Jewish Sacrificial System and The Gentiles

[Christian2]

Is this true?

“Did you know that traditional Judaism, based on the Torah, teaches that the Temple sacrifices made atonement for the Gentile world? This was part of Israel’s call as a priestly nation, and it was Israel’s Temple offerings that helped make Gentile repentance acceptable to God.” (See Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, vol. 2, pp. 152-153.)

http://www.realmessiah.com/OBJtheological.htm

[stabalizer]

Is this true?



http://www.realmessiah.com/OBJtheological.htm

Isn't that why there was an outer court?

Lk 2:30-32,; "For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of ALL people; a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel"

[Christian2]

Isn't that why there was an outer court?

Lk 2:30-32,; "For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of ALL people; a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel"

Yes, stabalizer, it is my understanding that is why there was an outer court. But, I wanted the Jews to confirm it and perhaps expound on it.

[MegaHertz]

A whole page that I pretty much agree with, WOW.
The one minor exception being the need for blood sacrifice, that came into being when Law came into being didn't it? There were no sacrifices of that nature when they were with Moses in the wilderness;

Am:5:25:
Have ye offered unto me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years,
O house of Israel?

[Gavriel]

A whole page that I pretty much agree with, WOW.

If you are Christian it's no big surprise, it was a Christian site preaching to the choir.

The "source" form the original post is from Christian book.

[MegaHertz]

If you are Christian it's no big surprise, it was a Christian site preaching to the choir.

The "source" form the original post is from Christian book.

Yeah, I got that from some of the answers, still I can find lots of 'points' to discuss from a different point of view.

[Christian2]

If you are Christian it's no big surprise, it was a Christian site preaching to the choir.

The "source" form the original post is from Christian book.

No, Gavriel, it is not a Christian book in the sense that you are implying. It is a book written by a Jew who still considers himself a Jew who now follows Christianity. There is a difference. He still calls the Jews his people, "my" people. A Jew born a Jew does not stop being a Jew because he has changed his religion. He studied with Jews, studied Hebrew in college, ultimately making it his major. He earned a doctorate in Semitic languages. He has publically debated rabbis.

Now, what is your answer to my question? Are you denying it?

[Modalist]

Animal sacrafice was only one way to relieve sin and only minor unintentional sin. Repentance and Charity are the other two.

[Christian2]

Animal sacrafice was only one way to relieve sin and only minor unintentional sin. Repentance and Charity are the other two.

Please provide the Scriptures that say that animal sacrifice was only for minor unintentional sins.

Nevertheless, it was the blood sacrifices that atoned for sins while the Temple was still standing. It was only after the destruction of the Temple that the Jews proclaimed that repentance and charity atoned for sins in place of blood sacrifices.

I am not discounting the importance of repentance and charity. Jews and Christians do not believe that sacrifices without repentance and faith do anyone any good, but I believe that blood sacrifice was always the means for atonement of sins--unintentional and intentional.

Leviticus 16:20-22:

20 And when he hath made an end of atoning for the holy place, and the tent of meeting, and the altar, he shall present the live goat.

21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, even all their sins; and he shall put them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of an appointed man into the wilderness.

22 And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land which is cut off; and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.

23 And Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting, and shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place, and shall leave them there.

Please notice the words "all." "All" means "All."

Blood sacrifices operated on the principal of life for life. Life was in the blood. The innocent animal's life was offered in place of the sinner's life. I've read that some Orthodox Jews to this day offer a blood sacrifice on the eve of Yon Kuppur—chickens and rosters. This is because they recognize that they still need the blood to atone for their sins—life for life.

The sacrifices on Yom Kippur or the Day of Atonement provided atonement both for intentional and unintentional sins. This is taught in the Talmud and Law Codes and the Scriptures are very clear about this. I don't believe that Jewish tradition has ever questioned that.

[Christian2]

OK folks, this is what I am getting at.

The Jews had all kinds of sacrifices to atone for sins. These sacrifices along with repentance, etc. atoned for their sins. As I noted above I read that the Jewish sacrifices also included the Gentiles. Gavriel, the only Jew I know of who has answered has flipped me off.

But what about the Gentiles? We have two groups--the Jews and the Gentiles--what provision did God make for the Gentiles to atone for sins if the Jewish sacrificial system did not include them?

And if someone comes along and says, "Well C2, all the Gentiles had to do to atone for sins was to repent and give to charity, etc.," then why did God put the Jews through this elaborate system of sacrifices?

[Menachem]

No, Gavriel, it is not a Christian book in the sense that you are implying. It is a book written by a Jew who still considers himself a Jew who now follows Christianity. There is a difference. He still calls the Jews his people, "my" people. A Jew born a Jew does not stop being a Jew because he has changed his religion. He studied with Jews, studied Hebrew in college, ultimately making it his major. He earned a doctorate in Semitic languages. He has publically debated rabbis.

Lets apply this another way. "the book was written by a christian who still considers himself a christian who now follows hinduism." Now can you see how utterly rediculous that sounds? Halachically any Jew who converts to another religion is not considered as a Jew but as an adherent of that religion.

He has a doctorate in near eastern languages...Whoopie! It does not make him an expert in Jewish theology. In fact his very religious choice makes him not an authority. I have heard many of his debates one, I recall with Rabbi Shochet to which all he did was wonder off into unrelated topics to never really Answer the Rabbi's questions about jesus and or the GNT.

Now, what is your answer to my question? Are you denying it?

what was Dr. Browns source for saying that? Just to be curious before I answer.

[Menachem]

Please provide the Scriptures that say that animal sacrifice was only for minor unintentional sins.

Nevertheless, it was the blood sacrifices that atoned for sins while the Temple was still standing. It was only after the destruction of the Temple that the Jews proclaimed that repentance and charity atoned for sins in place of blood sacrifices.

I am not discounting the importance of repentance and charity. Jews and Christians do not believe that sacrifices without repentance and faith do anyone any good, but I believe that blood sacrifice was always the means for atonement of sins--unintentional and intentional.

Numbers 15:27-31.

If a person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one-year-old female goat for a sin offering. The priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven . . . . The person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people, because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt shall be on him.

Leviticus 16:20-22:



Please notice the words "all." "All" means "All."

Blood sacrifices operated on the principal of life for life. Life was in the blood. The innocent animal's life was offered in place of the sinner's life. I've read that some Orthodox Jews to this day offer a blood sacrifice on the eve of Yon Kuppur—chickens and rosters. This is because they recognize that they still need the blood to atone for their sins—life for life.

The sacrifices on Yom Kippur or the Day of Atonement provided atonement both for intentional and unintentional sins. This is taught in the Talmud and Law Codes and the Scriptures are very clear about this. I don't believe that Jewish tradition has ever questioned that.

this chapter Leviticus 16 talks about the death of Aharon's sons and the Yom Kippur Service and the way the Yom Kippur sacrifice is to be carried out.
this is shown in the verses Lev 16:29-34. In every ordinary day life sin sacrifices were for unintentional or minor sins as per Numbers 15 above.

as for those Orthodox Jews that use the Kaperot as scape goats. The idea is that when you swing the chicken over your head and utter a few words to the affect that "this is for atonement" the chicken is then ritually slaughtered and given to feed the poor. The idea is to show that we desire to return to the ways of the Temple but the slaughter of the scapegoat is not a sacrifice that is prohibited by the Talmud itself as the only place sacrifices can be offered is in the Temple, but since it is not standing we cannot do so.

you can find more information on the kaperot at this website it gives good info on the tradition: http://www.hanefesh.com/edu/Holidays/Yom_Kippur.htm

[Krusader]

It is understood in Scripture that repentance and good deeds must be coupled with blood atonement to be efficacious for the remission of sins. God said that He had provided blood as the means of atonement - He never said that He accepted anything other than that as the means of cleansing one from sin - Lev. 17:11. The rabbis, when faced with the destruction of the Temple sacrificial system began to teach a bloodless atonement - which is unscriptural and without Biblical support.

[Menachem]

It is understood in Scripture that repentance and good deeds must be coupled with blood atonement to be efficacious for the remission of sins. God said that He had provided blood as the means of atonement - He never said that He accepted anything other than that as the means of cleansing one from sin - Lev. 17:11. The rabbis, when faced with the destruction of the Temple sacrificial system began to teach a bloodless atonement - which is unscriptural and without Biblical support.

I see a whole bunch of rehash here that was already taken care of in another thread. Want support see Hoshea 14:3 for starters. Not only that you disregard all of the verses that point out that charity is also a valid form of atonement. So crusader go wander off somewhere else with this nonsense.

[Christian2]

Lets apply this another way. "the book was written by a christian who still considers himself a christian who now follows hinduism." Now can you see how utterly rediculous that sounds? Halachically any Jew who converts to another religion is not considered as a Jew but as an adherent of that religion.

He has a doctorate in near eastern languages...Whoopie! It does not make him an expert in Jewish theology. In fact his very religious choice makes him not an authority. I have heard many of his debates one, I recall with Rabbi Shochet to which all he did was wonder off into unrelated topics to never really Answer the Rabbi's questions about jesus and or the GNT.



what was Dr. Browns source for saying that? Just to be curious before I answer.

While I am looking up the source how about answering another question for me?

You said:

Halachically any Jew who converts to another religion is not considered as a Jew but as an adherent of that religion.

Is it not true that during WWII, the Germans considered anyone who had 1/4 Jewish blood in them no matter what religion they professed to be Jews?

If I, being a Gentile with not an ounce of Jewish blood in me, were to embrace Judaism, would I be considered a Jew?