Jewish sacrifice and Jesus

[rightofcenter77]

I was reading more about the Korban or Jewish temple sacrifice. I was curious about what it looked like procedurally. It seems Wikipedia and other websites claim that the sacrifices at the temple were NOT mainly for the forgiveness of sin. This seems to be a direct contradiction to Hebrews 9:22. This is certainly a contradiction to our belief as Jesus being the perfect sacrifice for forgiveness of sin.

Is there any truth to this? Or is this a rewrite of history in an attempt to refute Christianity?

 

[joeybaggz]

Think you need some posters with solid understanding of Jewish Law and Practice to answer this. I suggest you vet responses with a question as to the posters qualifications to speak to such topics.
Good luck. Will be interesting to see the responses.

 

[meltzerboy2]

According to what I read and was taught, the Temple sacrifices were meant to atone for unintentional sins, whereas intentional sins could be atoned for only by means of seeking repentance toward the injured party. However, the Temple sacrifices in themselves could not absolve ANY sin if there was not sincere repentance on the part of the individual. Prayers and good deeds were the main way of absolving sin in ancient Judaism, while the shedding of animals’ blood was supplemental to them. (Flour was a sufficient substitute especially for those poorer Jews who could not travel to the Temple.) It says so right in the Hebrew Bible. Even today, ritual atonement during Yom Kippur, accompanied by fasting and self-denial of all physical pleasures, is regarded as “hollow” if there is no sincere prayer to G-d for sins of commission and omission, particularly those done inadvertently, as well as repentance toward others for our wrongdoing.

 

[Vico]

I was reading more about the Korban or Jewish temple sacrifice. I was curious about what it looked like procedurally. It seems Wikipedia and other websites claim that the sacrifices at the temple were NOT mainly for the forgiveness of sin. This seems to be a direct contradiction to Hebrews 9:22. This is certainly a contradiction to our belief as Jesus being the perfect sacrifice for forgiveness of sin.

Is there any truth to this? Or is this a rewrite of history in an attempt to refute Christianity?

Cleansing and remission is the action in Hebrews.

Hebrews 9:22

And almost all things, according to the law, are cleansed with blood: and without shedding of blood there is no remission.

Judiasm 101: http://www.jewfaq.org/qorbanot.htm has:

The atoning aspect of qorbanot is limited. For the most part, qorbanot only expiate unintentional sins, that is, sins committed because a person forgot that this thing was a sin. No atonement is needed for violations committed under duress or through lack of knowledge, and for the most part, qorbanot cannot atone for a malicious, deliberate sin. In addition, qorbanot have no expiating effect unless the person making the offering sincerely repents his or her actions before making the offering, and makes restitution to any person who was harmed by the violation.

 

[Kei]

It is not the death so much as the giving up of your possessions to the Most High. You kill the animal, then you can’t just take it, but offer it up for your sins.

Hence flour and stuff was fine, you’re giving something up.

Jesus gave His life, sinlessly, living in full, and was infinitely meritorious for us.

 

[joeybaggz]

According to what I read and was taught, the Temple sacrifices were meant to atone for unintentional sins, whereas intentional sins could be atoned for only by means of seeking repentance toward the injured party. However, the Temple sacrifices in themselves could not absolve ANY sin if there was not sincere repentance on the part of the individual. Prayers and good deeds were the main way of absolving sin in ancient Judaism, while the shedding of animals’ blood was supplemental to them. (Flour was a sufficient substitute especially for those poorer Jews who could not travel to the Temple.) It says so right in the Hebrew Bible. Even today, ritual atonement during Yom Kippur, accompanied by fasting and self-denial of all physical pleasures, is regarded as “hollow” if there is no sincere prayer to G-d for sins of commission and omission, particularly those done inadvertently, as well as repentance toward others for our wrongdoing.

I have thanked you before for your posts. Seems every time you post some detail about ancient and not so ancient Jewish Law and Tradition, I find something “new” in our Catholic traditions; “new” in the sense that I gain a newer understanding of the genesis of so much of my Catholic worship. Again thanks, and if you run into a troll, please just ignore him or her. I’ve seen a couple responses to you that I thought were out of place.
Shalom

 

[rightofcenter77]

Can you shed some light on how this enhances your faith? Is it because it proves the Old Testament sacrifices weren’t nearly enough to atone for all sin?

That’s what I think I’m getting from this. At first, I was bothered because it seemed to be leading to the conclusion that sacrifice wasn’t as important as our understanding of it.

Now, I’m starting to believe that Jesus being the perfect sacrifice is even more powerful as no other sacrifice could come close to the atonement Jesus offers.

 

[meltzerboy2]

Joeybaggz, you’re too kind, but much appreciated. I will also follow your advice.