# Sin and atonement



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 14, 2006)

Ok, after unintentionally hijacking Mrs. B's thread (sorry Mrs. B!!!    ) I thought I would go ahead and open a new one to discuss sin and atonement.

I'd like to start by making a 'disclaimer' of sorts... I am not intending to change anyone's beliefs nor is anything I post with the intent of discrediting or downgrading any religion. I am interested in a discussion involving the facts from the Bible, nothing more.  I have an open mind and only request that all proofs for validation come from the bible (Old Testament), as that is my catalyst for everything I trust.  I do not take it personally if anyone disagrees with my views or not.  I love all of y'all and believe that no matter what your faith, there is a place in the afterlife for everyone (ie: heaven, if you will).

So... there was a statement made in the other thread that 'without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.'  I asked where this rule was stated in the bible, and since it is being said that it was a part of the Law, the rule would have to come from the Law, which would be the Old Testament, not the New.  It was also stated that the sacrifices only pushed away the guilt from sin for one year. I am also wondering where this verse/information is also.  Anyone have any answers? 

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## Foxfire (Feb 15, 2006)

Go to www.wels.net.  Click on the question and answer section.  There you can ask your questions and receive answers.

Foxfire/Y2KZ71


----------



## Spotlite (Feb 15, 2006)

Kerri, we  must have posted at the same time, look at my thread and see if it helps


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*Law and sacrifice explained...Pt1*

*(Kerri,  FYI... in answer to your question, and to those also searching.  
A lot went into this, and I may need to split this up into a few parts.  It was also necessary to add the New Testament parallel verses with discussion for answer helps to this post.  God bless you and all who read these.)
~Glenn*

The Covenants, Laws and Sacrifices

God made a covenant with Adam giving him and his offspring dominion over the earth and all the living creatures on it and free access to the tree of life (*Gen 1:26-29; 2:8-9,15-17*).

Adam's part of the agreement was to "multiply and fill the earth" and "to dress and keep it" and rule over all that God had created on the earth as God would instruct and guide him (Gen 1:28; 2:15; Psa 8:6-8). And he was free to eat of "every herb bearing seed...and every tree whose fruit yields seed," but he was forbidden from eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for that would surely cause his death (Gen 1:29; 2:16-17). 

God created man (male and female - Gen 1:27) to be the children of God to inherit all things - the whole universe and more (Psa 8:3-9; 1 Cor 6:2-3; Heb 2:6-8). God prepared the earth as the training ground for His children in preparation for the Kingdom of God. But man must first learn the laws of the Kingdom of God and develop godly character before he can be given power as sons of God to rule over the universe. No evil or sin will be allowed to enter the Kingdom of God. 

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers (abusive speaking), nor extortioners will inherit the Kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9-11; also Rev 21:7-8).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God and sinned they brought on themselves the curse of death and were expelled from the Garden of God's pleasure (Eden) (Gen 3:6,22-24; Gal 3:10-13). God then offered the first animal sacrifice and made clothes of the skin and clothed them (Gen 3:21). Later Abel brought offerings 

"of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and his offering" (Gen 4:4).
But most all of mankind continued in evil and brought on themselves destruction by a worldwide flood, except for Noah and his family (Gen 6). 

After surviving the flood that destroyed the rest of mankind, 
_"Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every clean beast and every clean fowl and offered burnt offerings on the altar. 
"And the Lord smelled a sweet savor. and the Lord said in His heart, I will never again curse the ground any more [on account of man], for the imagination _("yetser" meaning forming of thoughts, plans, purposes) _of man's heart is evil_ ("ra" meaning inferior, evil, wrong, mischievous, injurious, causing unhappiness, morally deficient, unable to come up to good standards) _from his youth"_ with the promise that He would not again smite every living thing as He had done.(Gen 8:20-22). 
And God renewed His covenant with Noah and set the rainbow to be for the sign of His covenant. 
_"And I will remember My covenant which is between Me and you and every living creature..." _(Gen 9:1-17).
Ten generations later God called and made a covenant with Abraham promising national greatness and that the Savior, first promised to Adam and Eve (Gen 3:15), would come from his offspring if he would obey (Gen. 12:1-3; 15:1-21; 17:1-19,21). Abraham offered sacrifices as God instructed and when God said to him, 

_"Take now your son, your [beloved] Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you," _
he obeyed. When God saw his trust and obedience to Him, the angel of the Lord said to him, 
_"Lay not your hand upon the lad, neither do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your [beloved] from Me" _(Gen 15:7-18; 22:1-14). 
Because of his faith and obedience God confirmed His covenant with him (*Gen 26:1-5*; Gal 3:17-18; Jam 2:21-24). God then continued His covenant through Abraham's seed Isaac and Jacob (Israel). 
But Abraham's descendants become enslaved in Egypt. God delivered them from their bondage and established His covenant with Israel through Moses (*Ex 19:3-8*). God then came down on Mt. Sinai and gave Israel the ten commandments and laws of His covenant which Moses recorded into the first five books of the Old Testament, known as The Law (Heb. "torah" *Deut. 31:24*).

The commandments, statutes and judgments given to the early patriarchs (*Gen 6:9,12; 18:19; 22:18: 26:5*) and to Israel in the covenant at Horeb (Mt Sinai) (*Ex 19-24, 34; Deut 4:8,13-14; 5:22; 6:1-3: 12:1*) are God's laws of righteousness - the laws of the Kingdom of God (*Deut 4:8; Ps 19:9; 119 7,62,172*; Rom 2:26; 8:4; 9:31; 10:4; Mat 5,6,7). 

After the 40 years in the wilderness God renewed the covenant with the next generation of children of Israel "in the land of Moab, besides the covenant which He made with them in Horeb" 40 years earlier (*Deut 29:1-6,9-15*). But after receiving God's promised blessings, Israel did not keep God's covenant and eventually went into captivity as God had forewarned them (*Deut 28:15,41; Jer 31:32*; Heb 8:9).

Centuries later, the prophesied Mesiah, Jesus Christ, established the New Covenant with His disciples as recorded in the New Testament (Lk 22:20; Heb 10:12-18). 

_"This is the covenant I will make with them in those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,
"Then He adds, 'Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more'"_ (Heb 10:16-17). He ratified the new covenant with His blood (Lk 22:20; Heb 9:11-15). 
Was God's law of righteousness done away by the new covenant? God said, 

_"my righteousness shall not be abolished...but my righteousness shall be forever"_ (*Isa 51:6,8*). 
Paul wrote, _"Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid: Yea, we establish (confirm) the law"_ (Rom 3:31). 
_"Behold, the days come...that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers...which...they brake...But this shall be the covenant that I will make...After those days...I will put my law in their inward parts, and write them in their hearts" _(*Jer 31:31-33*; Heb 8:10).

But didn't Jesus do away with or abolish the law (Eph 2:15)? Ephesians 2:15 does not say He abolished the law, but rather He "katargeo" meaning put down in His flesh the enmity or hatred to the law as an example for us (1 Pet 2:21). The carnal mind is enmity against the law of God (Rom 8:7). He said, 

_"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. 
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled"_ (Mat 5:17-18).
In the NT, the Greek word for law, "nomos," sometimes refers to the books of the law, or as the Law of Moses (Luke 24:27,44; John 7:22-23; Gen 17:11; Acts 13:39; 15:5; II Cor 3:15; Gal 3:10). In other places, *the law of Moses refers more specificially to the laws of the old covenant *(*Mal 4:4*; John 1:17; 7:19 I Cor 9:9; Heb 10:28). In some cases the context refers to the works of the sacrificial laws (Acts 13:39; Heb 10:1), *added as a written sacrificial code to the old covenant because of transgressions of Israel in the wilderness *(*Deut 29:1; 27:1-26; 28:1-68; 29:1-15; Lev 1:1; 4:1-4...*).

Sacrifices Added 
*Sin has cut man off from God and from the tree of life *(Gen 2:17; 2:22-24; Ps 66:18; Isa 59:2). *The Tree of Life is symbolic of the Spirit and Truth of God's Word *(John 6:63). 

*Sacrifices have been made since the time Adam and Eve sinned - as a physical reminder that the consequence of sin is death *(*Eze. 18:4*; Heb 10:3-4) *and of the atonement Christ would make to redeem us from death *(Rom 5:11). 

*God made the first sacrifice *to cover their nakednesss. Later Abel brought an offering of the firstlings of his flock (*Gen 3:21; 4:3-5*). Sacrifices were also given by Noah for thanksgiving unto God (Gen 8:20-21). 

The laws regarding sacrifices were added to the old covenant with Israel because of transgressions (Gal 3:19). Man beginning from Adam's time perverted and corrupted everything that God had given, and also perverted the use of sacrifices (Deut 12:31-32; Psa 106:37), _"for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods."_ God therefore had to codify laws for sacrifices and gave warning, 

_"What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it"_ (Deut 12:32; Rev 22:18-19).

*The laws and ordinances of sacrifices and offerings became part of the law of Moses* (John 7:19,23; Acts 13:39; 15:5; 2 Cor. 3:7; Gal 3:5,10,13,19; Heb 10:1-3,28). They were added to the covenant given to Israel in the land of Moab during their 40 year in the wilderness (Num 28:1-31; 29:1-40). *The sacrifices and offerings spelled out in graphic terms the requirements of God's laws of righteousness for acceptance and also the penalties and requirements for atonement of sin as fulfilled by Christ *(Num 28:1-31; 29:1-40; 36:13; Lev 1-7; Deut 5:22; 29:1; Gal 3:19,21-23).

Israel left Egypt exactly 430 years after The covenant and promises given to Abraham were confirmed (Gen 17:1-24; 21:5; 22:15-18; 26:2-5; Ex 12:40-41; Gal 3:17-19). *The sacrifices and offerings *(the works of the law Gal 3:2-13,17-19) *began to be offered on the altar after the tabernacle was reared up in the second year, after the exodus from Egypt *(Ex 40:17,29; Lev 1:1). This was a year after the ten commandments were given on Mount Sinai (Horeb), after which they also turned away from God and the covenant (Ex 32:1-14; Deut 1:26-45). *The sacrificess became part of the book of the law and terms of the second covenant given in Moab* (Deut 29:1; 31:9).

Did God Desire Sacrifices? 
God said that He did not desire sacrifice and offering, and He did not require burnt offering and sin offering (Psa 40:6; Mic 6:7-8; Hos 6:6), neither does He delight in burnt offerings (Psa 51:16; Isa 66:2-3; Heb 10:6,8). God asks, 

_"To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me?"_ (Isa 1:11).

The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Eternal (Prov 15:8), and fools sacrifice and consider not that they do evil (Eccl 5:1). Is it any wonder then that God said, 

_"your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me"_ (Jer 6:20). 
_"Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel;...I spoke not unto your fathers nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them saying, Obey my voice and I will be your God, and you shall be my people: and walk you in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you" _(Jer 7:22-23).


"_Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice and to hearken than the fat of rams"_ (I Sam 15:22). 
_"To do justice and judgment is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice...The sacrifice of the wicked is abomination"_ (Prov 21:3,27). 
_"The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart..." _(Psa 51:17; Isa 66:2). 
He shall be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness (Psa 51:19).

*Why Sacrifices? 
If God did not desire sacrifices, then why are sacrifices a major part of Old Testament worship? *

*A pivotal key in understanding the meaning of the sacrifices is in their fulfillment by Jesus Christ. *

Before faith (before the law is written in our hearts and minds - Heb 8:10) *the law - including the laws regarding sacrifices - serve as a schoolmaster to bring us to repentance and to lead us to Christ* (Rom 7:7; Gal 3:19-24). And because it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins (Heb 10:1-4), that law of sacrifices was only a shadow of the good things to come, but not the very image of the things... 

_"for by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified [of sins] in his sight"_ (Rom 3:20; Heb 9:9). 
The physical services of sacrifices cannot make our hearts and minds perfect (Heb 10:1-4). We don't receive the spirit by doing the works of the sacrificial law, but by faith (belief and obedience)...There are no works in the ten commandments, they are restrictions of what we should not do (*Lev 4:2*). However, the spirit and intent of the law, summed up as love (Matt 5; 6; 7; 22:36-40) are works and gifts of the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:22 ; I Cor 12-13) which God gives to those who repent, believe and are baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and obey Him (Acts 2:38; 5:32; 16:31; John 1:12).

The laws of sacrifices and offerings specify the manner in which Jesus Christ had to fulfill the requirements of God's spiritual law (Matt 5:17), to be accepted by God and to take away our sins and redeem, justify and make us acceptable before God (Rom 3:24-25: Heb 2:10; I Pet 2:5). Jesus Christ fulfilled the law (Matt 5:17; Lk 24:27) in perfect obedience as an example for us (I Pet 2:21), and then offered His own blood for our sins (Heb 9:12,28; 10:10-14), condemning sin in the flesh (Rom 8:3), for 

_"... it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."_ (*Lev 17:11*)  and...
_"without shedding of blood is no remission of sins"_ (Heb 9:22, 26).  

*[Kerri, the Lev. verse above is a direct OT answer to your Q: 'without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.' I asked where this rule was stated in the bible, and since it is being said that it was a part of the Law, the rule would have to come from the Law, which would be the Old Testament, not the New.]*

A primary purpose for the sacrifices and offerings was therefore to bring to remembrance the sins (Heb 10:3) which separate us from God (*Isa 59:2*; Rom 10:3) and the need for an intercessor, Jesus Christ. 

...see PT2, next post


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*Law and sacrifice explained...Pt2*

The laws of sacrifices and offerings were a shadow of good things to come--the good news portraying our redemption by the fulfillment of the penalty of the law for our sin by Jesus Christ taking our place on the stake to reconcile us to God (*Deut 21:23*; Gal 3:13; Rom 5:10). Then we also must become acceptable to God as a sweet saviour by allowing God to fulfil His righteousness in us (putting His laws in our hearts and minds) through faith and obedience using the gift and power of the Holy Spirit in us (Rom 8:4; 2 Tim 1:6-9).

Faith works by love (Gal 5:6). God's spiritual law, the ten commandments summed up by spiritual love, is fulfilled by obedience (Rom 13:10). Obedience brings life and blessings (*Deut 30:20*). There are two aspects to the law of love. Love to God and love to fellow man. 

_"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength...
"and...You shall love your neighbor as yourself...
"[This] is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices"_ (Matt 22:36-40; Mark 12:29-33). 
The daily offerings, offered morning and evening, of burnt offerings, meal and drink offerings, and the peace offering as well represent the various aspects of loving obedience to God's law, even in the face of temptations and trials on a daily basis from morning to evening (continually) (*Ex 29:38-46*). Jesus Christ fulfilled these requirements as an example for us - not for us so we wouldn't have to (Matt 4:3-4; 5:17; 1 Pet 2:21-23).

The sin and trespass offerings represent what is required for disobedience to God's laws. Disobedience to God's law is sin or unrighteousness (I John 3:4; 5:17), which causes every evil, disorder, chaos, confusion, disease, destruction and death. Sin automatically brings curses and the penalty of death (*Gen 2:17; Eze 18:4,20*; Rom 6:23) just as suspending the law of gravity would cause chaos in the universe. 

God gave man the freedom of choice... He commands all to choose, but God also commands all to choose life (*Deut 30:15-19; Lev 26*). No sin or unrighteousness will be allowed in the Kingdom of God (I Cor 6:9-10). 

Adam and Eve's choice brought death upon all men, their progeny, for all have followed their way and have sinned (Rom 5:12). The penalty for disobedience to the law is fulfilled by claiming the life of the sinner for there is no remission of sins without the shedding of blood (Heb 9:22,27; Rom 6:7,23). He that is dead is freed from sin, but he is dead. 

The sin and the trespass offerings represent the fulfilling of the penalty for disobedience and the necessity of making restitution to the victim of our sins. Jesus Christ fulfilled this requirement by giving up his life through the shedding of his blood and making restitution for us so we could be forgiven upon repentance.

Baptism symbolizes our understanding of and accepting the death penalty required for our sins (Rom 6:3) and our choice to repent and bury our past and change to a new life of obedience to God's laws under the new covenant (vs 13,16-18; Heb 10:15--29). 

The Passover, fulfilled by Jesus, represents the fulfillment of the sin and trespass offerings to deliver God's firstborn, the firstfruits of salvation from sin (*Ex. 4:22*; Heb 12:23; James 1:18). 

_"For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life"_ (John 3:16).
Jesus' blood was shed so that our sins could be passed over with the penalty paid in full and we could be pardoned, forgiven, reconciled to God, when we accept his sacrifice and repent by choosing obedience to God (Deut 30:15). 
Taking the passover every year reconfirms our covenant (agreement) to come out of sin and our choice to obey. To take the passover unworthily (I Cor 11:27-29) is to not repent or not examine oneself but to desire and willfully continue in or carelessly ignore one's sins and vanity of the past (I John 2:15-17). Willful sin unrepented of, crucifying the Lord afresh, after having accepted forgiveness may result in the penalty of eternal death (Heb 6:6; 10:26-29).

The Atonement also represents Jesus sacrifice as a sin offering and peace offering to make reconcilliation for the rest of all mankind with God (*Lev 16:9*; Rom 5:1-11; Rev 7:9-17). 

_"Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ...
"For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly... while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
"Much more then, having been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.
"For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
"And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the atonement"_ (Rom 5:1,6,7-11).

next, Part 3...


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*Law and sacrifice explained...Pt3 "The Priesthood"*

The Priesthood 

God will not hear sinners (John 9:31; Psa 66:18). When man became separated from God by sin, need arose for an intercessor (Rom 8:26; Heb 4:14-16; 7:25). Melchisedec (Heb. meaning King of Righteousness), King of Salem (meaning King of Peace), the one who became Jesus Christ (Heb 1:8-9), was the Priest of the Most High God to man before Israel became a nation (Heb 7:1-3,14-17). 
After the exodus, God established the Levitical priesthood after the order of Aaron to administer the services of the tabernacle and to offer the gifts and sacrifices of physical Israel (Num 17-18; Heb 7:11; 8:3; 9:6). The priests taught the people God's laws and were required to offer up sacrifices daily first for their own sins, and then for the sins of the people (Heb 7:27) as a reminder of their sin and as a shadow of heavenly things - Christ, the Savior who was to come (Heb 8:5; 9:9-10; 10:1-4).
A priest had to be consecrated and sanctified by the washing with water at the door of the tabernacle; and put on the holy garments, the breastplate of judgment (Isa 59:17 Eph 6:14), an ephod as a memorial to the children of Israel, and the robe, coat, mitre and girdle; be anointed with oil; and bring unblemished offerings for sin as an atonement unto God to be acceptable before the Eternal (Ex 28,29,38-39; Lev 8,9,10,21). This is representative of the requirements Jesus had to fulfill to qualify as our High Priest.
Jesus Christ, the living Word of God (John 1:1-3) by whom God created all things (Eph 3:9), gave up his position to become the son of man (Phil 2:6), fulfilled all the requirements to become our High Priest, except for his lineage which reqirement of the law was changed (Heb 7:11-14), and was made 
_"a Priest forever according the order of Melchisedec"_ (Heb 7:17; 9:11) 
_"who needed not to offer up sacrifices daily, as those high priests who did for their own sins and then for the peoples: for this He did once for all when He offered up himself"_ (Heb 7:27; 9:28; 10:12) 
_"without spot to God"_ (Heb 9:14) _"to make intercession"_ and sanctify and perfect us (Heb 7:25; 10:10,14); 
that we could have _"boldness to enter into the holiest"_ (Heb 10:19) "unto the throne of grace to obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need" (Heb 4:16).

Jesus Christ thus was the offerer, the offering and became our intercessor or High Priest before God the Father. He of his own voluntary will presented His own unblemished life as a perfect and righteous sacrifice to justify and atone for our sins, paying the supreme penalty of death on the stake. 

He was then resurrected from the dead _"because it was not possible that He,"_ who had not sinned, _"should be held by it"_ (Acts 2:24) and became our High Priest. Jesus took His own blood before God to obtain eternal redemption for us (Heb 9:12). He now makes continual intercession for us to God the Father to supply our needs, giving protection, encouragement, correction, etc. He takes our prayers (Rev 5:8) to God - if they are acceptable. When they are not, He intercedes so only our righteousness is presented before God (Rom 8:26-27).

next, (pt4) The offerings...


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*Law and sacrifice explained...Pt4 "The Offerings"*

The Offerings
All the offerings, as well as the ceremonies and laws, served to constantly remind Israel that God is eminently holy. He says, 
_"You shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and you shall be holy, for I am holy"_ (_Lev 11:44-45; 19:2; 20:26_).
God could be approached only in strict obedience to the detailed instructions for purification. God ordained the sacrifice of innocent animals for the covering of man's sin as an object lesson (Gal 3:24). These sacrifices were symbolic of the ultimate sacrifice which would take away the sins of the whole world (John 1:29). 

Definitions: 
Offering - Heb. "qorban" or "qurban," meaning something which is brought near (the altar) from "qarab," meaning to approach. It is a sacrificial present, offering, oblation, gift, contribution or sacrifice offered in worship of or for a particular purpose (Websters). 
Sacrifice - Heb. "zebach" from "zabach" meaning to slaughter an animal. 

Order of presenting offerings: 

The significance of the order of the offerings can be seen in their application. 
The order presented in Leviticus 1-7 is typical of Jesus Christ's fulfillment of the sacrifices. He first fulfilled the burnt offering, meat offering and peace offering in perfect obedience to be acceptable to God. Jesus never sinned. He pleased not himself (Rom 15:3), but kept himself spotless before God (Heb 9:14), made himself of no reputation taking on the form of a servant (Phil 2:7), then offered himself in complete obedience as a sweet savour, acceptable and well pleasing to God (Mk 1:11) and as an example for us (I Pet 2:21). 
Then, to redeem us from the penalty of sin (I Pet 1:18-19, Heb 9:28), He took our sins on himself and offered himself in our stead, bearing in His own flesh our penalty to free us from the penalty for sin (Rom 6:7,23; I Pet 2:24) in fulfillment of the sin and trespass offerings.
The order in which the offerings were presented by the Levitical priesthood and the order in which they are understood and apply to us is quite the reverse of their fulfillment by Jesus Christ (Ex 29:1-18; Heb 10:16-21). 
Our sins have separated us from God (Isa 59:2), as symbolized by a veil (II Cor 3:14-16) which first must be removed before we can come before God. Death frees us from sin (Rom 6:7) and since all have sinned, all must die (Rom 5:12; Heb 9:27). But now the sacrifice of Jesus Christ as a sin offering for us has given all men a chance to repent and become acceptable to God (II Pet 3:9).
After we have been redeemed from death, we must then offer ourselves as a living sacrifice in obedience as a sweet savour to God (Rom 12:1; Heb 2:1-3). These are the works that show our faith and appreciation for the sacrifice of Jesus (James 2). Any that will not become pleasing to God (John 3:20-22) will die the second death in the lake of fire (Matt 25:46; Rev 20:13-14).

I. THE BURNT OFFERING (Lev 1:1-17; 6:8-13; 7:8)

The law of the burnt offering reveals what is required to fulfill the first great commandment, to 
"love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." (Matt 22:37)
It was the voluntary offering of one's life to God. It was wholly burnt upon the brazen altar, the table of God on the earth (Lev 1:9; Mal 1:12), as a sweet savour to God. No part of it is to be withheld (Matt 16:24-26). 
The burnt offering represented a sweet savour, something that is pleasing, desirable, appetizing, as food that is satisfying to God and therefore had to be perfect without blemish. God is pleased with and looks "to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit" (Isa 66:2) and keeps his commandments (I John 3:22). 
"For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments and His commandments are not grievous" (I John 5:3).

However our sacrifices are not without blemish and cannot be acceptable to God because of our sin except through Jesus Christ who gave himself without blemish for us as a sweet smelling savour to God (Eph 5:2). 
The fire that consumed the offering was from God (Lev 9:24). Fire is used to refine and purify precious metals (Rev 3:18) and used to typify the manner in which God is proving, purifying and perfecting his godly character in us (I Cor 3:13). Jesus Christ learned obedience by suffering (Heb 5:8-9), being tempted (tried) in every point of the law yet without sin (Heb 4:15). In all his trials, Christ pleased God, not himself (Rom 15:3; John 5:30; 17:4; Matt 26:39). All that are called to become sons of God can expect a fiery trial to prove and perfect godly character and faith (Acts 14:22; I Pet 4:12; 1:6-7). 

The burnt offering was offered as a voluntary offering to become accepted by God (Lev 1:3-4, 23:11). An important point is that it was offered for God's acceptance and not man's. Christ was accepted by God but not by man (John 1:11; 5:41). Carnal men seek to be accepted and esteemed of men and not God (Gal 1:10; John 5:44; Jukes pp. 65). 

Jesus Christ, as man's offering, was accepted by God to make atonement for us. To make atonement is to satisfy the requirement of the law. Jesus, as our offering, makes us acceptable, justifies us, before God by his perfect obedience (Rom 5:1-2,19). God sees us as Jesus Christ, perfect and without sin. 

The types of burnt offerings acceptable to God are represented by the animals offered... 

An offering of fowls (Lev 1:14-17) was a turtledove or a young pigeon. The dove represents a harmless or simple (Matt 10:16) and mourning (Isa 38:14; 59:11) nature with God's holy spirit (Matt 3:16) which is the most basic requirement for acceptance with God. Without God's holy spirit represented by the dove, none can please God (Rom 8:8-9,14-16). Jesus set the example of harmless innocence (John 18:23), forgiving all (Lk 23:32) while bearing the marks of evil against himself (Isa 52:14). He mourned and wept over Jerusalem (Matt 23:37; Lk 19:41). The offering of a fowl was not cut up into its various parts and it had to be presented by the priest, indicating that very little of a positive nature was required on the part of the offerer other than controlling human nature and to be cleansed of sin and without guile (Psa 32:2).
An offering of the flock (Lev 1:10-13), is a male without blemish of the sheep or of the goats. Sheep represents one who follows the good shepherd as Christ followed God. A kid or goat is representative of one who leads as Christ leads us or as a leader in the community. A lamb, represents a willing submission without complaint or murmur (Isa 53:7). Jesus Christ, as the lamb of God (John 1:36), willingly gave up all that he was (Phil 2:7; Heb 2:14) to take on the nature of man and submit himself to the laws of God and man and to do the will of God (John 5:30; Heb 10:7). 

God has no pleasure in the self willed (*** 1:7), the stubborn (I Sam 15:23), the proud (Prov 6:17) or the complainer (Num 11:1), but He will look to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit and trembles at his word (Isa 66:2; Psa 51:17). *Jesus suffered all unrighteousness against himself without a murmur* (Matt 27:14) to fulfill God's will (Lk 22:42) for the salvation of man. 
The offering of the flock is killed by the offerer even as Jesus willingly gave up his own life (John 10:18). The offering was then cut up into various parts to represent the different aspects of ones life required to fulfill the law in obedience to be accepted by God. The offering represented one's life being yielded to God (Eccl 12:7). The priest, representing Christ, is the only one sanctified to prepare and present the offering and sprinkle the blood or life (Lev 17:11) upon the altar to God. Saul presumptuously took upon himself that responsibility to present an offering (I Sam 13:12-13). 
A burnt offering of the herd (Lev 1:2-9) shall be a male bullock without blemish. A bullock is a beast of burden representing untiring service. The bullock is strong to labor (Psa 144:14) and brings forth much increase by his strength (Prov 14:4). 

The work and service of God is to believe and follow the example of Jesus Christ (John 6:27,29; 14:12; I Pet 2:21). Jesus commanded his people to go and teach all nations (Matt 28:19) and to feed his sheep (John 21:15-17). The harvest is plenteous, but laborers are needed (Matt 9:37) who have exercised their senses to discern good and evil (Heb 5:14) and are able to rightly divide the word of truth (II Tim 2:15) to fulfill God's commission (Matt 24:14).
The offering of the herd was flayed and cut into pieces. Jesus disciples didn't recognize him after he had been beaten and flayed (John 20:14-16; Lk 24:15-16,31). The pieces of the offering represent the various aspects of a man's life which are to be dedicated completely to the love of God (Lk 10:27; I John 5:3) in fulfillment of the law.
The head identifies the man - the offerer put his hand upon the head indicating that the offering was to represent him taking his place (Lev 1:4) even as Jesus is our offering (Heb 10:10). Christ is also the head of the church Eph 1:22; 5:23). 
The head also represents the mind and thoughts. To be acceptable and pleasing to God, every thought must be brought into control into captivity to the obedience of Jesus Christ (II Cor 10:5). However, with our natural mind and human spirit (I Cor 2:11), we cannot please God (Rom 8:7-8). It is only with God's Holy Spirit in our mind witnessing with our spirit (Rom 8:16), guiding us into all truth (John 16:13), shining his light on our wretched nature and past sins, that we can come to understand his spiritual laws (Heb 8:10) and have our minds renewed in truth and love (Rom 12:2). 

The legs of the offering represent the way in which we walk. The law requires man to walk in God's ways (Ex 16:4) after the spirit (Rom 8:1,4) by faith (II Cor 5:7; Eph 4:1). The way of man is not in himself to direct his own steps (Jer 10:23). If we acknowledge God in all our ways, then he will direct our paths (Prov 3:6). We ought therefore to walk even as Jesus walked (I John 2:6). To walk is to work doing the work of God which takes effort. 
The inwards are symbolic of the deep feelings and affections of the heart (II Cor 7:15). God will put his law in our inward parts and write it in our hearts (Jer 31:33). We ought to be moved with bowels of compassion when seeing others in need (I John 3:17; Matt 25:34-46) and not harden our hearts. Jesus was moved with compassion seeing the people fainting having no shepherd (Matt 9:36 and he wept over Jerusalem (Lk 19:41). He never judged or condemned people (John 3:17; 5:45; 8:11,15; 12:47; Lk 23:34; 9:56). God desires mercy more than sacrifice (Hos 6:6). 
The inwards and legs were washed in water (Lev 1:9; Ex 30:18-21), symbolic of how our ways and feelings need to be renewed with the washing of water by the word (Eph 5:26; John 14:3). Once cleansed, the inward man is renewed day by day (II Cor 4:16) like the daily offering by the true bread from heaven (John 6:32-35). 
The fat of the offering represents the energy and well being that the animal draws upon for strength. It also represents the blessing of health and abundance (Gen 27:39; John 10:10; III John 2; Rom 11:17). We are to love God with all our strength (Lk 10:27) and not live by our own might or power, but by God's spirit (Zech 4:6). Jesus could do nothing of his own self (John 5:30) in God's service, but had to receive power from God to perform his ministry (Lk 4:18). Likewise his disciples (Acts 1:8). All our strength, which comes from God, is to be used in God's service as part of our offering as a sweet savour (Lev 3:16).
The burnt offering was part of the daily sacrifice (Ex 29:38-46) along with the meal and drink offering which typifies the daily fulfillment of love to God and love to man fulfilling the law of love. 
This is the law of the burnt offering (Lev 7:37-38) which the Lord commanded Moses in Mount Sinai.

next... The Sin Offering (pt5)


----------



## toddboucher (Feb 15, 2006)

God's love for us is so deep and strong. What came to my mind was Jermiah 7:22,23 "For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. I love this when God brought them out of Egypt(or there old life) he didn't command sacrifices and all these things, his plan was a people who would just walk with him. but the people walked away so God have a different plan to bring them back, which is a type and shadow of what we have today. I was just thinking about what God had to do to get me out of my Egypt, Spiritually it was equal to parting the sea. Inshort God will not let go of us, his 1st and best plan is that we would just walk with him, but if not he has ways to bring us back. I love Romans 8 we all know verse 28 all things work together for good, but verse 29 say God wants to turn us into the image of his son. At times Im as far from this image as can be but he still has a molding process which Im not in favor of, but im still thankful for.

God Bless in this image process.


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*Law and sacrifice explained...Pt5 "The Sin Offering"*

[Due to size & time constraints, the "Peace, Meal & Tresspass" offerings were left off the posts]

THE SIN OFFERING (Lev 4-5:1-13; 6:24-30) 
The sin offering represents the price (Rom 6:23; Heb 9:22) required to atone for our sin, the transgression of God's law (I John 3:4; 5:17). 

Flesh and blood is corruptible (Rom 8:20), made subject to vanity, and cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:3-6; I Cor 15:50). All physical things are temporary and corruptible, they wax old as a garment according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics (Heb 1:11). 
Man was created in God's image (Gen 1:26), but made subject to corruption and vanity (Rom 8:20). And as it is written, 
"There is none righteous... for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" (Rom 3:10,23).
Because of man's physical nature, the carnal mind is enmity against God and evil continually (Gen 6:5; 8:21; Jer 17:9; Rom 7:21; 8:7). Sin defiles the heart and out of the heart precede evil thoughts (Matt 15:19; 7:14-23). The carnal mind cannot even understand the things of God (I Cor 2:14) making man unfit in his natural state to enter God's family and kingdom. Because of sin it is appointed unto all men once to die (Heb 9:27). 

God gave the first man Adam the opportunity to take of his Holy Spirit, represented by the tree of life (Gen 2:16), so that he would be able to understand spiritual things and conquer the carnal spirit and bring it into subjection to God's spiritual law as a son of God. 

But Adam and Eve and all their progeny after them, under the influence and temptations of Satan, have made the wrong choice, rejecting God's spirit and chose their own ways, to trust their own knowledge and decide for themselves what is good or evil rather then to trust and obey God. So all mankind have sinned and have earned the death penalty (Rom 3:23; 6:23) and have cut themselves off from God and eternal life in God's righteous kingdom (Gen 3:24; Rom 5:12-14). To sin through ignorance (Lev 4:2) is to be carnally minded, which is a mind that is contrary to God, for the flesh lusts against the spirit and are contrary one to the other (Gal 5:17). Such a mind is only worthy of death (Rom 8:6-7) and is already dead spiritually (Gen 2:17).
Sin can only be cleansed or removed by death of the sinner (Rom 6:7, 23) to fulfill the requirement for disobedience to the law. The sin offering was a constant reminder of the consequences of sin and the need for a Savior (Heb 10:3-5). 

The full meaning of the sin offering represented what was required of our Savior to fulfill the penalty required for our disobedience to the law in order to redeem us from eternal death, which we have all earned by our 'works'. Jesus Christ had to fulfill the requirements for us because we can not redeem ourselves from the corruption of sin (Matt 5:17; Rom 5:6-11; 6:7). 

_"For when we were yet without strength, in due time died Christ for the ungodly... while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us"_ (Rom 5:6,8).
Through him we received the atonement (reconciliation). 
_"He has not dealt with us after our sins, nor punished us according to our iniquities.
"For as the heavens are high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward those who fear Him; 
"As far as the East is from the West, so far has He removed our transgressions from us"_ (Psa 103:1-12). 
The sin offering was not a sweet savour, it was not pleasing, for God says, 
"I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live".
(Eze 18:23,32; 33:11). The sin offering, except for the blood (life-Lev 17:11; Eccl 3:19-21) and the fat, was taken without the camp to be burned, it could not go into the holy place. The offerer came not as a worshipper to present himself as something pleasing, but he came as a convicted sinner (Psa 69:5) born with a corruptible nature (Psa 51:5; Rom 8:20). Even Jesus took on this same corruptible nature (Phil 2:7-8; Matt 19:17) when he was born of the flesh, but he had God's spirit from birth and successfully strove against all temptations to sin (Heb 5:9; 12:3-4; John 16:33) to overcome and conquer it. 

The sin offering required to make atonement (satisfy the law to fulfill justice) to redeem carnal man had to be without blemish. If it were blemished, it would have to die for its own sin. But since it was to pay for the sins of others, it would have to be without blemish. Jesus was without blemish. He conquered all temptations of wrong desires, thoughts and actions to qualify without blemish (Heb 9:14) to become an offering for us. Our sins were then transferred onto him and he took our penalty upon himself (II Cor 5:21; Gal 1:4; 3:13; Rom 4:25) as a sin offering laying down his life as a ransom for us (Matt 20:28; 26:53; John 10:17-18; 19:11). 

The types of the sin offering are specific in their application.
An offering for the sin of the priest had to be a bullock. The blood (life) of the offering was sprinkled seven times before the veil of the sanctuary (probably representing the seven eras of the Church before Christ returns - Rev 2 & 3) and on the horns of the altar of incense and poured out at the brazen altar before God representing the spirit returning to God the source of all life (Eccl 3:21). 
The golden altar for incense in the holy place represents the heavenly places and their appointed services (Heb 9:4-7, 24). The brazen altar was in the outer court and represents the earth and God's work done by the Church (Ex 29:36-43). Sprinkling of the blood was required to approach into God's presence. The veil represents the blindness and separation of man from God as a result of sin (Isa 59:2; II Cor 3:14). 

The fat was burnt upon the brazen altar to show the offering itself was perfect, without blemish, and acceptable to God. But the whole bullock, the skin, all its flesh, head, legs, inwards and his dung were burnt without the camp to testify how completely the offering was identified with sin (sorry for this graphic description) and was not acceptable in God's kingdom but will be burned up in the lake of fire (Rev 21:8). 

God's Holy Spirit and his law reveals the sin that is in us (Rom 3:20; 7:7; John 16:8; James 1:23-25), but it is Christ's sacrifice that cleanses us from sin (I John 1:17). The sin offering also reveals how hateful our sin is to God (Rom 8:3,) in that he allowed Jesus to suffer and die and be cast out for our sin (John 3:16) as an example to us (Heb 13:11-13; I Pet 2:21-24) of the result of sin and need to repent and be forgiven. 

The bullock was used to represent both the priest and the whole congregation which is the Church or the body of Christ (Col 1:18, 24). The willing and untiring labor of the priest and church is cast out when sin is present (Matt 7:22-23; Eze 33:12). A ruler is represented by a male kid goat. The commoner is represented by a female kid goat or a female lamb. 

Sin offerings for particular sins, such as for the sin of swearing or making an oath, or touching of any unclean thing, are represented by a female lamb or kid, two turtledoves or pigeons or fine flour without the oil or frankincense upon it (Lev 5:1-13). A ram plus a fifth part of the shekel of the sanctuary to make amends for the harm done was offered for sin in the holy things of God.
The level of understanding of Christ's offering is represented by the types. In one view, Christ is seen as our High Priest (Heb 7:27). The next view is Jesus representing the whole church, or the family of the priest or the congregation of Israel. Others may see Him as the ruler, losing sight of the unity of the Church. More commonly, He is understood as the sin offering for the individual and often only for the particular sin with the sinful person of the offerer not seen at all. The individual sinner had to slay the sacrifice for sin offering. This was to show recognition of sin in himself and a willingness to lay down his own sinful life (Lev 4:3-4,15,22-24,27-29; Matt 16:24-25).

The blood of the bullock was sprinkled on the horns of the incense altar, representing the horn of salvation (Lk 1:69) or Christ who takes our prayers before God, to restore communion of the priests with God. The consequence of the sins of the priests was much greater because it affects not only the priest, but the whole congregation. Christ had the burden of the whole world on Him. He was accountable for all life. 
In the lower grade of offerings, no notice is made of either altar, but only that the priest has made atonement for sin.  The fat is also overlooked in the lowest class indicating that the perfectness of Christ's sacrifice is not understood. 
The body of the offering in the higher grades is cast without the camp, representing the nature of the judgment borne by it, but this also is not seen in the lower grades. Also the separation from God is not seen, only that it satisfies the mediator shown by the priest feeding upon it. The distinction between the sin offering and the trespass offering in the lower grades is so slight that they are called by both names. In one case, it is for the persons (Lev 4:20; Gal 2:20) and in the other for the act (Lev 4:26,35; I Pet 3:10). 
As we grow in knowledge and depth of understanding, that which we understood only in part is perfected by greater comprehension of the whole of Christ's sacrifice for our justification (I Cor 13:9-12; Acts 13:39; II Pet 3:18). Then as we understand the nature of sin we must examine and prove ourselves (I Cor 11:25-32; II Cor 13:5). If we don't judge our own selves and "slay our sin" (give our lives to the One who was slain for sin), God will judge us. 
The sin offering culminated in the passover (John 3:16). Jesus' blood was shed so that our sins could be passed over in judgment and remove the veil that separated us from God (II Cor 3:14). 

This is the law of the sin offering.

Next...  Conclusion


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*Law and sacrifice explained...Conclusion*

Conclusion 

This is the law of sacrifice and offerings fulfilled by Jesus Christ for us (Dan 9:27; Matt 5:17-18; I Cor 5:7). 

Jesus had to fulfill all these sacrifices and be forsaken (Matt 27:46) for our redemption (Rom 3:24; I Cor 1:30; Eph 1:7; Col 1:13-14). 

We cannot establish our own righteousness before God (Isa 64:6; Rom 10:3-10; 5:19), but we are sanctified in Christ (Heb 10:10; Rom 6:1-4).

What then is required of us? 
_"To fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him and to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, 
"To keep the commandments of the Lord and his statutes which I command you this day for your good... 
"Be no more stiff-necked. For the Lord your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God...". _(Deut 10:12-13,16-17). 

_"He has showed you O man, what is good, and what does the Lord require of you, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God"?_  (Mic 6:7-8). 

"Fear God and keep his commandments, this is the whole duty of man" (Eccl 12:13).

_"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present yourselves as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God by your reasonable service. Be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind (with God's spirit and truth), prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God"_ (Rom 12:1-3).

Prove your faith by your works (James 2:18) by walking even as He walked (I John 2:6) and following in his steps (I Pet 2:21), living by every word of God (Matt 4:4). 

_"For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required"_ (Lk 12:37,43,48; I Cor 4:2). And 
_"when you have done all those things which are commanded you, say, 'We are unprofitable servants. We have done that which was our duty to do'"_ (Lk 17:10).

But because of Christ's sacrifice for us, we can look forward to the resurrection as sons of God in his soon coming kingdom (Matt 6:33; I Cor 15:52; Col 3:2; I John 3:2; Rev 3:12; 20:4,6; 21:7; 22:12-14). . . 

"It is finished" (John 19:30).


----------



## SBG (Feb 15, 2006)

Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> . I am interested in a discussion involving the facts from the Bible, nothing more.  I have an open mind and only request that all proofs for validation come from the bible (Old Testament), as that is my catalyst for everything I trust.
> 
> So... there was a statement made in the other thread that 'without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.'  I asked where this rule was stated in the bible, and since it is being said that it was a part of the Law, the rule would have to come from the Law, which would be the Old Testament, not the New.  It was also stated that the sacrifices only pushed away the guilt from sin for one year. I am also wondering where this verse/information is also.  Anyone have any answers?
> 
> ...



Kerri, your request for only using the Old Testament is why I had to back away form the discussion in the other thread. The two cannot be separated. They are perfectly harmonized and the latter is the fulfillement of the first.

An analogy of the problem is like playing a football game and only wanting to consider the score at halftime.


----------



## PWalls (Feb 15, 2006)

SBG said:
			
		

> Kerri, your request for only using the Old Testament is why I had to back away form the discussion in the other thread. The two cannot be separated. They are perfectly harmonized and the latter is the fulfillement of the first.
> 
> An analogy of the problem is like playing a football game and only wanting to consider the score at halftime.



Exactly, there is no point.

All the smilies and hugs and kisses don't cover the fact that she admits that she has turned from Jesus and doesn't believe that He is the son of God and discounts all the teaching in the New Testament as the Word of God.

Not much point in me arguing or discussing that.


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Feb 15, 2006)

StriperAddict,

Well Said!  I am going to copy your posting and study them closely for I want to be able to exlain to others, just incase i ever meet anyone that believes the same way Kerri does.

Thanks,
DB BB


----------



## ilikembig (Feb 15, 2006)

Double Barrel BB said:
			
		

> StriperAddict,
> 
> Well Said!  I am going to copy your posting and study them closely for I want to be able to exlain to others, just incase i ever meet anyone that believes the same way Kerri does.
> 
> ...



I totally agree DD
StriperAddict you have really gone above and beyond with this one. I so thank you. We all have  to remember what the word says...
1John 3:23
'Noone who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also'


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*The reasons to our faith*

I think all of us need to concentrate on the true roots of our faith.  Hashing them out is a passion of mine, near the passion I have for the Lord Jesus, the Lamb of God who "takes away the sin of the world".

God is the God of the 2nd chance, too.  If it were not so, there'd be no mention of the prodigal son.  I consider myself one, it took me a few years after knowing the gospel was true before I put my complete trust in Christ for salvation.  If God wasn't "slow to anger", I wouldn't be here today!

~Glenn


----------



## SBG (Feb 15, 2006)

StriperAddict said:
			
		

> God is the God of the 2nd chance, too.  If it were not so, there'd be no mention of the prodigal son.  I consider myself one, it took me a few years after knowing the gospel was true before I put my complete trust in Christ for salvation.  If God wasn't "slow to anger", I wouldn't be here today!
> 
> ~Glenn



Good posts Stripe! The only thing that I might see different is I beleive that God is a God of a "True" first chance.


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 15, 2006)

Hey StriperAddict!

WOW!! That is alot of information!!! 
You'll have to give me a day or two to go through all of that as I don't want to just skim it, I see you put alot of work in that and want to give it the full attention it deserves.

The one thing I did want to comment on though is this:


> "... it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." (Lev 17:11) and...
> "without shedding of blood is no remission of sins" (Heb 9:22, 26).
> 
> [Kerri, the Lev. verse above is a direct OT answer to your Q: 'without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.' I asked where this rule was stated in the bible, and since it is being said that it was a part of the Law, the rule would have to come from the Law, which would be the Old Testament, not the New.]



I have to disagree that the Leviticus verse is an answer to 'without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin.'  That is not what the verse says.  

This is from my notes, I did not write this but took it from various resources I used during my 2-year study:

"Contrary to the claim that Leviticus 17:11 proves that man can only atone for his iniquity through the shedding of blood, this verse only explains the prohibition of eating blood.  The verse has conveniently been severed from it's original context, effectively concealing and distorting it's message.

In the immediate context of Leviticus 17:11, we find that the Torah is speaking of the prohibition of eating blood, NOT the subject of sin and atonement.  The Torah discusses blood atonement in this verse only as a byproduct of its central theme.  This crucial message is lost when the verse is quoted alone, without the surrounding texts as its proper background.  Leviticus 17:11 begins with the conjunctive verb in Hebrew (pronounced 'kee'), meaning "This is because..."  Whenever a verse begins with this word, it is explaining what has just been related in the previous verse.  The previous verse, Leviticus 17:10 reads:

'And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people.'

Leviticus 17:11 then continues this message and explains:

"This is because the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.'

Thus, Leviticus 17:11 explains Leviticus 17:10 by revealing that consuming blood is forbidden because it may only be used in the act of sprinkling of the animals blood on the altar for an atonement.  It is a grievous sin to use it for anything else.

Leviticus 17:10-11 is therefore declaring two principles about blood:  1) you may not eat it  2) amongst all the various rituals associated with the sin sacrifice, such as the laying of the hands on the animal, slaughtering, collecting, carrying, sprinkling, placing of the animal on the alter, it is only the sprinkling the blood on the altar that brings about the atonement.  You therefore may not eat the blood. This verse does not state or imply that one cannot have atonement for sin without a blood sacrifice.  Such a message would contradict all of the Old Testament, which clearly outlines at least two other methods of atonement MORE PLEASING to God than a sacrifice - heartfelt repentance and charity."

Back to my thoughts... I can give at least three instances where atonement was made for sins without shedding blood:

Lev 5:11-13 But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, then he that sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put [any] frankincense thereon: for it [is] a sin offering. (12) Then shall he bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take his handful of it, [even] a memorial thereof, and burn [it] on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the LORD: it [is] a sin offering.  (13) And the priest shall make an atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath sinned in one of these, and it shall be forgiven him: and [the remnant] shall be the priest's, as a meat offering.  


Numbers 17:11 (12)  So Moses said to Aaron, Take a censer and put fire in it from the altar, put incense on it, and take it quickly to the congregation and make atonement for them; for wrath has gone out from the Lord. The plague has begun.


Num 31:50 We have therefore brought an oblation for the LORD, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the LORD.  (51) And Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold of them, [even] all wrought jewels.  (52) And all the gold of the offering that they offered up to the LORD, of the captains of thousands, and of the captains of hundreds, was sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty shekels.  


I will take time as I am able over the next couple days to go over the information you posted, but the bottom line is that there are proof verses that show undeniably that atonement for sin WAS made without shedding blood. And continues to be made today via prayer.   So how is that explained?  Were those sins not 'really' forgiven, even though the bible says they were?

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 15, 2006)

Whiteboy said:
			
		

> Gen 4
> 
> Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. 3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD. 4 But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.
> 6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."
> ...



Hey Whiteboy!
The verses tell you why God didn't accept Cain's offering... Abel brought the best of his flock, his firstborn, while Cain did not bring the best, he only brought ''some of the fruits of the soil".   Abel brought the best of what he had as an offering (by the way, it was NOT a SIN offering), whereas Cain brought whatever he had on hand.  As with all things, it is the intent of one's heart that God sees, not just what you do.

Hope this makes sense?
Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 15, 2006)

*short on: Attonement*



			
				Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> I have to disagree that the Leviticus verse is an answer to 'without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin.'  That is not what the verse says.
> 
> This is from my notes, I did not write this but took it from various resources I used during my 2-year study:
> 
> ...



Thanks for writing in, Kerri.  That avatar still puts a smile on my face (wish I didn't have puppy allergies    !!)

Just a short point...
From your notes here, it's for the very reason that blood is used as an attonement (because of it's VALUE for attonement) that God made (law) prohibition against eating blood.  I can read this within your text quotes as well, but the conclusion is faulty.  Other text in the "offerings posts" I've posted shine light on what God was doing with sacrifices, etc.  This is throughout the OT and clearly points the way to Christ.  

What I've put together is pretty straightforward, though I'd like to have added more.  But I'll let some other OT historians write in a while here and I'll get back later. 

Best to you Kerri, and all who ... "Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life"... Jesus said... "and they are they which testify of Me." From John 5:39, where our Savior, is quoted. See also Acts 17:11. 

One final (excellent!) link: http://www.search-the-scriptures.org/

Kerri, this is a solid Messianic site with a lot of helps in your OT studies.  I did not use thier notes for my other posts, so you and others could check on something new that might bring the Jewish Messiah, "Yahshua" (Jesus), into better  understanding.

Blessin's,
~Glenn


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 16, 2006)

Whiteboy said:
			
		

> It also says he brought fat portions from "some" of the firstborn of his flock.  It's all how you want to read it.  Guess that's where faith comes in to it.




"Fat portions" would not be a blood offering.  By using the phrase 'firstborn of his flock', this is signifying that Abel brought his best. If you look throughout the bible, there is much emphasis put on being the 'firstborn' and all the blessings that brings with it.
And as stated before, this was not a sin sacrifice that Cain and Abel did.
And I agree... most of the bible can be (and is!)  interpreted how you want to read it 

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 16, 2006)

SBG said:
			
		

> Kerri, your request for only using the Old Testament is why I had to back away form the discussion in the other thread. The two cannot be separated. They are perfectly harmonized and the latter is the fulfillement of the first.
> 
> An analogy of the problem is like playing a football game and only wanting to consider the score at halftime.




Hmmm..... it shouldn't be..... if the NT is the fulfilment of the OT, then it should be no problem to show where in the OT the foundation was laid...?    The OT stands by itself, but the NT does not, it needs the OT for support.  The OT does not need the NT for support, so it should not be difficult to show where the ideas came from, IMHO of course 

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 16, 2006)

PWalls said:
			
		

> Exactly, there is no point.
> 
> All the smilies and hugs and kisses don't cover the fact that she admits that she has turned from Jesus and doesn't believe that He is the son of God and discounts all the teaching in the New Testament as the Word of God.
> 
> Not much point in me arguing or discussing that.



Hey PWalls!
Regarding my beliefs, you are correct in your post! 

I think the smilies and hugs were his way of showing that he was not intending to offend me.  In these types of discussions, with a lot of emotion involved, it is easy for some to take offense or become heated in defense or argument, and I think that was just his way of letting me know that even if I disagree with him or vice versa, he isn't 'attacking' me.

I would hope that no one sees these threads as 'argumentative', because they aren't intended to be.  I enjoy discussing theology and different doctrines, because I ALWAYS learn something new when I participate in them. It causes me to go back and read the bible and review things I have learned in the past, and someone always ends up showing me something I didn't know before. I may not agree with them, they may not agree with me, but I believe that it is always good to go back and read the scriptures and get familiar with it again.  To me, that's not an argument, as I am not trying to change anyone's mind... only to learn what others think about the subject.

Besides, I don't make this stuff up, I take everything I use from the Bible itself.  To 'argue' would be to argue with the Bible, not with me.  It is the interpretation, understanding or conception of the verses in the Bible that I like to discuss.

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## SBG (Feb 16, 2006)

Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> Hmmm..... it shouldn't be..... if the NT is the fulfilment of the OT, then it should be no problem to show where in the OT the foundation was laid...?    The OT stands by itself, but the NT does not, it needs the OT for support.  The OT does not need the NT for support,
> Hugs!
> Kerri



Your above comment is only valid if you look at the canon as two books...they are actually one. 



> so it should not be difficult to show where the ideas came from, IMHO of course



No offense intended, but when you can only use one portion of the Book to discuss something, it makes it difficult to discuss. 

Its like discussing the movie Castaway, and only talking about up until Tom Hanks got on the island. 

For the believer, it is easy to see how the Passover lamb was a picture of Christ' atoning sacrifice. It is also quite easy to see that Christ was the fulfillment of prophesy from the OT.

Just curious, if Christ is not the redemptor of mankind, what is/can be done now for atonement?


----------



## leroy (Feb 16, 2006)

Jesus was the sacrifice for all our sins past and present. If you only believe in the OT do you have a altar in your yard and do you go out to your goats and pick one and offer it up as a sacrifice for yours.


----------



## redwards (Feb 16, 2006)

*Anyone...Answers please*



			
				Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> So... there was a statement made in the other thread that 'without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.'


What does the Hebrew word for "atonement" mean?




> 7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.....
> 
> ...
> 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
> ...


 
If the shedding of blood as atonement for sin was not a requirement, why is it that God in Gen. 3:21 clothed Adam and Eve with "coats of skin" after they had already made themselves clothing in verse 7? 

Was this not the first account of man's sin? 

If sin does not require a covering, why did God provide a covering for Adam and Eve?

And how did God get the "coats of skin" if not by the sacrifice of an animal?

Which would require the shedding of blood, since Gen. 9:4 and Lev 17:11 state:



> Gen. 9:
> 4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
> 
> Lev. 17:
> 11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.


Could the answer be that man cannot supply a sufficient covering for sin, only God can provide a completely sufficient covering for sin?

God has given His Son Jesus Christ as the ultimate blood sacrifice, and His blood is the completely sufficient covering for my sins, your sins, everybody's sins.

We must accept God's Word that says we all are sinners and know that it is sin that separates us from God and repent or "turn away" from that sin. Until we each acknowledge, and ask forgiveness for our own guilt, we will never be free from it. It will eventually lead us right into pinkiepinkiepinkiepinkie.


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 16, 2006)

leroy said:
			
		

> Jesus was the sacrifice for all our sins past and present. If you only believe in the OT do you have a altar in your yard and do you go out to your goats and pick one and offer it up as a sacrifice for yours.





			
				SBG said:
			
		

> Just curious, if Christ is not the redemptor of mankind, what is/can be done now for atonement?



Hey guys 
I figured I'd combine these since they both essentially asked the same question... what is done today (since there is no temple) for atonement of sins?

The answer comes from the OT itself, many times over:

God told the Jews (who, by the way, ALL of the laws were written for, not the Gentiles) through the prophets that they would be without a temple, without a priest and without sacrificing for a very long period of time.  And He also gave instruction on what to do for atonement in the meantime.

Hosea 3:4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and [without] teraphim:  

Hosea 3:5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.  

*Hosea 14:2 "Take words with you, and return to the Lord. Say to Him, "Take away all iniquity; receive us graciously, For we will render for bulls the offering of our lips."*


All throughout the scriptures, you can see where the men of God (the prophets) declare over and over that repentance and charity are more pleasing to God than a blood sacrifice.  Hosea predicted that the children of Israel would spend their bitter exile without the sacrificial system, and he encourages his brethren to use their lips filled with words of pentinence for their atonement so that the lips of the sinner would become as bulls of the sin offerings.  This still stands today.  

Then you have the prophet, Ezekiel who, speaking in the name of God, condemns the notion of human vicarious atonement.  He encourages the nation of Israel to turn to God through repentance ALONE for a complete atonement.  Through this bloodless atonement, he promises, ALL sin would be forgotten.  Throught his entire sermon on atonement, Ezekiel NEVER mentions the sacrificial system, and never mentions a crucified messiah or man-god.  The prophet only assures the Jews that God does not want to punish the wicked, but rather 'that they turn from their ways, so they might live."

Eze 18:1 The word of the LORD came unto me again, saying,  

 Eze 18:2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge?  

 Eze 18:3 [As] I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have [occasion] any more to use this proverb in Israel.  

 Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die. 

Eze 18:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, [and] hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.  

 Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.  

*Eze 18:21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. * 


*Eze 18:22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.  * This is clearly stating complete forgiveness of sin, and NO blood or sacrifice necessary... only heartfelt repentance!

 Eze 18:23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: [and] not that he should return from his ways, and live?  


I think also it is VERY important to understand that SACRIFICES were ONLY accepted for UN-INTENTIONAL SINS!!  If you sinned on purpose and intentionally, there was NO sacrifice you could do to remove your guilt.  You remained guilty.  If caught, you were required to make restitution for your sin and be punished by law. The law is very clear on all of this and states exactly what the restitutions and punishments are for the various sins. If you sin on purpose, THERE IS NO SACRIFICE AVAILABLE to cleanse you! It was this way in the beginning and remains this way today.  And notice, the punishments were not 'eternal' and after you died, but they were carried out right away during one's life!

Numbers 15:30-31 "Inadvertence is a key criterion in all expiatory sacrifice. * A deliberate, brazen sinner is barred from the sanctuary*.

The ONLY way to receive atonement for INTENTIONAL sin is to make restitution and heartfelt repentance, accept punishment and to turn from doing it again.

There is an exeption for this, and that is if someone INTENTIONALLY commits a sin, gets away with it, and then later comes forward and admits his guilt, and makes restitution, THEN it is treated as if an unintentional sin and he would have been allowed to make a sacrifice (Leviticus 5). 

Here is a quote from a well-known Jewish commentator on the overall picture of atonement and blood sacrifice as written in the OT:

"It should be emphasized here, as the workings of the sacrificial system are introduced to the reader, that the laws of the Torah did not permit Israelites to expiate intentional or premeditated offenses by means of sacrifice. There was no vicarious, ritual remedy - substitution of one's property or wealth - for such violations, whether they were perpetrated against other individuals or against God Himself. In those cases, the law dealt directly with the offender, imposing real punishments and acting to prevent recurrences.  The entire expiatory system ordained in the Law must be understood in this light.  Ritual expiation was restricted to situations where a reasonable doubt existed as to the willfulness of the offense.  Even then, restitution was always required where loss or injury to another person had occurred.  The mistaken notion that ritual worship could atone for criminality or intentional religious desecration was persistenly attacked by the prophets of Israel, who considered it a major threat to the entire covenental relationship between Israel and God."  Baruch Levine

Substitution was allowed only in cases of inadvertent sin.  Where the offense against God had been intentional, ritual sacrifice did not apply.  The Jewish scriptures (Old Testament) clearly state that sacrifice was used to atone for man's least grievous transgressions; unintentional sins; the prophets, therefore, did not dignify the blood sacrificial system.  On the contrary, as if with one voice, these men of God declared that repentance and charity were more appeasing to God than a blood sacrifice.

Hope this helps answer a little of the question!
Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 16, 2006)

StriperAddict said:
			
		

> Thanks for writing in, Kerri.  That avatar still puts a smile on my face (wish I didn't have puppy allergies    !!)
> 
> Just a short point...
> From your notes here, it's for the very reason that blood is used as an attonement (because of it's VALUE for attonement) that God made (law) prohibition against eating blood.  I can read this within your text quotes as well, but the conclusion is faulty.  Other text in the "offerings posts" I've posted shine light on what God was doing with sacrifices, etc.  This is throughout the OT and clearly points the way to Christ.



The Torah (Law) explains in Leviticus 17:11 why it is forbidden to consume blood: it has been set aside for the sole purpose of making atonement on the altar. However, NOWHERE does Leviticus 17:11 imply that the ONLY method of atonement is the shedding of blood.  Does that make more sense? I'm sorry if I'm not explaining myself well enough   

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Feb 16, 2006)

SBG said:
			
		

> The sin and the trespass offerings represent the fulfilling of the penalty for disobedience and the necessity of making restitution to the victim of our sins. Jesus Christ fulfilled this requirement by giving up his life through the shedding of his blood and making restitution for us so we could be forgiven upon repentance.



Hey SBG!
Two observations:
1. Man always could be forgiven of sin upon repentance.  That was nothing new when Jesus came along. It has been that way since the beginning.

2. There is NO vicarious atonement allowed... no one can 'make restitution for us'.  Moses tried this, God said NO.  It is littered all throughout the scriptures that every man must pay for his OWN sins.



> Jesus' blood was shed so that our sins could be passed over with the penalty paid in full and we could be pardoned, forgiven, reconciled to God, when we accept his sacrifice and repent by choosing obedience to God (Deut 30:15).



Where does this belief come from? I never see anywhere in scriptures in the Old Testament where someone made a sacrifice and someone else could come up and 'accept it' for themselves?  If Jesus' blood was shed so everyone's sins could be forgiven, why the requirement for it to be 'accepted'?  I wasn't given the opportunity to accept or deny Adam's sin, thereby condemning me to death, why do I have to 'accept' a sacrifice that is claimed to have been made on my behalf?



> Taking the passover every year reconfirms our covenant (agreement) to come out of sin and our choice to obey. To take the passover unworthily (I Cor 11:27-29) is to not repent or not examine oneself but to desire and willfully continue in or carelessly ignore one's sins and vanity of the past (I John 2:15-17). Willful sin unrepented of, crucifying the Lord afresh, after having accepted forgiveness may result in the penalty of eternal death (Heb 6:6; 10:26-29).



I'm not sure what 'taking the passover every year' means...?  The Passover was not a sin offering and has nothing to do with sins. 



> *What then is required of us? *
> "To fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him and to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul,
> "To keep the commandments of the Lord and his statutes which I command you this day for your good...
> "Be no more stiff-necked. For the Lord your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God...". (Deut 10:12-13,16-17).
> ...



In NONE of these verses does it ever say that it is (or will be) required to believe that God came to earth as a man and made vicarious atonement for the sins of mankind. I would think, if our eternal soul depended upon belief in Jesus, that God would have mentioned SOMEWHERE that this would be a requirement.  But He never did.  

The posts were very interesting, although it is difficult for me to comment on them because probably 90% of the 'supporting' verses are from the NT.  You can't prove the validity of the NT by using the verses from the NT.  That would be like me telling you that the Book of Mormon is the word of God, because the Book of Mormon says so.    


Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## SBG (Feb 17, 2006)

Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> Hey guys
> 
> The answer comes from the OT itself, many times over:
> 
> ...



Kerri, 
I'm sorry...but this prophesy is in regards to the diaspora and when the jews return to their promised land. Nowhere in the Old Testament does God remove the requirement of sacrifice from the chlidren of Israel.



> Originally Posted by SBG
> The sin and the trespass offerings represent the fulfilling of the penalty for disobedience and the necessity of making restitution to the victim of our sins. Jesus Christ fulfilled this requirement by giving up his life through the shedding of his blood and making restitution for us so we could be forgiven upon repentance.
> 
> 
> ...



Hey!!!! That quote wasn't from me.  

I'll argee with the poster though that Christ was the fulfillment of the law, making the need of sacrifice obsolete. Christ, instead is the fulfillment of the Passover promise. Christ is the Passover lamb.



> 2. There is NO vicarious atonement allowed... no one can 'make restitution for us'. Moses tried this, God said NO. It is littered all throughout the scriptures that every man must pay for his OWN sins.



Indeed. Until Christ. He is the first and the last.

Take care.


----------



## redwards (Feb 17, 2006)

*Dixie Dawg...*

Since you are so adept at answering questions, could you please answer these for me?


			
				redwards said:
			
		

> What does the Hebrew word for "atonement" mean?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Double Barrel BB (Feb 17, 2006)

Kerri,

I am curious, why did you call King David the "Messiah"?

DB BB


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 17, 2006)

*Explanation*



			
				Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> In NONE of these verses does it ever say that it is (or will be) required to believe that God came to earth as a man and made vicarious atonement for the sins of mankind.



Kerri,
Isaiah 53 has fully explained your objection.

You've mentioned Isaiah 53 as relating to Israel before.  Please check this out, Rabbinical sources attest to the validity of the passage as the coming of "Messiah" and His mission:

Why Isaiah 53 cannot refer to the nation of Israel, or anyone else, but must be the Messiah 


1. The servant of Isaiah 53 is an innocent and guiltless sufferer. Israel is never described as sinless. Isaiah 1:4 says of the nation: "Alas sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity. A brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!" He then goes on in the same chapter to characterize Judah as Sodom, Jerusalem as a harlot, and the people as those whose hands are stained with blood (verses 10, 15, and 21). What a far cry from the innocent and guiltless sufferer of Isaiah 53 who had "done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth!"



2. The prophet said: "It pleased the LORD to bruise him." Has the awful treatment of the Jewish people (so contrary, by the way, to the teaching of Jesus to love everyone) really been God's pleasure, as is said of the suffering of the servant in Isaiah 53:10 ? If, as some rabbis contend, Isaiah 53 refers to the holocaust, can we really say of Israel's suffering during that horrible period, "It pleased the LORD to bruise him?" Yet it makes perfect sense to say that God was pleased to have Messiah suffer and die as our sin offering to provide us forgiveness and atonement.

3. The person mentioned in this passage suffers silently and willingly. Yet all people, even Israelites, complain when they suffer! Brave Jewish men and women fought in resistance movements against Hitler. Remember the Vilna Ghetto Uprising? Remember the Jewish men who fought on the side of the allies? Can we really say Jewish suffering during the holocaust and during the preceding centuries was done silently and willingly?

4. The figure described in Isaiah 53 suffers, dies, and rises again to atone for his people's sins. The Hebrew word used in Isaiah 53:10 for "sin-offering" is "asham," which is a technical term meaning "sin-offering."  (Check again... see how it is used in Leviticus chapters 5 and 6.) Isaiah 53 describes a sinless and perfect sacrificial lamb who takes upon himself the sins of others so that they might be forgiven. Can anyone really claim that the terrible suffering of the Jewish people, however undeserved and unjust, atones for the sins of the world? Whoever Isaiah 53 speaks of, the figure described suffers and dies in order to provide a legal payment for sin so that others can be forgiven. This cannot be true of the Jewish people as a whole, or of any other mere human.


5. It is the prophet who is speaking in this passage. He says: "who has believed our message." The term "message" usually refers to the prophetic message, as it does in Jeremiah 49:14. Also, when we understand the Hebrew parallelism of verse 1, we see "Who has believed our message" as parallel to "to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed." The "arm of the Lord" refers to God's powerful act of salvation. So the message of the speaker is the message of a prophet declaring what God has done to save his people. 


6. The prophet speaking is Isaiah himself, who says the sufferer was punished for "the transgression of my people," according to verse 8. Who are the people of Isaiah? Israel. So the sufferer of Isaiah 53 suffered for Israel. So how could he be Israel?

7. The figure of Isaiah 53 dies and is buried according to verses 8 and 9. The people of Israel have never died as a whole. They have been out of the land on two occasions and have returned, but they have never ceased to be among the living. Yet Jesus died, was buried, and rose again.


8. If Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Israel, how about Isaiah himself? But Isaiah said he was a sinful man of unclean lips (Isaiah 6:5-7). And Isaiah did not die as an atonement for our sins. Could it have been Jeremiah? Jeremiah 11:19 does echo the words of Isaiah 53. Judah rejected and despised the prophet for telling them the truth. Leaders of Judah sought to kill Jeremiah, and so the prophet describes himself in these terms. But they were not able to kill the prophet. Certainly Jeremiah did not die to atone for the sins of his people. What of Moses? Could the prophet have been speaking of him? But Moses wasn't sinless either. Moses sinned and was forbidden from entering the promised land (Numbers 20:12). Moses indeed attempted to offer himself as a sacrifice in place of the nation, but, (as you correctly pointed out, Kerri) God did not allow him to do so (Exodus 32:30-35). Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah were all prophets who gave us a glimpse of what Messiah, the ultimate prophet, would be like, but none of them quite fit Isaiah 53.

(( I'll make a new thread soon on the parallel of Moses and Jesus and how Moses' "office" was a "type" unto Jesus Christ))

So what can we conclude? Isaiah 53 cannot refer to the nation of Israel, nor to Isaiah, nor to Moses, nor another prophet. And if not to Moses, certainly not to any lesser man. Yet Messiah would be greater than Moses. As the rabbinic writing "Yalkut" said: "Who art thou, O great mountain? (Zech. iv.7) This refers to the King Messiah. And why does he call him`the great mountain?' because he is greater than the patriarchs, as it is said, `My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly' --he will be higher than Abraham...lifted up above Moses...loftier then the ministering angels..." (Quoted in The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters, Ktav Publishing House, 1969, Volume 2, page 9.)


Of whom does Isaiah speak? He speaks of the Messiah, as many ancient rabbis concluded. The second verse of Isaiah 53 makes it crystal clear. The figure grows up as "a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground." The shoot springing up is beyond reasonable doubt a reference to the Messiah, and, in fact, it is a common Messianic reference in Isaiah and elsewhere. The Davidic dynasty was to be cut down in judgement like a felled tree, but it was promised to Israel that a new sprout would shoot up from the stump. The Messiah was to be that sprout. Several Hebrew words were used to refer to this undeniably Messianic image. All the terms are related in meaning and connected in the Messianic texts where they were used. Isaiah 11, which virtually all rabbis agreed refers to the Messiah, used the words "shoot" (hoter) and branch (netser) to describe the Messianic King. Isaiah 11:10 called Messiah the "Root (shoresh) of Jesse," Jesse being David's father. Isaiah 53 described the suffering servant as a root (shoresh) from dry ground, using the very same metaphor and the very same word as Isaiah 11. We also see other terms used for the same concept, such as branch (tsemach) in Jeremiah 23:5, in Isaiah 4:2 and also in the startling prophecies of Zechariah 3:8 and 6:12.


Beyond doubt, Isaiah 52:13-53:12 refers to Messiah Jesus. He is the one highly exalted before whom kings shut their mouths. Messiah is the shoot who sprung up from the fallen Davidic dynasty. He became the King of Kings. He provided the ultimate atonement. 


Isaiah 52:13 states that it would be the Messiah who will "sprinkle" many nations. What does that mean? What was Messiah's ministry to be toward the nations? The word translated "sprinkle" or sometimes "startle" is found several other places in the OT. The Hebrew word is found in Leviticus 4:6; 8:11; 14:7, and Numbers 8:7, 19:18-19. The references cited all pertain to priestly sprinklings of the blood of atonement, the anointing oil of consecration, and the ceremonial water used to cleanse the unclean. Is Isaiah 52:13 telling us that the Messiah will act as a priest who applies atonement, anoints to consecrate, sprinkles to make clean? (This vision of the Messiah as both priest and king is also found in Zechariah 6:12-13). But, priests were to come from the tribe of Levi and Kings from the tribe of Judah! What kind of priest is he? David told us Messiah would be a priest of the order of Melchizedek (see Psalm 110 and Hebrews chapters 7-9).  [This was previously explained in post # 6]


Isaiah 53 must be understood as referring to the coming Davidic King, the Messiah. King Messiah was prophesied to suffer and die to pay for our sins and then rise again. He would serve as a priest to the nations of the world and apply the blood of atonement to cleanse those who believe. There is one alone who this can refer to, Jesus, whom millions refer to as Christ, which is from the Greek word for Messiah. Those who confess him are his children, his promised offspring, the spoils of his victory. According to the testimony of the Jewish Apostles, Jesus died for our sins, rose again, ascended to the right hand of God, and he now serves as our great High Priest who cleanses us of sin and our King. Jesus rules over his people and is in the process of conquering the Gentiles. The first century Jewish disciples were willing to die rather than deny they had seen the risen Messiah. Only if one has presupposed Jesus cannot have been the Messiah can one deny that which is obvious. Israel's greatest son, Jesus, is the one Isaiah foresaw.


----------



## SBG (Feb 17, 2006)

StriperAddict said:
			
		

> Kerri,
> Isaiah 53 has fully explained your objection.
> 
> You've mentioned Isaiah 53 as relating to Israel before.  Please check this out, Rabbinical sources attest to the validity of the passage as the coming of "Messiah" and His mission:
> ...



Stripe...this is the pivotal passage in the whole old testament concerning the messiah. Most, if not all, students of Judaism, admit that this passage refers to the coming messiah. It is obvious from its reading that either Jesus was/is the Messiah, or there is a Messiah yet to be revealed that the Jewish people will reject...as they did Jesus. This is the one book that gives the adherents of Judaism their problem. It can't be intellectually explained away, nor can it be denied.


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 20, 2006)

*Worthy question...*

An observation and question:

_The Despised Servant _

“He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from who men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.” (Isaiah 53:3)

In 705 A.D., Isaiah predicted that this Servant would be a man of sorrows who would be despised and rejected by his own nation. When this Servant appeared to Israel as their Messiah and Savior, the Jewish nation rejected Him, despised Him, and placed Him on a cross to suffer the most painful death that man could execute. 

Hollywood often depicts Jesus as a sad man of sorrows with a long face and a solemn disposition. However, this is simply not the case. It was pleasing for Jesus to die on the cross for our sins, “for the joy that was set before him he endured on the cross.” (Hebrew 12:2) Notice also that men “hid their faces” from Him. When Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden, they also hid their faces from God. Israel did the same when they crucified their Creator on the cross. 

Q: Are you hiding your face from the One who saved you?


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Mar 6, 2006)

Hey Striper! 
Betcha thought I'd forgotten about this thread, but I haven't   I've been trying to figure out how to best go about discussing this without bringing in alot of other topics (like Isaiah 53 and the other Servant Songs, etc.) before the basics are settled.

I think the easiest way is to take it one step at a time.... so let's start with the basics 

The New Testament says that 'without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin'.

However, the Law says this:
Lev 5:11 But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, then he that sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put [any] frankincense thereon: for it [is] a sin offering.  

 Lev 5:12 Then shall he bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take his handful of it, [even] a memorial thereof, and burn [it] on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the LORD: it [is] a sin offering.  

 Lev 5:13 And the priest shall make an atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath sinned in one of these, and it shall be forgiven him:  

So, speaking of the basics, did the sin offering of flour, as instructed above, bring forgiveness of sins or not?  There was no blood involved, so was the sin forgiven?

I think once we establish the answer to this question, we can discuss the rest alot easier.

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## ilikembig (Mar 6, 2006)

*What does the word mean....*

I would like to add as well, it about blew me out of my seat yesterday in service when our Preacher said he was going to be covering Hebrews 10, and the word we would be focused on would be Sanctuary. A sacred moment with God where one can find peace and restoration.  Why do we need it? Because of SIN. What was supposed to correct sin? Atonement. What is atonement? Well in the Old Testament, it means to cover something up, a very expensive way.  Yes preferably with blood. Yet in the New Testament, because there was no need for an individual to 'cover something up' (because of Jesus Christ) atonement means an exchange of equivalent value. One confesses 10tons of sin to the Father; He sends back 10 tons of grace and forgiveness. No more, No less just what one needs.

I would also like to add that as you have seen me type atonement in the Old Testament means to 'cover'. What we as Christians want to have is a 'Cleansing'. So true sanctuary with the Father, gives one a true Cleansing.


----------



## redwards (Mar 6, 2006)

*Dixie dawg....*

Don't believe you will find anywhere in God's word where it sates that if one could afford it that a blood offering was not required.
Only in the case of the very poor, one who could not possibly afford an animal for sacrifice, was an offering as you state allowed.
Now a God who would not make provision for 'atonement' of sin for the very poor would not be a very just God would He!
See Matthew Henry commentary below.

But before that, let's go back to the very beginning, before the Law was given to Moses. You see, you seem to have ignored these questions that were posed in an earlier post to this thread. If you want to discuss atonement, then let's go back to the very basics and discuss them from the beginning, not just one little hang-up that you have.

What does the Hebrew word for "atonement" mean?


If the shedding of blood as atonement for sin was not a requirement, why is it that God in Gen. 3:21 clothed Adam and Eve with "coats of skin" after they had already made themselves clothing in verse 7? 



> 7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.....
> 
> ...
> 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
> ...


 
Was this not the first account of man's sin? 

If sin does not require a covering, why did God provide a covering for Adam and Eve?

And how did God get the "coats of skin" if not by the sacrifice of an animal?

Which would require the shedding of blood, since Gen. 9:4 and Lev 17:11 state:



> Gen. 9:
> 4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
> 
> Lev. 17:
> 11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.


 
Could the answer be that man cannot supply a sufficient covering for sin, only God can provide a completely sufficient covering for sin?

God has given His Son Jesus Christ as the ultimate blood sacrifice, and His blood is the completely sufficient covering for my sins, your sins, everybody's sins.

Now, here is the Matthew Henry commentary on Lev. 5:11-13




> Of Fowls (5:7-10)
> Provision is here made for the poor of God's people, and the pacifying of their consciences under the sense of guilt. Those that were not able to bring a lamb might bring for a sin-offering a pair of turtle-doves or two young pigeons; nay, if any were so extremely poor that they were not able to procure these so often as they would have occasion, they might bring a pottle of fine flour, and this should be accepted. Thus the expense of the sin-offering was brought lower than that of any other offering, to teach us that no man's poverty shall ever be a bar in the way of his pardon. The poorest of all may have atonement made for them, if it be not their own fault. Thus the poor are evangelized; and no man shall say that he had not wherewithal to bear the charges of a journey to heaven. Now,
> 
> I. If the sinner brought two doves, one was to be offered for a sin-offering and the other for a burnt-offering, v. 7. Observe,
> ...


----------



## redwards (Mar 6, 2006)

ilikembig said:
			
		

> I would like to add as well, it about blew me out of my seat yesterday in service when our Preacher said he was going to be covering Hebrews 10, and the word we would be focused on would be Sanctuary. A sacred moment with God where one can find peace and restoration. Why do we need it? Because of SIN. What was supposed to correct sin? Atonement. What is atonement? Well in the Old Testament, it means to cover something up, a very expensive way. Yes preferably with blood. Yet in the New Testament, because there was no need for an individual to 'cover something up' (because of Jesus Christ) atonement means an exchange of equivalent value. One confesses 10tons of sin to the Father; He sends back 10 tons of grace and forgiveness. No more, No less just what one needs.
> 
> I would also like to add that as you have seen me type atonement in the Old Testament means to 'cover'. What we as Christians want to have is a 'Cleansing'. So true sanctuary with the Father, gives one a true Cleansing.


You are right on!!


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Mar 6, 2006)

redwards said:
			
		

> Don't believe you will find anywhere in God's word where it sates that if one could afford it that a blood offering was not required.
> Only in the case of the very poor, one who could not possibly afford an animal for sacrifice, was an offering as you state allowed.
> Now a God who would not make provision for 'atonement' of sin for the very poor would not be a very just God would He!
> See Matthew Henry commentary below.
> ...



Hi Redwards!
I appreciate your reply!

I have to say though, with all due respect, that it seems like a bit of double-walking with your answer.

The statement made by the New Testament is that 'without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sin."   NONE.  No stipulations on personal wealth, etc.

The answer is a simple 'yes' or 'no'. Did the flour offering provide atonement or not? According to the bible, the answer is YES.  Therefore this makes the statement 'without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin', a false statement.  There is no need for interpretation or commentary as this is clearly and unequivocably stated in the bible itself. The flour offering provided BLOODLESS atonement for sin. Why is that so difficult to accept? It doesn't matter if it was for 'poor people' or not, the fact is, BLOODLESS offerings WERE accepted for sin atonement, which proves that there IS forgiveness of sin without shedding of blood.

I asked a Rabbi (www.askmoses.com you can ask Rabbi's questions in real-time chat) this morning what the Hebrew word for 'atonement' means. His answer was 'forgiveness'.  So I'm not sure what your question is? As far as the covering for Adam and Eve, that is a nice anectdote but has no biblical support as the bible never says Adam and Eve's covering was a 'sacrifice'. I also asked the Rabbi about that and his question was, why would God perform an animal sacrifice... was it God that sinned? I can't find anywhere in the bible where God performed a sacrifice. If you can find one, please let me know.

The bottom line, cut raw to the core is that there was and IS forgiveness of sin without the shedding of blood.  In the verses given for support of blood atonement, ('for it is the blood that atones for sin'), it is taken out of context because it supports the Christian belief that way.  The passage never meant that blood was the only atonement for sin.  It is simply saying (read in context) that out of all of the steps in doing animal sacrifice, the part of putting the blood on the altar is the part that makes atonement, and this is why blood is not to be eaten. It never says that blood is the ONLY means of atonement.

To make an analogy, let's say you are required to write a report for your boss on why you were late for work.  You have a cup with a mechanical pencil and a blue pen to choose from for your writing utensils.  If you choose the mechanical pencil, you must use .07 size lead in order to write the report.  Does that mean that .07 size lead is the ONLY way to write the report? No, you could use the pen instead. But if you CHOOSE to use the mechanical pencil, then it is only the .07 lead that will work. In the same sense, if you CHOOSE to use sacrifice as your method of atonement, it is the blood that atones.  Even with that, using the pencil is not the ideal way to write the report because using the pen would be a more preferred method and more presentable.  In the same way, animal sacrifice was not and is not the PREFERRED method of sin atonement.  In fact it is stated NUMEROUS times in the bible that it is the LEAST preferred method of atonement by God. I will be happy to provide verses if necessary. PRAYER (which is bloodless) and charity (again bloodless) are more preferred by God for sin atonement than sacrifice ever was.

And a last note... in the New Testament it also says that if you continue to sin, there remains no sacrifice for you.  This is not a new concept and actually I think is not understood by many Christians.  This is a Jewish concept and belief that is supported by the Law.  The SIN sacrifice was ONLY for UNINTENTIONAL SINS.  If you committed a sin on purpose, you could NOT make a blood atonement to cleanse your sin, you were guilty.  You could (and can) REPENT of your sin and turn from doing it again, and if you do this with a contrite heart and truly repent, you are forgiven, but there is NO sacrifice for that. There was only restitution... if you stole from someone, you were to repay them for what you stole, etc.  But NO sacrifice!

I'm sure this will probably be contraversial, but it's not ME, it is the bible.  Bottom line is that the bible specifically gives provisions for BLOODLESS sin atonement, which is contrary to the New Testament teachings.  If one says that there is NO forgiveness of sin without sacrifice, then they are saying that God lied in Leviticus (as well as elsewhere in the bible where atonement without blood is listed).  Which is why the Jews did not accept Jesus as the messiah, or the New Testament teachings.

Hugs,
Kerri


----------



## No. GA. Mt. Man (Mar 6, 2006)

It must be burdensome to have all the answers.


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Mar 6, 2006)

No. GA. Mt. Man said:
			
		

> It must be burdensome to have all the answers.




I surely would not know!!
There are many things I don't understand, like how God could punish people when He is the one who 'hardened their heart'.  Or why there has to be so much suffering in the world.  Biblically, I don't understand how the whole creation and multiplication of people happened... how could Adam and Eve's sons marry women who somehow already existed and weren't from Eve and Adam, if they were the only ones created?  Heck there is alot more than all of that that I don't understand because there is no reference for them in the bible.  I am FAR from having all the answers!

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## leroy (Mar 6, 2006)

Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> I surely would not know!!
> There are many things I don't understand, like how God could punish people when He is the one who 'hardened their heart'.  Or why there has to be so much suffering in the world.  Biblically, I don't understand how the whole creation and multiplication of people happened... how could Adam and Eve's sons marry women who somehow already existed and weren't from Eve and Adam, if they were the only ones created?  Heck there is alot more than all of that that I don't understand because there is no reference for them in the bible.  I am FAR from having all the answers!
> 
> Hugs!
> Kerri




Where does it say that God hardened anyones heart. it says that God tempts no on. The suffering is the result of sin in the world it all began when Adam and Eve committed the first sin. And dont think any of us will ever have all the answers untill we reach Heaven then it will all be clear to us.


----------



## redwards (Mar 6, 2006)

No. GA. Mt. Man said:
			
		

> It must be burdensome to have all the answers.


So true!
And the fact of the matter is, the load could be so light, if only the simple truth would be accepted.



> Matthew 11: 25-30
> *25* At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. *26* Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. *27* All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. *28* Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. *29* Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. *30* For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.


----------



## ilikembig (Mar 6, 2006)

"The bottom line, cut raw to the core is that there was and IS forgiveness of sin without the shedding of blood. In the verses given for support of blood atonement, ('for it is the blood that atones for sin'), it is taken out of context because it supports the Christian belief that way."
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 Dixie Dawg - I have gone out to the site that you have provided I am currently next in line to ask my questions, one which will be the same you asked( I like to see the consistency) and another question I have. In the meantime I have gone out to this site and queried 'atonement' this is what I have pulled from the site you provided.

"Animal Sacrifice Date Posted: Aug 26, 2005 
Since G-d gave the Ten Commandments to Moses and He was the source of the law then the law from G-d's point of view is that we must make animal sacrifices to atone for sin. 
Nowhere, can I find in His scriptures where God said that His people would receive forgiveness by any other means. It clears from the law that atonement comes only from animal sacrifice."

Also - please remember the word atonement in the Old Testament means to "Cover". I am not referring to a Jewish website or a Q&A site but the Old Testament.

The findings from the site that you have provided are not very clear, as the ‘scholar’ I was in chat with was not very helpful.

###### : i was taught that the word atonement in the old testament meant to cover up
###### : sin
Mrs. Lipskier : to atone, to cover up the bad, to repeal the bad for good
Mrs. Lipskier : etc, etc
###### : Does the Jewish religion believe there is a forgiveness of sin without a blood offering?
###### : ?
Mrs. Lipskier : not sure what you are referring to
###### : I suppose i am not asking the question correctly. i was just trying to understand if the Jewish belief was in the old testament in order to have forgiveness of sins the only way was through blood sacrifice
Mrs. Lipskier : not sure


----------



## Branchminnow (Mar 6, 2006)

No. GA. Mt. Man said:
			
		

> It must be burdensome to have all the answers.


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Mar 6, 2006)

ilikembig said:
			
		

> "The bottom line, cut raw to the core is that there was and IS forgiveness of sin without the shedding of blood. In the verses given for support of blood atonement, ('for it is the blood that atones for sin'), it is taken out of context because it supports the Christian belief that way."
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
> 
> Dixie Dawg - I have gone out to the site that you have provided I am currently next in line to ask my questions, one which will be the same you asked( I like to see the consistency) and another question I have. In the meantime I have gone out to this site and queried 'atonement' this is what I have pulled from the site you provided.
> ...



Renee, if you're going to query the site (which is very informative!) and then post it here, please note where you are taking the information from.  The text you quoted above was from a "comment" left by a visitor to the website, not a Rabbi or even a Jew for that matter.  Anyone can post their comments there, they are commenting their opinion on the article that was written, not biblical fact.  The quote that you posted above was made by someone named "Andy" that visited the site and gave his opinion.  It was answered by the AskMoses.com website editor with this link:  Editor's Comment 
See "Why aren't we offering sacrifices any more?" (http://www.askmoses.com/qa_detail.html?h=267&o=2543). 



> Also - please remember the word atonement in the Old Testament means to "Cover". I am not referring to a Jewish website or a Q&A site but the Old Testament.



Ok, what are your supporting verses?  

Also, please remember that the term "Sin offering" does NOT mean 'blood offering'.  I am not referring to any Jewish website or Q& A site either, but the Old Testament and I gave one of the verses in my previous post above.



> The findings from the site that you have provided are not very clear, as the ‘scholar’ I was in chat with was not very helpful.
> 
> ###### : i was taught that the word atonement in the old testament meant to cover up
> ###### : sin
> ...



I'm sorry that you didn't get much info/help from Mrs. Lipskier.  The attendants change every few hours or so on the site, so if you try back this afternoon again, you may be able to talk to a Rabbi then and ask them.

Kerri


----------



## ilikembig (Mar 6, 2006)

Dixie Dawg - In reference to the verses needed. I am going to place in here quite a few of them. Old and New Testament. 

atonement

This word does not occur in the Authorized Version of the New Testament except
in Rom. 5:11, where in the Revised Version the word "reconciliation" is used.
In the Old Testament it is of frequent occurrence. The meaning of the word is
simply at-one-ment, i.e., the state of being at one or being reconciled, so
that atonement is reconciliation. Thus it is used to denote the effect which
flows from the death of Christ. But the word is also used to denote that by
which this reconciliation is brought about, viz., the death of Christ itself;
and when so used it means satisfaction, and in this sense to make an atonement
for one is to make satisfaction for his offences (Ex. 32:30; Lev. 4:26; 5:16;
Num. 6:11), and, as regards the person, to reconcile, to propitiate God in his
behalf. By the atonement of Christ we generally mean his work by which he
expiated our sins. But in Scripture usage the word denotes the reconciliation
itself, and not the means by which it is effected. When speaking of Christ's
saving work, the word "satisfaction," the word used by the theologians of the
Reformation, is to be preferred to the word "atonement." Christ's satisfaction
is all he did in the room and in behalf of sinners to satisfy the demands of
the law and justice of God. Christ's work consisted of suffering and obedience,
and these were vicarious, i.e., were not merely for our benefit, but were in our
stead, as the suffering and obedience of our vicar, or substitute. Our guilt is
expiated by the punishment which our vicar bore, and thus God is rendered
propitious, i.e., it is now consistent with his justice to manifest his love to
transgressors. Expiation has been made for sin, i.e., it is covered. The means
by which it is covered is vicarious satisfaction, and the result of its being
covered is atonement or reconciliation. To make atonement is to do that by
virtue of which alienation ceases and reconciliation is brought about. Christ's
mediatorial work and sufferings are the ground or efficient cause of
reconciliation with God. They rectify the disturbed relations between God and
man, taking away the obstacles interposed by sin to their fellowship and
concord. The reconciliation is mutual, i.e., it is not only that of sinners
toward God, but also and pre-eminently that of God toward sinners, effected by
the sin-offering he himself provided, so that consistently with the other
attributes of his character his love might flow forth in all its fulness of
blessing to men. The primary idea presented to us in different forms throughout
the Scripture is that the death of Christ is a satisfaction of infinite worth
rendered to the law and justice of God (q.v.), and accepted by him in room of
the very penalty man had incurred. It must also be constantly kept in mind that
the atonement is not the cause but the consequence of God's love to guilty men
(John 3:16; Rom. 3:24, 25; Eph. 1:7; 1 John 1:9; 4:9). The atonement may also
be regarded as necessary, not in an absolute but in a relative sense, i.e., if
man is to be saved, there is no other way than this which God has devised and
carried out (Ex. 34:7; Josh. 24:19; Ps. 5:4; 7:11; Nahum 1:2, 6; Rom. 3:5).
This is God's plan, clearly revealed; and that is enough for us to know.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
The piece I took from the site you provided, I understand it is a reply back from a member. I am not sure how you know "Andy" is not of Jewish faith, that of course not important, what I thought was important or valid was the fact that the site thought enough to place it out there. I am sure they get many replies back. 
Also about the "scholar" that I spoke to, is it your belief that only some are  knowledgeable enough to share what they know. Do I have to go directly to a rabbi to get a good honest answer to a question?  I would hope not. I will try back though later today as you have suggested.


----------



## StriperAddict (Mar 6, 2006)

Hey Kerri, I've been off of this post lately for personal stuff, but many of the posts here sum up everything well, no need for addition!  (Plenty of things here are in answer to your questions, yet many articles by us go unanswered. So, ok, I'll (we'll) move along)

There have been other posts that cover the matters of faith & atonement also, and I'll likely get back on some of them.  But to those who've looked at the life of Christ and don't see Him being God's sacrifice for your sins, one note:   
Wether you believe in Jesus as the Messiah, the Christ _or not _is not as important as what has caused you NOT to believe in Him.  Your unbelief tells of some very crucial/life things about you.

Nevertheless,  I hope you can someday see through the 'letter of the law' and understand the love, mercy and grace God freely gives in the person of Messiah, Jesus.


----------



## StriperAddict (Mar 6, 2006)

Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> Hey Striper!
> Betcha thought I'd forgotten about this thread, but I haven't   I've been trying to figure out how to best go about discussing this without bringing in alot of other topics (like Isaiah 53 and the other Servant Songs, etc.) before the basics are settled.
> 
> I think the easiest way is to take it one step at a time.... so let's start with the basics
> ...



BTW Kerri, in all the matters of blood sacrifice, it was Jesus' blood that made atonement for ALL sins, both those of the people in the Old covenant, and of course those in the new covenant.  Therefore, 'without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin' is fulfilled in the OT _and_ NT for all believers...  in the person of Christ.

Anyone's obedience to the commands of God in OT times were rewarded because of thier FAITH, God knowing the heart, but only as "looking forward" to the true and perfect atonement in Christ.  Jesus said of Moses, "he spoke of me", and Isaiah certainly puts in plain light the message of "the suffering servant" as was previously outlined in this thread.  All this ties together with sin/atonement.


----------



## brofoster (Mar 6, 2006)

I think some attention should also be paid to Hebrews Ch 10-13 in which Jesus, through his death, ushers us into a new covenant.  He was the final lamb to be slain to close the old testament.  A sacrafice without spot or blemish worthy of dying for man' sin.  Through this sacrafice God then through his own example was able to forgive men of their sins through the perpetual blood of Jesus that cleanses us today.  He was in the old Testament, but he was also in the new Testament.  Sealing one and opening another, while bridging the gap between the two.

Brofoster


----------



## StriperAddict (Mar 6, 2006)

Great note, Brofoster.  The book of Hebrews is one of the best texts for this thread.  

Heb 7:25  Consequently, He (Jesus) is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Mar 6, 2006)

leroy said:
			
		

> Where does it say that God hardened anyones heart. it says that God tempts no on. The suffering is the result of sin in the world it all began when Adam and Eve committed the first sin. And dont think any of us will ever have all the answers untill we reach Heaven then it will all be clear to us.



God hardened Pharoahs heart so he would not let the Hebrews go.

Where does it say God tempts no one? The bible says God DOES tempt us:

Deu 13:1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,  


 Deu 13:2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;  


 Deu 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: *for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul*.  

I agree with your last comment though... none of us will ever know all of the answers until 'judgement day' 

Hugs!
Kerri


----------



## StriperAddict (Mar 6, 2006)

Dixie Dawg said:
			
		

> God hardened Pharoahs heart so he would not let the Hebrews go.
> 
> Where does it say God tempts no one? The bible says God DOES tempt us:
> ...
> Deu 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: *for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul*.



Being "proved" of God is not the same as being tempted of evil...:

James 1:13:
Let no man say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God," for God can't be tempted by evil, and he himself tempts no one. 
14 But each one is tempted, when he is drawn away by his own lust, and enticed.  
15  Then lust, when it has conceived, bears sin; and the sin, when it is full grown, brings forth death.

===
Fire away, I'll be on this tomorrow...


----------



## brofoster (Mar 7, 2006)

This is a good illustration of the concept of trials and tempations.

As Striper illustrated above, God does not tempt anyone.  The final end of all tempation is sin and sin leads to a spiritual death this does not come from God but from within by our own (sometimes evil) desires.  

On the other hand you have trials.  The case of Job is a perfect illustration.  Satan was allowed to test Job's faith to a certain degree.  Note that none of it started with Job's mind or thoughts but directly from God.  

God allows us to go through trials to strengthen, test and make us stronger for greater responsibility.  Sometimes we end up going through the same trials over and over until we get it right.

Brofoster


----------

