God's blood demands are monstrous?

[Makerteacher]

I have been asked this question by a friend; what she said was, “Why would you want to worship a God who required a blood sacrifice before He granted forgiveness? What sort of a monster God is that?”

I tried to explain about the balance between His perfect love and mercy, and His perfect justice and righteousness, but I bungled it badly. She ended up shaking her head and rolling her eyes. She attends an extremely liberal Episcopalian church that welcomes same sex couples and has a female minister, etc etc.

I’d greatly appreciate any thoughts from the board members.

This friend, by the way, is steeped in mortal sin and could really use prayers from any who are willing. Let’s call her Barb for the purposes of this prayer request.

 

[Bud_Stewart]

Makerteacher:

I have been asked this question by a friend; what she said was, “Why would you want to worship a God who required a blood sacrifice before He granted forgiveness? What sort of a monster God is that?”

…She ended up shaking her head and rolling her eyes. She attends an extremely liberal Episcopalian church that welcomes same sex couples and has a female minister, etc etc…

I am sorry, but I don’t understand your friends problem. Episcopalians are Christian. Catholics and Episcopalians believe in the same God. What point is she trying to make, I don’t understand. Perhaps your friend is not really a member of the Episcopalian Church that I know, just a thought.

Maybe you can ask her to fully define her position. I think that anyone would have a difficult time answering a question if you don’t understand what it truly being asked.

 

[hawkeye]

We humans can’t enter Heaven with sin on our soul, it would be too painful, so only by the blood of the Lamb of God are we cleansed.
Your friend has a problem with sacrfice, thank God for Jesus .

 

[Minimus]

I am just a forum member, not an apologist. But your friend seems to have a common enough problem, namely, she believes that God’s actions must reflect the motives that we ascribe to Him; that His logic is the same as ours; and that we can obviously discern as well as He the effects of His will. She needs to watch out for her own “hidden premises.”

In addition, God’s acceptace of His Son’s death was His acceptance of His own suffering for the creature He had made, in His image and likeness. The physical death of His Son, like His incarnation, was really the ultimate statement of love–that He would take on as wretched and miserable and humiliating a suffering as any of His beloved creation.

God demanded nothing, but gave everything. He lay down His life for his friend.

 

[thisismyusrname]

Is the blood sacrifice refered to the Old Testament sacrifices or Christ’s sacrifice on the cross?

The Old Testament sacrifices were to externally show God’s justice and the ugliness of sin. I do not think, however, that God would deny forgiveness to someone who was truly repentant of their sin but unable to perform the sacrifice. God is not bound by his own laws which He has made.

 

[Makerteacher]

Let me expound a bit on what my friend has said. She feels that if God were truly loving, He would just save us all, no sacrifice required. She says she is appalled by the Catholic God’s “bloodthirsty nature” revealed in the Old Testament and the Gospels. In her liberal “Christian” church (left wing Episcopalian), she says she worships a God who is more peaceful and benevolent that the “Catholic God”, whom she sees as a disfigured and twisted version of the real God. She claims that “any God who demands the death of His own child is not a God she could serve”. Her Church (or at least her preacher) preaches that all men will be granted Heaven because all of them are born with a “spark of the Divine” in them, and that because of that spark we must all accept and love each other as we are, etc etc.

Her theology allows for no concept of sin, as I understand what she is saying. Lots of good feelings, with no demands made on the parishoners, from what I can see. No one can judge another’s actions. As a result, my arguments against her lesbianism fall pretty flat.

Has anyone ever run up against this theory of a monster God demanding the death of His own child? How do we address this error?

 

[iguana27]

How does this friend explain Christ’s death on the cross? Does she deny that it was divinely ordained? Does she accept that Christ died for the salvation of the world?

 

[fix]

*Her theology allows for no concept of sin, as I understand what she is saying. Lots of good feelings, with no demands made on the parishoners, from what I can see. No one can judge another’s actions. As a result, my arguments against her lesbianism fall pretty flat. *

So, she is a relativist. A pagan. She in essence makes her self a god. She determines what is right or wrong. What would she say about Nazism? There is no sin, so anything goes? Relativists are the most rigid. They can only accept what their feelings tell them, so they never have a reason to change the way the lead their lives.

Catholics believe in an obejective truth. If you can show a Catholic that their behavior conflicts with the truth, they will change.

She can’t accept that God allows sacrifice, because then she may have to accept that sacrifice is part of life and salvation. That would mean she would have to change the way she leads her life.

 

[Ellen_Marie]

Makerteacher:

she says she worships a God who is more peaceful and benevolent that the “Catholic God”, whom she sees as a disfigured and twisted version of the real God.

Sorry to edit your message so much, but this summarizes my question. My question is, why does she worship God at all? I struggle to understand how it is that people make up their own God, or how they believe that their “God” has been revealed to them. My somewhat flippant response has always been that “God created us; we don’t get to create Him.” So, when people don’t believe in the God of the Bible, how do they come to know their god?

Ellen

 

[Charles]

Makerteacher:

She feels that if God were truly loving, He would just save us all, no sacrifice required.

This is not just a profession that goes against Catholic teaching, but most if not all mainstream, evangelical, and fundementalist Christian teachings as well.

In a nutshell you can explain that the kind of love from God she is describing is a love in which God gives us no freedom of Choice (that should shake her up a bit… )

If we’re all just saved, then we’re all just robots.

 

[wisdom_3_5]

“For the wages of sin is death…” Rom 6:23

God hates sin. He can’t stand to be around it, can’t stand to see it etc. He is so Holy that sin is immensely offensive to Him. When Adam & Eve sinned they deserved death, they received a “spiritual death”. When God chose to start revealing Himself to Man there had to be a way for Man to “cover” those sins so prayers could be offered to God.

The Old Testament sacrifices were the only way to “cleanse” a person of their sins, it didn’t save them, just made them “right” with God (salvation comes through Jesus Christ). The person would bring the lamb (goat, bullock etc.) to the priest, lay their hands on the head of the animal while confessing their sins, transferring the sins from the person to the animal. The animal would be slaughtered according to procedure given by God.

Once a year on Yom Kippur the High Priest would go into the “Holy of Holies” (Where the Ark of the Covenant was, God’s residence among men) and pour blood over the ark “covering” the sins of the people.

You can read more about it in the end of Exodus after the 10 commandments chapter. Also Leviticus and Numbers.

 

[wisdom_3_5]

I thought maybe your friend didn’t know the entire reasoning behind the sacrifices so I gave you some background.

Bottom line is the God is HOLY. He told the Hebrews to do this and we try to understand as best we can because our ways are not His ways.

The whole idea of Christianity being “barbaric” shows a basic misunderstanding of who God is.

What God would you rather have, One that is willing to die for you or one that’s a “warm fuzzy”?

 

[dredgtone]

Ellen Marie:

My somewhat flippant response has always been that “God created us; we don’t get to create Him.” So, when people don’t believe in the God of the Bible, how do they come to know their god?

Ellen

Because the Bible is just blatantly wrong and immoral at certain points, nobody should lose sight of that or fool themselves into thinking otherwise. It was written by man (imperfect) and translated by other men (imperfect) and therefore the concept of God should be readjusted to fit the “essence” of the Bible.

 

[yochumjy]

dredgtone:

Because the Bible is just blatantly wrong and immoral at certain points, nobody should lose sight of that or fool themselves into thinking otherwise. It was written by man (imperfect) and translated by other men (imperfect) and therefore the concept of God should be readjusted to fit the “essence” of the Bible.

Maybe you should start a thread and tell us where you “THINK” the Bible is just blatantly wrong. In other threads you say you just don’t believe in God, then you say God should be readjusted to fit the “essence” of the Bible. You should at least try to be consistant.

Not sure why, I’m trying…

John

 

[dredgtone]

The Bible says to kill prostitutes and the bastard children of the prostitutes. Uum, hold on let me get my Bible.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Surely you think it’s wrong to kill gay people.

I’ll stop there I don’t need to go out. I simply wish to point out that the Bible says some bad stuff. The Bible condones slavery, says to kill prostitutes and gay people etc. It shouldn’t be taken literally by any means, i think we should all acknowledge that fact.

 

[diogenes]

Makerteacher:

Her theology allows for no concept of sin, as I understand what she is saying. Lots of good feelings, with no demands made on the parishoners, from what I can see. No one can judge another’s actions. As a result, my arguments against her lesbianism fall pretty flat.

Has anyone ever run up against this theory of a monster God demanding the death of His own child? How do we address this error?

I haven’t run up against that theory, but she sounds heavily influenced by New Age teaching, which generally forbids all talk of sin, and which has infiltrated liberal churches, including the Episcopal and the liberal portions of the Catholic Church. Of course, I don’t know your friend, but the type she reminds me of is anything but nonjudgmental–they judge Christians, they judge people who disapprove of their lifestyles, they judge God. They have a moral point of view, distorted as it is, but they kid themselves that they don’t. Frustrating.

 

[dredgtone]

diogenes:

I haven’t run up against that theory, but she sounds heavily influenced by New Age teaching, which generally forbids all talk of sin, and which has infiltrated liberal churches, including the Episcopal and the liberal portions of the Catholic Church. Of course, I don’t know your friend, but the type she reminds me of is anything but nonjudgmental–they judge Christians, they judge people who disapprove of their lifestyles, they judge God. They have a moral point of view, distorted as it is, but they kid themselves that they don’t. Frustrating.

No i think they’re just not fooling themselves and see things the way they are. Do not be so pious as to believe God wouldn’t be in the wrong if he reached down and slapped you in the face this very instant.

 

[Didi]

“Why would you want to worship a God who required a blood sacrifice before He granted forgiveness? What sort of a monster God is that?”

Back to the original question. I have two comments.

The first is regarding the old testament sacrifices. God demanded these daily sacrifices after the Hebrews rejected Him (again) while waiting for Moses to come down from the mountain by creating and worshiping the golden calf. The animal sacrifices were a reminder that it is God alone we worship, not cows or goats or other animal-like objects. These sacrifices reminded God’s people that it is He alone we worship, by literally killing all other idols.

The second is regarding Jesus’ sacrifice in the New Testament. Jesus endured His Great Passion and Suffering to show us what we must be willing to do for Him and for others “There can be no greater love than to give one’s life for a friend.” Not only did Jesus become the sacrificial victim (Lamb of God) and the Priest offering the sacrifice, **He showed us His great depth of love by His willingness to give HIS ALL, TO EMPTY HIMSELF TOTALLY, for us. ** We are called to do the same.

Mother Teresa told her sisters that each day they needed to “love until it hurts. It hurt Jesus to love us.”

It is easy to tell someone you love them. It is much more difficult to show them and be willing to sacrifice your own wants, needs and desires for those of another. That is true Love. Jesus showed us this great depth of Love He has for us all.

 

[yochumjy]

dredgtone:

The Bible says to kill prostitutes and the bastard children of the prostitutes. Uum, hold on let me get my Bible.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Surely you think it’s wrong to kill gay people.

I’ll stop there I don’t need to go out. I simply wish to point out that the Bible says some bad stuff. The Bible condones slavery, says to kill prostitutes and gay people etc. It shouldn’t be taken literally by any means, i think we should all acknowledge that fact.

Yes, there are things in the old testament that no longer apply. The new covenant supplants the old. Jesus fulfills the old covenant and creates the new and improved covenant. You are also not taking into account that at one time the rules were there to allow God’s people to continue to get to the point where they were ready for Jesus. So, while we consider many of the rules of Leviticus wrong for us in our time, they had some reason at that time (and no, I don’t even pretend to know why, but things were much more uncivilized at that point in time). We have the same issues today, at one point the death penalty had more meaning (protection of society). So, the bible becomes a history of where we came, but just because the covenant is no longer necessary does not mean we need to recreate God in whatever form we decide is necessary. Oh, and to answer your other question, No, I do not think it is right to kill homosexuals… History must be placed in context to be understood. The bible is the same, when taken out of context you get erroneous “understanding”

John

 

[fix]

dredgtone:

The Bible says to kill prostitutes and the bastard children of the prostitutes. Uum, hold on let me get my Bible.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Surely you think it’s wrong to kill gay people.

I’ll stop there I don’t need to go out. I simply wish to point out that the Bible says some bad stuff. The Bible condones slavery, says to kill prostitutes and gay people etc. It shouldn’t be taken literally by any means, i think we should all acknowledge that fact.

Not all slavery is chattel slavery. By “gay” people I assume you mean sodomites? Sodomy is one of the few sins mentioned in scripture that calls out to heaven for justice. It is so serious that God inflicted the death penalty.

Catholics do not interpret the bible literally in every instance, but we interpret it faithfully. Today, we are so self centered and full of ourselves that we forget that God made us. His ways are not our ways. Your words sound to me as if you want to be a god yourself. You want to be your own master. You want to decide right and wrong as it pleases you.

It is funny you said the bible says some “bad stuff”. You mean like hell? Why is it bad? Too negative for you? The truth is a sword, it divides. The truths of salvation are revealed to us so we may benefit from the knowledge.