How necessary was a blood sacrifice?

[walnutleviosa]

Did God have to prove his love through the crucifixion of Jesus?
Also, why should Jesus have to bear the sins of the world? Are we not to be held accountable for our own deeds and actions?

 

[Warrenton]

God did not have to prove His love through the sacrifice of Christ, He chose to. His love was proved by creation, and the many good things of this world.

The main purpose of the sacrifice of Christ was not to prove divine love, although it does do that. The main purpose of the sacrifice was to redeem mankind.

St. Paul explains this in detail, Christ explains it generally. If you have not read them, read the Gospels. They contain more than half of what you need to know.

As background, because it is easy to understand, read Genesis. Don’t get hung up on the geneologies though, and don’t worry too much who begets whom. Just read the stories themselves, and get a feeling for how the world was made, and how sin entered into it, and how it got progressively worse. You will see how sacrifice fits into the picture - it happens early, with the second generation of humans.

Basically, though, when our first parents sinned, the price was death. Remember what the Lord told Adam and Eve? “Eat not of the fruit, for if you do, you shall surely die.”

They ate, they died - but not only mortal death, spiritual death, just like the fallen angels, except because they repented, the Lord gave them hope and promised Eve that one day, one of her children (meaning descendants) would triumph over Satan.

To modern minds, this seems really harsh. But try to look at it more “scientifically.” If you smash the atoms inside a hydrogen bomb together, it’s going to get really hot, really fast. No one says, “Geez, that’s so unfair!” even if a city happens to be in the way. The explosion is simply what happens when you push certain properties of physics to that point.

The same with sin. In the beginning, people disobeyed God, the very creator of the everything that is. They set of a spiritual nuclear explosion.

Beacause the punishment of all sin is death, blood, “wherein is life” as it says in the Old Testament, was though to be the best thing to offset the guilt of sin. That is why they made sacrifices.

But St. Paul explains that none of those old sacrifices were ever really good enough to cover fully the sins of humankind. At best, they reminded people that God one day would fulfill the promise made to Eve. Only one sacrifice could fulfill: God Himself.

Why? Because God must remain true to his own Word. He said “the price of sin is death.” But who has “enough” life to pay the debt for all the billions of people who ever lived, and ever shall live? Ony God. Who has enough love to continue paying it? Only God. God made flesh, Jesus Christ.

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

On the contrary, It is written (Apocalypse 1:5): “He loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood.”

I answer that, Christ’s Passion is the proper cause of the forgiveness of sins in three ways. First of all, by way of exciting our charity, because, as the Apostle says (Romans 5:8): “God commendeth His charity towards us: because when as yet we were sinners, according to the time, Christ died for us.” But it is by charity that we procure pardon of our sins, according to Luke 7:47: “Many sins are forgiven her because she hath loved much.” Secondly, Christ’s Passion causes forgiveness of sins by way of redemption. For since He is our head, then, by the Passion which He endured from love and obedience, He delivered us as His members from our sins, as by the price of His Passion: in the same way as if a man by the good industry of his hands were to redeem himself from a sin committed with his feet. For, just as the natural body is one though made up of diverse members, so the whole Church, Christ’s mystic body, is reckoned as one person with its head, which is Christ. Thirdly, by way of efficiency, inasmuch as Christ’s flesh, wherein He endured the Passion, is the instrument of the Godhead, so that His sufferings and actions operate with Divine power for expelling sin. ST III, Q. 49, A. 1

CCC 1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.

 

[meltzerboy]

Did God have to prove his love through the crucifixion of Jesus?
Also, why should Jesus have to bear the sins of the world? Are we not to be held accountable for our own deeds and actions?

From the Jewish perspective, we are indeed to be held accountable for our own deeds and actions. Individual atonement is essential, not vicarious atonement. The atonement by the Tzadik (Holy Man) cannot replace personal atonement. Further, the Hebrew Bible strongly discourages human sacrifice. This is why Moses, who wished to atone for the sins of the Jewish people by his own death, was told directly by G-d that this is unacceptable and even reprehensible. Of course, Christianity has a rather different perspective, in that Jesus is accepted as both human and G-d Himself (the second Person of the Trinity). However, both Christians and Jews must agree, I believe, that G-d Himself did not, in fact could not, have actually died on the Cross, for if this is so, then He would not be G-d. Or am I misinterpreting Christian teaching, which is quite possible? Another important point according to Judaism is that the blood of animals sacrificed in the Temple was meant to accompany the principal form of repentance, which was–and still is–prayer. The other two major ways to atone for one’s sins are by means of good deeds in the form of acts of charity and making amends to people whom we have wronged. Incense was also used in ancient times. Finally, Judaism does not believe that we are the products of original sin emanating from the disobedience of Adam and Eve toward G-d. Rather, it believes we are born with the potential for goodness. For Orthodox Jews, focus on studying and practicing Torah morality as best one can is the surest way to avoid sinful thoughts and behavior. But when one does commit transgressions, sincere prayer to G-d is the means of absolution.

 

[A_G]

Firstly, I don’t think we can fully understand the greatness of God so this question is hard to answer. We do know that God is perfect, all merciful, all powerful and all forgiving. He loves us so much that He created us and He gave us free will to choose to sin or reject sin and accept Him. Sin and holiness are opposites of eachother and therefore incompatible. They just can’t go together… so it is sin that keeps us away from God. Think about it…the punishment for sin is eternal death. We cannot enter heaven unless we are “purified.”

Since Jesus is sinless, His death can amend our sins because this is a “perfect, and stainless” sacrifice. We are all born with original sin, so our deaths cannot do this. Only through Jesus Christ can our sins be forgiven, thus restoring our relationship with God. Jesus came to offer the pure, complete and everlasting sacrifice by taking ALL the sins committed by mankind from the WORLD, and dying. His death thus removed, atoned, and eternally payed for our sins.

When we accept Jesus Christ as our savior, go to Mass, recieve the Sacraments and basically do everything He instructed us to do, we are on the path to eternal life. He was perfect, sinless etc… and therefore His death was atonement for our sins. Again, His sacrifice was pure and clean (something we are not capable of being without God) and therefore we receive eternal life though Jesus Christ. This is why Jesus had to die…to save us. All we must do is accept Him. Free will is a gift given to us by God and it is up to us to make to correct choice! And since we are not capable of being what Jesus was (being stainless and clean from all sin His entire life), His sacrifice was very necessary - this allows us to be saved.

 

[Crumpy]

From the Jewish perspective, we are indeed to be held accountable for our own deeds and actions. Individual atonement is essential, not vicarious atonement. The atonement by the Tzadik (Holy Man) cannot replace personal atonement. Further, the Hebrew Bible strongly discourages human sacrifice. This is why Moses, who wished to atone for the sins of the Jewish people by his own death, was told directly by G-d that this is unacceptable and even reprehensible. Of course, Christianity has a rather different perspective, in that Jesus is accepted as both human and G-d Himself (the second Person of the Trinity). However, both Christians and Jews must agree, I believe, that G-d Himself did not, in fact could not, have actually died on the Cross, for if this is so, then He would not be G-d. Or am I misinterpreting Christian teaching, which is quite possible? Another important point according to Judaism is that the blood of animals sacrificed in the Temple was meant to accompany the principal form of repentance, which was–and still is–prayer. The other two major ways to atone for one’s sins are by means of good deeds in the form of acts of charity and making amends to people whom we have wronged. Incense was also used in ancient times. Finally, Judaism does not believe that we are the products of original sin emanating from the disobedience of Adam and Eve toward G-d. Rather, it believes we are born with the potential for goodness. For Orthodox Jews, focus on studying and practicing Torah morality as best one can is the surest way to avoid sinful thoughts and behavior. But when one does commit transgressions, sincere prayer to G-d is the means of absolution.

I appreciate and relish these comments to give us perspective on the Hebrew texts and on the historic beliefs of Judaism. Thank you.

My own reading of various Jewish commentaries (Jewish Publication Society Commentary series on the Torah) rang a bell for me. Somewhere in there it points out how the ritual of blood sacrifices were performed to re-dedicate the altar and the tablernacle that had been violated by personal sin. Something so precious as blood was used to sanctify the horns of the altar and blood was thrown on it.

I seem to recall that blood was sprinkled on the Day of Atonement in the Holy of Holies.

So, the Catholic perspective is that this was a foreshadowing of the final, once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary – the perfect sacrifice.

(Within the pages of the New Testament, we see how Jesus was not “sacrificed” in the manner of a ritual done in the confines of the Temple. The shedding of Jesus’ blood was done violently outside of even the city of Jerusalem. It was done under the pretext of punishment, in the first instance, for violation of Jewish law. But, with respect to Jesus himself, it was a sacrifice, as he said at the “last supper.” His blood was shed to atone for the sins of many. Jesus’ death is a sign of the new covenant in his blood. The theology here is very deep and – beautiful. It’s why I am Catholic.)

(I’m really fuzzy on this. I seem to recall that his Holiness Benedict XVI has given an explanation of how Jesus death on the cross is a fulfillment of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. This would be in his second volume of Jesus of Nazareth. Please correct me if I’m wrong on this. My studying has been very weak for months, but I just got a copy of the Artscroll (Jewish Publications) book on Yom Kippur. And, it starts out with a beautiful insight on how God established teshuvah – repentence – before the world was created.)

please see my next post

 

[Crumpy]

So, how necessary was a blood sacrifice?

The Hebrew scriptures seem to define blood sacrifice as the standard sacrifice for sin.

I totally agree that the Hebrew scriptures teach that human sacrifice is not necessary – but why?

To a Catholic, it is because animal sacrifice or even human sacrifice is not sufficient for redemption. The Hebrews raise that question and insight and conclusion, but only to all-the-more hightlight the unique divine-human sacrifice of Jesus Christ. That was the only “human” sacrifice that WOULD atone for sin.

“God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, so that whosever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life.”

It was necessary TO GOD to do things this way. (This is my own conviction: ) This method of sacrifice shows not only how much God loves mankind, his creation, but shows how much God suffers from our sins.

The death of Jesus was not the “death of God.” God did not die. But, Jesus, in the flesh, did really suffer and die, and rose from the dead. (Which incidentally fulfills so much of the Old Testament prophecy.)

 

[Warrenton]

However, both Christians and Jews must agree, I believe, that G-d Himself did not, in fact could not, have actually died on the Cross, for if this is so, then He would not be G-d. Or am I misinterpreting Christian teaching

You are quite correct, but (orthodox) Christians add an idea that sources in our understanding of the trinitarian nature of God.

After three hours on the cross, Christ, the Son of the Father, and one of the three “persons” of God (a modern synonym might be “aspect,” but this word has a few problems) actually died.

There was, interestingly, a very early heresy that claimed the death of Christ was something like an illusion - an appearance but not an actual death in the human sense. A variation on the heresy taught that Christ’s body was an emanation, and not substantial like ordinary mortals. These theories were expressly condemned, and I am sorry that I cannot recall the name of it for you.

This is not the end of the story under orthodox theology, however. The Father did not (and as you rightly say, cannot) perish, nor does the Holy Ghost (also called the Paraclete) perish. But the human body of the Divine Person - Christ- did suffer actual death, and like (almost) all the souls prior to the incarnation, descended into Hell.

Christ’s body was resurrected, and after 40 days we believe Christ ascended, bodilly, into Heaven, to be reunited with the Father (the formula is “He sits at the right hand of the Father”).

If we think about it, it poses no more difficulty to say “The Son of God died” that it does to say “The Son of God was born.” So far as we observe, whatever is born, dies. The greater theological problem is why, or how, the Father, who is completely outside of nature, could become incarnate. “Blessed be the Lord our God, King of the Universe.” Does the king mingle with the peasants?

Personally, I resolve the the theological conundrum through the understanding of the “sacrifice.” I see the sacrifice of Abraham as a parallel. From Genesis, we know of the more or less total depravity to which humanity had sunk. God wished to raise a holy people, and made a covenant with Abraham. But, there had to be a sacrifice to cover the sin. What could possibly be sufficient for such an incredible, unmerited gift? Only one thing: the people themselves, represented by the first born among them, Isaac.

In His mercy, the Lord commuted the fulfillment of that sacrifice. In orthodox understanding, while comprising the holiest covenant on earth, and creating the holiest people on earth, the Old Law was not sufficient to redeem fully either the Jewish people, or the gentiles at all. A second sacrifice was required, and this the Father provided, just as He had provided the sacrifice for Abraham, who by himself, had no suitable offering. Sarah only bore Isaac because of a miracle.

The sacrifice provided was Jesus Christ, the eternal son of the Father.

So, the sacrifice of Christ was absolutely necessary. But, as some of the posts have observed, it was also an act of love. Creation itself is an act of love, but if we want to examine the “whys” of certain divine acts, I find the concept of sacrifice more helpful.

 

[lowell_mass]

. I believe, that G-d Himself did not, in fact could not, have actually died on the Cross, for if this is so, then He would not be G-d. Or am I misinterpreting Christian teaching, which is quite possible? .

I hope I can help. It comes down to the definition of ‘died’. Sometimes people say die in the sense of ‘ceased to be.’. For God, this is of course impossible. Catholics use the more theological definition of die = separation of physical body from spiritual soul.

When Jesus died, His eternal spiritual soul exited out of His sinless but otherwise normal human body.

 

[meltzerboy]

I appreciate and relish these comments to give us perspective on the Hebrew texts and on the historic beliefs of Judaism. Thank you.

My own reading of various Jewish commentaries (Jewish Publication Society Commentary series on the Torah) rang a bell for me. Somewhere in there it points out how the ritual of blood sacrifices were performed to re-dedicate the altar and the tablernacle that had been violated by personal sin. Something so precious as blood was used to sanctify the horns of the altar and blood was thrown on it.

I seem to recall that blood was sprinkled on the Day of Atonement in the Holy of Holies.

So, the Catholic perspective is that this was a foreshadowing of the final, once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary – the perfect sacrifice.

(Within the pages of the New Testament, we see how Jesus was not “sacrificed” in the manner of a ritual done in the confines of the Temple. The shedding of Jesus’ blood was done violently outside of even the city of Jerusalem. It was done under the pretext of punishment, in the first instance, for violation of Jewish law. But, with respect to Jesus himself, it was a sacrifice, as he said at the “last supper.” His blood was shed to atone for the sins of many. Jesus’ death is a sign of the new covenant in his blood. The theology here is very deep and – beautiful. It’s why I am Catholic.)

(I’m really fuzzy on this. I seem to recall that his Holiness Benedict XVI has given an explanation of how Jesus death on the cross is a fulfillment of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. This would be in his second volume of Jesus of Nazareth. Please correct me if I’m wrong on this. My studying has been very weak for months, but I just got a copy of the Artscroll (Jewish Publications) book on Yom Kippur. And, it starts out with a beautiful insight on how God established teshuvah – repentence – before the world was created.)

please see my next post

Thank you, Crumpy. And I appreciate your insightful and heartfelt comments as well.

 

[meltzerboy]

I hope I can help. It comes down to the definition of ‘died’. Sometimes people say die in the sense of ‘ceased to be.’. For God, this is of course impossible. Catholics use the more theological definition of die = separation of physical body from spiritual soul.

When Jesus died, His eternal spiritual soul exited out of His sinless but otherwise normal human body.

Interesting distinction. Thanks for the explanation, lowell mass.