Why/how exactly did the shedding of the blood of animals and Jesus cover sin?

[ericc]

God’s priests did not sacrifice Jesus, nor torture him. and God did not require any payment for sin, (for missing the mark of true justice)…

How can you say that? The High Priest and his gang plotted and set Jesus up, couldn’t get a guilty verdict themselves, so they harassed Pilate to have him killed by crucifixion, the most terrifying way to die of those times. They literally borrowed Caesar’s sword to kill Jesus. And they would have done it themselves if the Romans didn’t have a law prohibiting the Jews from carrying out capital punishment. But even that law didn’t prevent them from plotting to kill Paul Acts 23:12-15. The Mosaic law requires witnesses to condemn a person to death and yet they were disregarding the law explicitly. The High Priest could not get evidence to condemn them. So they chose alternative methods to get what they want.

The enemies of God killed Jesus, not a religious ritual established by God.

These tie in with the “Scapegoat Theory” I mentioned in my previous post. Although this may do away with the God’s wrath theory, it doesn’t explain how this managed to redeem all mankind via a crime perpetuated by evil people. Why is a ransom paid and to who was it paid to? If the ransom was Jesus death to be paid to Satan, this part was not alluded to in the OT at all. The Satan in the OT was depicted very differently from that of the NT and we don’t see him demanding Jesus death in order for God to redeem Mankind. I suspect the word ransom in the NT is used loosely for something else (I haven’t figure out that yet) , but not as payment to Satan. And it is not a ransom paid to God because the Father and Son are one. All the Father has have been given to the Son.

The Good Father does not delight in seeing his Son suffer, who not too long ago said in front of so many witnesses that he was well pleased. (Transfiguration). No father will be pleased to see their only son being tortured and killed so as to appease their own anger at someone else.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Just some thoughts…

Did God have a complete plan for the creation of the universe and life? Did he think ahead? Were Christ’s life, death and resurrection planned before the creation of the universe began?
To search for a deeper meaning, was Christ freely given the choice to accept his sacrifice before the creation of the universe began?
Would it mean that the Father had a purpose for man so great, that creation could not be achieved in any lesser way?
What purpose can be so great, that it would compel God to create the universe and life, knowing in advance that his son would die?
Would it be to forgive the sins of mankind, or can there be something greater?

If we are to be created as children of God, and it was always God’s plan that he would love each and everyone of us as he loves himself. How would he plan to show his love? How would we understand how big God’s love for us is?

 

[PJM]

Having a bit of trouble understanding the concept.

[1] The shedding of BLOOD is seen as essential in the OT for a valid SACRIFICE

[2] Because GOD is the Creator of all and everything; He is able and Justified in setting the RULES for what HE is willing to accept.

So the sacrifices that GOD required were largely metaphorical in that they were symbolic of [1] GOD"S Presence and Sovereign RIGHT to dictate to them [2] Were signs of humble OBEDIENCE, which is what GOD sought.

[3] None of the sacrifices though were truly sufficient to override the sins of the person or the Nation [if they would have been then it would not have been deemed NECESSARY for the Incarnation, Passion Death and Resurrection of Christ], some other “Sacrifice” could and would have been sufficient. … The sins were in a sense “covered over”, rather than being forgiven in the sense of a Sacramental NT Confession [John 20:19-23]. YET this was deemed as “sufficient” [acceptable] for a people still “UNDER THE LAW” [before grace].

Matthew 13:12
For he that hath, to him shall be given, and he shall abound: but he that hath not, from him shall be taken away that also which he hath.

Then and NOW, God meets man where we are, and take us if we permit Him too, a closer union with Him. Amen!

 

[fisherman_carl]

Having a bit of trouble understanding the concept.

I think it was sacrifice/punishment/appeasement/demonstration or love/worship? The gods of the pagans required sacrifices to be appeased or a form of worship. Yet, the gods of the pagans did not even exist. So, who really required them? Did God require such a thing? Or was it more for our benefit? I think it was obviously for our benefit. A guilt offering for our sin. A guilty man makes his offering to forgive his sin, to relieve him of his guilt or appease a wrathful god. Yet, Scripture says the blood of bulls and goats could never wash away our sins.

“For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.” Hebrews 10:4

Animal sacrifice was therefore a temporary measure, an imperfect system. And, in fact many Scripture scholars see it as a punishment, because the whole Levite system of priests and sacrifices did not start until after the Israelites had sinned against God by making a golden calf idol. It was then that God commanded them to kill the very thing that they were worshiping because it was a punishment to get them away from idols. The Egyptians worshiped these things where they had come from.

"“The multitude of your sacrifices-- what are they to me?” says the LORD. “I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.” (Isaiah 11:1)

So, why did Jesus Sacrifice himself on the Cross? We have to allow for some mystery to it, but Thomas Aquinas gives us 5 good reasons:

"I answer that, Among means to an end that one is the more suitable whereby the various concurring means employed are themselves helpful to such end. But in this that man was delivered by Christ’s Passion, many other things besides deliverance from sin concurred for man’s salvation.

In the first place, man knows thereby how much God loves him, and is thereby stirred to love Him in return, and herein lies the perfection of human salvation; hence the Apostle says (Romans 5:8): “God commendeth His charity towards us; for when as yet we were sinners . . . Christ died for us.”

Secondly, because thereby He set us an example of obedience, humility, constancy, justice, and the other virtues displayed in the Passion, which are requisite for man’s salvation. Hence it is written (1 Peter 2:21): “Christ also suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow in His steps.”

Thirdly, because Christ by His Passion not only delivered man from sin, but also merited justifying grace for him and the glory of bliss, as shall be shown later (III:48:1; III:49:1 and III:49:5).

Fourthly, because by this man is all the more bound to refrain from sin, according to 1 Corinthians 6:20: “You are bought with a great price: glorify and bear God in your body.”

Fifthly, because it redounded to man’s greater dignity, that as man was overcome and deceived by the devil, so also it should be a man that should overthrow the devil; and as man deserved death, so a man by dying should vanquish death. Hence it is written (1 Corinthians 15:57): “Thanks be to God who hath given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

It was accordingly more fitting that we should be delivered by Christ’s Passion than simply by God’s good-will. "
newadvent.org/summa/4046.htm#article3

 

[petra22]

So, why did Jesus Sacrifice himself on the Cross? We have to allow for some mystery to it, but Thomas Aquinas gives us 5 good reasons:

"I answer that, Among means to an end that one is the more suitable whereby the various concurring means employed are themselves helpful to such end. But in this that man was delivered by Christ’s Passion, many other things besides deliverance from sin concurred for man’s salvation.

In the first place, man knows thereby how much God loves him, and is thereby stirred to love Him in return, and herein lies the perfection of human salvation; hence the Apostle says (Romans 5:8): “God commendeth His charity towards us; for when as yet we were sinners . . . Christ died for us.”

Secondly, because thereby He set us an example of obedience, humility, constancy, justice, and the other virtues displayed in the Passion, which are requisite for man’s salvation. Hence it is written (1 Peter 2:21): “Christ also suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow in His steps.”

Thirdly, because Christ by His Passion not only delivered man from sin, but also merited justifying grace for him and the glory of bliss, as shall be shown later (III:48:1; III:49:1 and III:49:5).

Fourthly, because by this man is all the more bound to refrain from sin, according to 1 Corinthians 6:20: “You are bought with a great price: glorify and bear God in your body.”

Fifthly, because it redounded to man’s greater dignity, that as man was overcome and deceived by the devil, so also it should be a man that should overthrow the devil; and as man deserved death, so a man by dying should vanquish death. Hence it is written (1 Corinthians 15:57): “Thanks be to God who hath given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

It was accordingly more fitting that we should be delivered by Christ’s Passion than simply by God’s good-will. "
newadvent.org/summa/4046.htm#article3

All of your post was great, fishermancarl, but this part was soothing to the savage beast…!!! Thank you! It holds a lot of answers…

 

[Chesster]

At the moment, I am still stuck with the words of “Jesus died to save us from our sins”. “He bore the sins of the whole world.” Such a basic fact of Christianity and yet I am so block headed to comprehend it. Perhaps I wasn’t paying attention in catechism class.

“Jesus died to save us from our sins” means that He was the atonement - the sin offering.

“He bore the sins of the whole world” means that He bore the burden of expiating our sins.

How did his death actually do that? The world still sin. We still get punished upon death/Judgement. So what does “save us from our sins” really mean? I don’t think it refers to Original Sin either. Add to it is that his death redeemed us all but not all are saved. How did his death redeemed us all? Who was paid off and how did the debt originated? How to put all these together so that all of it makes sense?

Someone please help.

The key to the Atonement is the concept of sacrifice. If you can understand how sacrifice atones for sin, then you can understand how Jesus’ sacrifice atones for sin. Sacrifice has several purposes, to make a gift to God or to repair an offense or to achieve covenant with God. What is given is the victim’s life. That’s why the OT points out, in the context of sacrifice, that “the life is in the blood,” and it is the victim’s blood (life) that is primarily offered to God not death per se. Death is the consequence of pouring out the victim’s blood. Once given to God, the blood becomes holy and can then sanctify whatever it comes in contact with.

The Mosaic Covenant was inaugurated by such a sacrifice. Recall the scene in Genesis chapter 24 where Moses took the blood and sprinkled it over the people, saying, ‘This is the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you.’ This episode is also echoed in Hebrews chapter 9.

The Atonement is therefore effected by our sacramental union with the body and blood of Christ and, through them, we are incorporation into the new covenant. This occurs through baptism, by which we are washed in Christ’s blood when we are washed in the water.
Redemption is another facet of Christ’s sacrifice but what are we redeemed from? We are redeemed from sin, death and the Devil. You can say that a ‘ransom’ was paid to them if that helps you to understand the atonement but it is not necessary to identify a payee. Scripture doesn’t so we don’t have to.

 

[petra22]

“Why/how exactly did the shedding of the blood of animals and Jesus cover sin?”

It is disheartening to read all the many above attempts to rationalize, justify, or excuse the barbaric practice of sacrificing living things by making their blood flow. Not one person seems willing to say just how ridiculously barbaric the whole concept is. Instead we get the standard memorized Catholic reasons, none of which make any real sense. This entire discussion could have been written by a group of Aztec or Inca priests trying to justify their actions sacrificing people to please their gods.

It’s hard for us realize that there is a world out there that is struggling just to survive. Bombs hitting buildings, men and women and children being blown to smitherines… Remember the days when men had to go find food for the family and they had to kill it and bring it back for dinner? then the women prepared it for the family and then they did the same thing the next day? golly those were tough times and the people were in touch with the land and the Lord. Now days we go to a sterile grocery store and purchase canned goods or fresh fruit and vegetables…

It’s called history. The devil wants us to believe there is no such thing as the “devil” or it’s ridiculous that someone needed to die to make people believe that this life is not all there is. there is ETERNAL life. Follow Jesus and you will see… but you have to die first. Because of “our unbelief” Jesus had to die.

 

[Athanasiy]

The Old Testament practise had to explain a deep sense-
The lamb did not commit sin- I have sinned!
The lamb does not deserve punishment- i deserved punishment. The lamb sacrifice was for me , because of me, instead оf me, for the sake of me…

 

[kkollwitz]

God provided Abraham with an acceptable offering in lieu of his son.