Redemption vs Atonement

  • Thread starter Thread starter xavierakx
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
X

xavierakx

Guest
I’m faced with this question : Why Jesus had to come to earth, if Jews could obtain forgiveness for their sins through the sacrifice of lamb ?

What I think is the answer, is the difference between atonement and redemption.

Atonement - The act by which one’s sins are forgiven and he is cleansed from all its stains. Found in almost every religion, including heathen religions.

Redemption - The very plan of God the Father to redeem the entire mankind, for the sin that entered the world through the disobedience of one man.

Please correct me if I’m wrong.
 
xavierakx said:
I’m faced with this question : Why Jesus had to come to earth, if Jews could obtain forgiveness for their sins through the sacrifice of lamb ?

What I think is the answer, is the difference between atonement and redemption.

Atonement - The act by which one’s sins are forgiven and he is cleansed from all its stains. Found in almost every religion, including heathen religions.

Redemption - The very plan of God the Father to redeem the entire mankind, for the sin that entered the world through the disobedience of one man.

Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Click to expand...
Modern Catholic Dictionary:

REDEMPTION. The salvation of humanity by Jesus Christ. Literally, to redeem means to free or buy back. Humanity was held captive in that it was enslaved by sin. Since the devil overcame human beings by inducing them to sin, they were said to be in bondage to the devil. Moreover, the human race was held captive as to a debt of punishment, to the payment of which it was bound by divine justice.

On all these counts, the Passion of Christ was sufficient and superabundant satisfaction for human guilt and the consequent debt of punishment. His Passion was a kind of price or ransom that paid the cost of freeing humanity from both obligations. Christ rendered satisfaction, not by giving money, but by spending what was of the highest value. He gave himself, and therefore his Passion is called humanity’s Redemption. (Etym. Latin redemptio, a buying back, ransoming, redemption.)

ATONEMENT. The satisfaction of a legitimate demand. In a more restricted sense it is the reparation of an offense. This occurs through a voluntary performance that outweighs the injustice done. If the performance fully counterbalances the gravity of the guilt, the atonement is adequate. And if the atonement is done by someone other than the actual offender, but in his stead, it is vicarious.

Applied to Christ the Redeemer, through his suffering and death he rendered vicarious atonement to God for the sins of the whole human race. His atonement is fully adequate because it was performed by a divine person. In fact, it is superabundant because the positive value of Christ’s expiation is actually greater than the negative value of human sin. (Etym. Middle English at one, to set at one, to reconcile; of one mind, in accord.)
 
The coming of Jesus was foretold from the beginning. Gen 3:15
 
Because an animal’s death can’t forgive anyone of any sins. Only God can forgive sins. The Jews never were forgiven through animal sacrifice; it was merely a type of Christ who was to come. Animal sacrifice, whether in the Temple for Jews or in Mecca for Mohammedans, doesn’t atone nor redeem anyone.

If it was efficacious, why did tens of thousands of animals have to be sacrificed constantly? And why did God’s anger always eventually come down? If the sins were forgiven, then God would not have been angered, as, sins that are forgiven can’t offend God; that’s forgiveness. No matter how many goats and sheep died, the people still went astray repeatedly and evoked the wrath of God.

The rulers touched the animals and believed it transferred their sins in to the animal: it doesn’t work like that. And animals are lesser than Man, not greater, nor equal. But, without the sacrifices, would anyone have even understood the concept of the Cross and Resurrection? Unlikely. Thus the sacrifices were instituted to foreshadow an efficacious sacrifice.
 
Khalid said:
The rulers touched the animals and believed it transferred their sins in to the animal: it doesn’t work like that. And animals are lesser than Man, not greater, nor equal. But, without the sacrifices, would anyone have even understood the concept of the Cross and Resurrection? Unlikely. Thus the sacrifices were instituted to foreshadow an efficacious sacrifice.
Click to expand...
Hmm. I would not be quite so stark on this point, because God TOLD them to carry out the Temple sacrifices and TOLD them their sins would be forgiven by their obedience to these instructions. I would not want to conclude that He was somehow deceiving them in those commandments.

BUT - I think that the Temple sacrifices were only efficacious BECAUSE they foreshadowed and, in a limited way, made present the Sacrifice of the Cross.
 
Would you consider responding to a thread I started on “Muslim to Christian”? I assume you converted from Islam to Christian.
Khalid said:
Because an animal’s death can’t forgive anyone of any sins. Only God can forgive sins. The Jews never were forgiven through animal sacrifice; it was merely a type of Christ who was to come. Animal sacrifice, whether in the Temple for Jews or in Mecca for Mohammedans, doesn’t atone nor redeem anyone.

If it was efficacious, why did tens of thousands of animals have to be sacrificed constantly? And why did God’s anger always eventually come down? If the sins were forgiven, then God would not have been angered, as, sins that are forgiven can’t offend God; that’s forgiveness. No matter how many goats and sheep died, the people still went astray repeatedly and evoked the wrath of God.

The rulers touched the animals and believed it transferred their sins in to the animal: it doesn’t work like that. And animals are lesser than Man, not greater, nor equal. But, without the sacrifices, would anyone have even understood the concept of the Cross and Resurrection? Unlikely. Thus the sacrifices were instituted to foreshadow an efficacious sacrifice.
Click to expand...
 
xavierakx said:
I’m faced with this question : Why Jesus had to come to earth, if Jews could obtain forgiveness for their sins through the sacrifice of lamb ?

What I think is the answer, is the difference between atonement and redemption.

Atonement - The act by which one’s sins are forgiven and he is cleansed from all its stains. Found in almost every religion, including heathen religions.

Redemption - The very plan of God the Father to redeem the entire mankind, for the sin that entered the world through the disobedience of one man.

Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Click to expand...
One thing should be made clear. The MAIN means of atonement in Judaism from the beginning consisted of three forms: sincere prayer to G-d promising to transform one’s sinful behavior to morally correct behavior, charity toward others in the form of good deeds, and redressing the wrongs one has done to others by directly asking their forgiveness and making amends. Animal sacrifice by means of the shedding of blood was a MINOR means of atonement meant to accompany prayer. So were incense offerings. Further, Judaism does not believe in vicarious atonement; IOW each individual must personally ask G-d for forgiveness, if they are able to do so. Least of all, human sacrifice for the purpose of atonement is forbidden according to Judaism, as indicated several times in the Torah. Moses had wanted to offer himself to G-d to atone for the sins of the Jewish people; but G-d strongly deterred him from performing this act. The redemption by means of Jesus’ suffering and death is considered the sacrifice of G-d Incarnate despite the fact G-d Himself cannot die; however, I would assume this act is not regarded in Christianity as simply a human sacrifice in the ordinary sense. Nonetheless, the act of redemption is a vicarious atonement, with which Judaism does not agree. Indeed, the whole idea that humanity must be “saved” from original sin is foreign to Judaism, as it is to Islam, I believe, for there is no concept of original sin in either religion. And the concept of Satan as a fallen angel is also not found in the Hebrew Bible. Jewish teaching regards Satan as a messenger from G-d who is sent to Earth to tempt and test mankind and its free will, but hopes it will not yield to his temptation. The notion of Satan as the evil devil is a Christian invention, adopted as well by Islam. Or perhaps there are pre-Christian origins. A question for another thread!
 
So lets see that G-d sent Satan to temp us to leave G-d’s blessing is, that what you meant? Or that G-d created Satan to fight the mortals and turn them away from G-d.
Satan doesn’t exist except in our own souls and how we live. We manufacture Satan everytime we go against the will of G-d. Satan does’nt exist without human acknowlegement.

g-
 
  1. In Judaism and Islam, Adam and Eve were created in Eden/Paradise.
  2. Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden for sinning.
  3. The world contains suffering, and Eden/Paradise didn’t.
  4. We’re living in the world and suffering, not in Eden/Paradise and not.
  5. Therefore, We are paying for Adam and Eve’s sin, whether your religious tradition teaches so or not.
  6. Therefore, If we were not paying for Adam and Eve’s sin, we’d be living without suffering in Eden/Paradise.
 
Khalid said:
  1. In Judaism and Islam, Adam and Eve were created in Eden/Paradise.
  2. Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden for sinning.
  3. The world contains suffering, and Eden/Paradise didn’t.
  4. We’re living in the world and suffering, not in Eden/Paradise and not.
  5. Therefore, We are paying for Adam and Eve’s sin, whether your religious tradition teaches so or not.
  6. Therefore, If we were not paying for Adam and Eve’s sin, we’d be living without suffering in Eden/Paradise.
Click to expand...
However, “whether your religious tradition teaches so or not” is the key phrase in your succinct analysis. Of course you may disagree with other religious traditions, but this statement is a bit too dismissive in my opinion. To outline the Jewish perspective on this issue would take too much time and space on the current thread, but I just wanted to respectfully point this out.
 
rdscheirer said:
So lets see that G-d sent Satan to temp us to leave G-d’s blessing is, that what you meant? Or that G-d created Satan to fight the mortals and turn them away from G-d.
Satan doesn’t exist except in our own souls and how we live. We manufacture Satan everytime we go against the will of G-d. Satan does’nt exist without human acknowlegement.

Judaism is divided (nothing new here) on the issue of Satan’s existence. One of the reasons why some Torah Jews do not believe in the actual existence of Satan is the idea that there might be a force so powerful as to rival G-d Himself, even though he was created by G-d and does G-d’s bidding, is unacceptable. But for those who do believe in his existence, he was certainly NOT created to turn us away from G-d, but rather to make our faith stronger by means of putting it to the test. In a sense, Satan does the “dirty work.” He is also considered the Angel of Death and the accuser who forces us after our death to defend ourselves in G-d’s Presence. He is also thought to execute G-d’s Judgment (or rather Sentence, since it may be, according to certain Jewish thought, that we judge ourselves).

g-
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top