takes away.” Gone, never to return. Only the sacrifice of Jesus has the very real power to completely take away our sins, to make us truly Holy, to turn us into saints. The sacrifices of the old covenant do atone for sin. They fulfill the requirment that a death take place and make reparation for transgressing covenant. But the sacrifices do not have the power to completely take away sin and make us truly holy as the sacrifice of Jesus does.

The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, (John 1:29)

John the Baptists recognized Jesus as the one who’s sacrifice would have the power to make us truly holy. The author of Hebrews makes this all clear.

Every priest stands daily at his ministry, offering frequently those same sacrifices that can never take away sins. But this one offered one sacrifice for sins, and took his seat forever at the right hand of God; now he waits until his enemies are made his footstool. For by one offering he has made perfect forever those who are being consecrated. (Hebrews 10:11-14)

Be careful here about the words. Make sure you understand. Atonement for sins is required. All sin demands punishment and we have to atone for our sins, but that is not the same as sanctification, the power to actually take away sins, to make us perfect.

Catholicism believes that Jesus’ sacrifice has the power to sanctify, to make us perfect.

So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:48)

Would Jesus command us to do something that was impossible, or does he give us the power to do what he commands? Catholics believes that Jesus can make us saints, and that he rose form the dead to prove it. But that’s not the same as atonement.

-Tim-
 
Hebrews 10:4 - For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

God was pretty clear in the Old testament that the animal sacrifices atoned for their sins. This doesn’t make sense. Can someone help me out here?
I was reading in the book “Salvation is from the Jews” by Roy Scheoman where he talked about how a person would go to the temple and see a priest to ask for forgiveness. The priest would take an offering from the Jewish person and go inside. When he came out, the headband he was wearing would turn a different color if the offering was accepted meaning it atoned for the sins. This concept is carried over into the Catholic Church in the new covenant in that we use a priesthood for the forgivness of sins and the priest has to assess our true sincerity for asking forgiveness. Absolution then takes the place of the color change of the headband.

It should be said that the color change never happened again after the temple was destroyed in 70AD.

mdcpensive1
 
So is it possible that Paul was not referring to sacrifices in the Old Covenant but after Christ in this passage? Just a thought.
 
Sometimes it helps to see how the Catechism uses a certain passage. Your passage is referenced in the footnotes to this paragraph:

1540 Instituted to proclaim the Word of God and to restore communion with God by sacrifices and prayer,9 this priesthood nevertheless remains powerless to bring about salvation, needing to repeat its sacrifices ceaselessly and being unable to achieve a definitive sanctification, which only the sacrifice of Christ would accomplish.10

From context, they are talking about priesthood in the Old Testament.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top