Did G_D lie to the jews?

[KingAlfred]

i still do not see anything heretic in what you wrote. When i think of Jesus , the last thing i think about is original sin or animal sacrifice…i do not even think about them… He is the lamb of God because He willingly gave Himself to everyone, not because He couldn’t do otherwise…He died, that is the fact, and any theological response as to the “why” is explained in light of His death rather than potraying it as the reason He “had” to die as if we are limiting His sacrifice.

Some say Jesus had to die, i believe He did not “have” to die and this does not make me or you a heretic.

I couldn’t agree more, although I’m not fond of the lamb-metaphor. I get a bit frustrated with similes and metaphors, and I’m definitely against the theory and practice of animal-sacrifice. To me, Christ, the God-Man, came to teach and lead humanity to God’s Kingdom. Because Man is corrupt in his fallen nature, his power-brokers grew jealous, angry and felt threatened; they killed The Truth, because The Truth stood against all they represented. Dying, Jesus released The Advocate, to carry His message beyond the Jews, so that they who would listen would be saved therein. In my own life, I have witnessed what Jesus experienced – the burning hatred of truth, on the part of the corrupt, and their instantaneous willingness to do anything to silence it. As Christ said, the corrupt among us are liars, and the father of lies.:knight1:

 

[reen12]

quote: Sepharad

I know that at times, God required blood (animal) sacrifices, but in Jewish law those are not the only kinds of sin atonements. Proverbs 16:6 among others, establishes this.

We also know in Judaism that God would never require any form of human sacrifice. When God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son, He sent an angel to stop him just in time, and instead, had him sacrifice a ram caught in the nearby thicket.

This was to show two things: a) God was only testing Abraham, and b) God stopped a human sacrifice, and replaced it with an animal sacrifice…to show that God would never demand the sacrifice of any human, only animals.

That’s a stunning thought. Thank you.

reen12

 

[ralphinal]

God asked Abraham, “How much do you love me?”

Abraham said, “Above all things.”

God said, "Sacrafice your son, the one that I have promised to you. The one that will be the first of a multitude of decendents.’

And Abraham went to comply. And GOd saw his love, and spared Isaac.

Later, God looked to the world and said, “Do you know how much I love you?”

 

[inJESUS]

On a side note, how do Jews interpret this :

Abraham answered, “God himself will provide **the lamb **for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. **Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” **

Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw **a ram **caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son.

First, about lamb and ram.

Second, how can Araham fear God by not withelding his son from an angel if it was God who order him in the first place?

 

[inJESUS]

God asked Abraham, “How much do you love me?”

Abraham said, “Above all things.”

God said, "Sacrafice your son, the one that I have promised to you. The one that will be the first of a multitude of decendents.’

And Abraham went to comply. And GOd saw his love, and spared Isaac.

Later, God looked to the world and said, “Do you know how much I love you?”

Beautiful

 

[Sepharad]

On a side note, how do Jews interpret this :

Abraham answered, “God himself will provide **the lamb **for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. **Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” **

Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw **a ram **caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son.

First, about lamb and ram.

Second, how can Araham fear God by not withelding his son from an angel if it was God who order him in the first place?

Its pretty obvious. God was only testing Abraham, to see if he would even give back to God the son God allowed him to have, when his wife Sarah was barren.

The key is where God says, “Do not harm the child, FOR NOW I SEE THAT YOU TRULY LOVE ME, SEEING YOU HAVE NOT WITHHELD YOUR ONLY SON FROM ME”.

The reason why Abraham used the term, “lamb” was because that was what was usually sacrificed.

The ram was simply the animal caught in the thicket, which God allowed to be there so Abraham would be able to still offer the sacrifice without using his son.

Christians like to see symbolism in there, as being a foreshadowing of Jesus…but its just not there. They like to say, “Just as Abraham offered his only son, God now offers HIS only son”. The thing they forget is, God STOPPED Abraham from sacrificing his son, and requested an animal be substituted.

 

[ralphinal]

Its pretty obvious. God was only testing Abraham, to see if he would even give back to God the son God allowed him to have, when his wife Sarah was barren.

The key is where God says, “Do not harm the child, FOR NOW I SEE THAT YOU TRULY LOVE ME, SEEING YOU HAVE NOT WITHHELD YOUR ONLY SON FROM ME”.

The reason why Abraham used the term, “lamb” was because that was what was usually sacrificed.

The ram was simply the animal caught in the thicket, which God allowed to be there so Abraham would be able to still offer the sacrifice without using his son.

Christians like to see symbolism in there, as being a foreshadowing of Jesus…but its just not there. They like to say, “Just as Abraham offered his only son, God now offers HIS only son”. The thing they forget is, God STOPPED Abraham from sacrificing his son, and requested an animal be substituted.

Ah, but God requires no more sacrafices, as He once again provided the offering.

 

[Sepharad]

Ah, but God requires no more sacrafices, as He once again provided the offering.

That is how Christianity sees it. In Judaism, we see it as God replacing the human offering with an animal offering…as a way to show that if he would not actually want Abraham to offer HIS son, neither would He ever offer His son, either (if He had one).

Its all a matter of perspective!

 

[LilyM]

That is how Christianity sees it. In Judaism, we see it as God replacing the human offering with an animal offering…as a way to show that if he would not actually want Abraham to offer HIS son, neither would He ever offer His son, either (if He had one).

Its all a matter of perspective!

God the Father didn’t ‘offer His son’ in the sense of ordering or forcing Jesus to die, as Abraham would’ve done with the unaware, uncomprehending and almost certainly unwilling Isaac.

Jesus voluntarily chose to give up His life, and being human as well as God, had a human will as well as a divine will, in which human will He was always free to say no to the Father.

God actually offered HIMSELF, in the person of Jesus, who perfectly knew, comprehended and accepted the will of God the Father which moreover was His own divine will as well, which is a different thing entirely from the Isaac situation, I think you’ll agree.

 

[inJESUS]

Its pretty obvious. God was only testing Abraham, to see if he would even give back to God the son God allowed him to have, when his wife Sarah was barren.

The key is where God says, “Do not harm the child, FOR NOW I SEE THAT YOU TRULY LOVE ME, SEEING YOU HAVE NOT WITHHELD YOUR ONLY SON FROM ME”.

 

[inJESUS]

as a way to show that if he would not actually want Abraham to offer HIS son, neither would He ever offer His son, either (if He had one).

Its all a matter of perspective!

if God wanted Abraham to sacrifice his son, and did not stop him, would you consider it a wrong command ?

i do not believe that what God wants from humans limit what God will do for humans.

 

[Sepharad]

 

[Sepharad]

if God wanted Abraham to sacrifice his son, and did not stop him, would you consider it a wrong command ?

i do not believe that what God wants from humans limit what God will do for humans.

One of the reasons why God hated the Canaanites was because they sacrificed humans. Human sacrifice was always very abhorrent to the God of Israel…this is also how Jews know He would never ask anyone to sacrifice a human, nor would He sacrifice one.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

G_D asked the high priest to sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins on the day of atonement.

Yet christians would have us believe that without jesus there was no forgiveness of sins.

Did G_D lie when He said that sins would be forgiven on ‘yom kippur’?

Read Hebrews, and Romans.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

One of the reasons why God hated the Canaanites was because they sacrificed humans. Human sacrifice was always very abhorrent to the God of Israel…this is also how Jews know He would never ask anyone to sacrifice a human, nor would He sacrifice one.

aren’t you forgetting the daughter of Jephtha? Judges 11.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Its pretty obvious. God was only testing Abraham, to see if he would even give back to God the son God allowed him to have, when his wife Sarah was barren.

The key is where God says, “Do not harm the child, FOR NOW I SEE THAT YOU TRULY LOVE ME, SEEING YOU HAVE NOT WITHHELD YOUR ONLY SON FROM ME”.

The reason why Abraham used the term, “lamb” was because that was what was usually sacrificed.

The ram was simply the animal caught in the thicket, which God allowed to be there so Abraham would be able to still offer the sacrifice without using his son.

Christians like to see symbolism in there, as being a foreshadowing of Jesus…but its just not there. They like to say, “Just as Abraham offered his only son, God now offers HIS only son”. The thing they forget is, God STOPPED Abraham from sacrificing his son, and requested an animal be substituted.

Yes, it is. Read Isaiah’s Suffering Servant.

 

[Sepharad]

Yes, it is. Read Isaiah’s Suffering Servant.

I have, many times. And I accept the Jewish interpretation of the passage. The suffering servant is not Jesus, it is the people of Israel (the Jewish people.)

If you’d like to read a line-by-line explanation of why this is so, let me know and I’ll post it for you.

This is a brief explanation from a Karaite Jewish point of view (Karaites are Jews who do not accept the oral law, or talmud). Therefore, his arguments come solely from the Bible:

faithstrengthened.org/FSpart1chapter22.html

 

[wmscott]

We Christians have a cretin way at looking at salvation and the forgiveness of sin. It is a mindset and is ingrained culturally that we are the one and onlys bound for heaven. We tend to believe that only a true Christian will receive salvation, all else if false and damned. The question I have is did not the Jewish people have a special covenant with God even after Christ’s sacrifice. Just a thought.

 

[Sepharad]

We Christians have a cretin way at looking at salvation and the forgiveness of sin. It is a mindset and is ingrained culturally that we are the one and onlys bound for heaven. We tend to believe that only a true Christian will receive salvation, all else if false and damned. The question I have is did not the Jewish people have a special covenant with God even after Christ’s sacrifice. Just a thought.

Despite what more traditional Christians might think (who hold to replacement theology), the Covenant with the people of Israel remains in force. God promised us it would never be abolished, and we are promised everlasting salvation: Isaiah 45:17.

 

[wmscott]

Despite what more traditional Christians might think (who hold to replacement theology), the Covenant with the people of Israel remains in force. God promised us it would never be abolished, and we are promised everlasting salvation: Isaiah 45:17.

This is what I thought and I do not have a problem with this. I think there is plenty of room in heaven for both Christians and the Jewish people. Bottom line is that God is the only one who knows who is in and who is out.