The arguments for ancient animal sacrifice

mmksparbud · Nov 3, 2019

fosquirrels said:
When I joined Christianity, I presumed that the religion did not have anything to do with animal sacrifice; having learned more about it, including the fact that Jesus himself encouraged a leper to bring two birds to a priest for sacrifice, I am now reconsidering a great deal of things about the religion. I would like to discuss whether animal sacrifice in both the Old Testament and New Testament was a good thing and whether God would appreciate it.

To begin with, one must ask why God would want animals to be sacrificed. The only information I could find in the Bible is given in Leviticus 1:9, which mentions that burnt flesh has a “pleasing aroma” to the Lord. As God is above sensual pleasure, one presumes that this is not the reason God would have wanted sacrifices.

The standard explanation for why God would want sacrifices, which is nevertheless not found in the Bible to my knowledge, is that they constitute substitutionary atonement for sin, i.e. because the punishment for sin is death, the killing of an innocent creature placates God’s wraith, which would normally fall on the sinner, and thus the sacrificial victim “takes” the punishment intended for the sinner, and the sinner is forgiven. This explanation is false for several reasons.

For starters, we assume that killing an innocent creature is wrong and, therefore, sinful. If someone commits a sinful act, and then decides to kill an innocent creature to “atone” for that sinful act, they are in fact not atoning but committing another sinful act. Imagine for a moment a thief being prosecuted for his crimes; he decides, in front of the judge, to pull out a knife, stab a pigeon to death and hand it over to the judge, then tell the judge that in exchange for killing that pigeon, he can get to walk free. Not only would he continue to be prosecuted for theft, he would also be charged for cruelty to animals.

There is also the matter that the punishment for sin is supposedly death, ostensibly because God hates sin. However, God possesses a flawless sense of justice. To perform justice is arguably to either destroy evil or reform it, for the sake of preventing further evil from manifesting (this is admittedly debatable, as various people will have different concepts of justice). Punishment is only something one does for retribution and for practical reasons, and is not in itself just; legal punishment is carried out, in theory, to deter other people from pursuing crimes. Punishment provides no benefit unless it serves to prevent further evil, and if an ox is killed instead of the sinner, the loss incurred by this does not make the sinner any less likely to commit further evil than, say, charging him a fine equivalent to the price of the ox for the sin.

If the pro-sacrifice argument is that God specifically demands death as the punishment for sin, the counter-argument is still that punishing an innocent creature for the wrongs of another creature is itself wrong. In the above example of the thief, who is to receive a death sentence, it would be like the thief telling the judge to pass the sentence onto a pigeon instead. The judge would not display justice at all if he did that!

God does not demand sacrifices to sate His wraith. A perfectly just individual is, in theory, immune to wraith, as it does not bias his assessment of right and wrong. He would not feel wraith when going against evil, but simply recognize that the target of his enmity was evil and oppose it for that reason.

Because God is perfectly loving, He cares about innocent creatures and does not want them to be hurt; hurting an innocent creature in His name thus goes against His desires.

Also because He is perfectly loving, He is able to forgive sins without demanding the murder of animals in exchange for it.

It seems that for God to approve of animal sacrifices, he would have to be either unjust or unloving. If I’m wrong about this, then please provide your arguments. What motives would God have to approve of animal sacrifice?

It began with Adam and Eve and the first time they sinned. It was God Himself who killed the first lamb in order to clothe them. The wages of sin is death. That's it. You sin, you die. God is a pure and holy being and sin is so offensive to Him that He can not bare to see it. There is only one way to save man, someone else had to die for them. It was set up before creation that Jesus would be the one to die in their place. Until then, a temporary Lamb was used. The lamb had to be without blemish, perfect. For it symbolized God's pure Son who was sinless. The Lamb had to be brought inside into the living quarters and kept for several days before the sacrifice. A baby anything quickly becomes a loved pet. The head of the family had to slay the lamb himself. It was a hard thing to do and represented the hardship that God would feel to see anything die, but esp. His Son. This was done daily. In everything, Satan will make a counterfeit to what God has set up. In pagan rituals, animals and even human sacrifice became the counterfeit. That sacrifice was to appease an angry God and to acquire things or vengeance on others. God had a sacrifice that required His own Son to come and die for us.
Once a year came the Day of Atonement, on that day, the High Priest would have 2 goats, one was slain for the sins of the congregation by the Priest. He would then place his hands upon the live goat thus transferring the sins unto the live goat, it would be let out onto the wilderness and left to die. There are 2 trains of thought on who the live goat represents--in Jewish tradition and many denominations hold to that--it represents Satan. For it is he that is the reason for all sin and all the sins that the Lamb covered with His own blood (Jesus) were placed on him and he will die permanently. He does not pay for the sins---but he pays the price of death for sin for those not covered by Jesus. Others believe the live goat is Jesus also. But Jesus died only once for our sins, not twice, and He covers the sins, forgives us of them, but the sin remains and they are transferred to Satan who pays the penalty of death for those sins for those and those that were not covered by the blood of Jesus.
It was no easier for God to see His creations being sacrificed, but it was to teach us the severity of the cost of sin.

Andrewn · Nov 3, 2019

mmksparbud said:
It was no easier for God to see His creations being sacrificed, but it was to teach us the severity of the cost of sin.

Your last sentence summarizes the reason for sacrifices and, IMO, should be the answer to the OP.

Soyeong · Nov 3, 2019

fosquirrels said:
When I joined Christianity, I presumed that the religion did not have anything to do with animal sacrifice; having learned more about it, including the fact that Jesus himself encouraged a leper to bring two birds to a priest for sacrifice, I am now reconsidering a great deal of things about the religion. I would like to discuss whether animal sacrifice in both the Old Testament and New Testament was a good thing and whether God would appreciate it.

To begin with, one must ask why God would want animals to be sacrificed. The only information I could find in the Bible is given in Leviticus 1:9, which mentions that burnt flesh has a “pleasing aroma” to the Lord. As God is above sensual pleasure, one presumes that this is not the reason God would have wanted sacrifices.

The standard explanation for why God would want sacrifices, which is nevertheless not found in the Bible to my knowledge, is that they constitute substitutionary atonement for sin, i.e. because the punishment for sin is death, the killing of an innocent creature placates God’s wraith, which would normally fall on the sinner, and thus the sacrificial victim “takes” the punishment intended for the sinner, and the sinner is forgiven. This explanation is false for several reasons.

For starters, we assume that killing an innocent creature is wrong and, therefore, sinful. If someone commits a sinful act, and then decides to kill an innocent creature to “atone” for that sinful act, they are in fact not atoning but committing another sinful act. Imagine for a moment a thief being prosecuted for his crimes; he decides, in front of the judge, to pull out a knife, stab a pigeon to death and hand it over to the judge, then tell the judge that in exchange for killing that pigeon, he can get to walk free. Not only would he continue to be prosecuted for theft, he would also be charged for cruelty to animals.

There is also the matter that the punishment for sin is supposedly death, ostensibly because God hates sin. However, God possesses a flawless sense of justice. To perform justice is arguably to either destroy evil or reform it, for the sake of preventing further evil from manifesting (this is admittedly debatable, as various people will have different concepts of justice). Punishment is only something one does for retribution and for practical reasons, and is not in itself just; legal punishment is carried out, in theory, to deter other people from pursuing crimes. Punishment provides no benefit unless it serves to prevent further evil, and if an ox is killed instead of the sinner, the loss incurred by this does not make the sinner any less likely to commit further evil than, say, charging him a fine equivalent to the price of the ox for the sin.

If the pro-sacrifice argument is that God specifically demands death as the punishment for sin, the counter-argument is still that punishing an innocent creature for the wrongs of another creature is itself wrong. In the above example of the thief, who is to receive a death sentence, it would be like the thief telling the judge to pass the sentence onto a pigeon instead. The judge would not display justice at all if he did that!

God does not demand sacrifices to sate His wraith. A perfectly just individual is, in theory, immune to wraith, as it does not bias his assessment of right and wrong. He would not feel wraith when going against evil, but simply recognize that the target of his enmity was evil and oppose it for that reason.

Because God is perfectly loving, He cares about innocent creatures and does not want them to be hurt; hurting an innocent creature in His name thus goes against His desires.

Also because He is perfectly loving, He is able to forgive sins without demanding the murder of animals in exchange for it.

It seems that for God to approve of animal sacrifices, he would have to be either unjust or unloving. If I’m wrong about this, then please provide your arguments. What motives would God have to approve of animal sacrifice?

In Exodus, it ends with the glory of God descending on the tent of meeting and with the problem of no one being able to approach, while Leviticus begins with God calling out instructions for how to draw close to him, and in fact that is what the root word means, so Leviticus should be thought of as instructions for how to draw close to God, not as butcher's manual. Someone who made offerings before God without repenting and drawing close to God was missing the whole point and accomplish nothing more than depriving themselves of livestock. So the offering itself was not the object of what God wanted, but was the means to what He wanted and what was a pleasing aroma to God was not the small of burt animal flesh, but about what it signified about the condition of the heart of the person making the offering.

If you are interested, then I can link you to a study on Finding Messiah in Leviticus.

ewq1938 · Nov 3, 2019

fosquirrels said:
When I joined Christianity, I presumed that the religion did not have anything to do with animal sacrifice; having learned more about it, including the fact that Jesus himself encouraged a leper to bring two birds to a priest for sacrifice, I am now reconsidering a great deal of things about the religion.

That was before the new covenant and has nothing to do with the Christian religion. There is no such thing as animal sacrifices in Christianity.

St_Worm2 · Nov 3, 2019

ewq1938 said:
That was before the new covenant and has nothing to do with the Christian religion. There is no such thing as animal sacrifices in Christianity.

I agree. The New Covenant was not in place until after Jesus died. His direct ministry was specific, to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and they, like Him, were born under the law.

--David

Galatians 4
4 When the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law,
5 so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.
.

Mercy74 · Nov 10, 2019

dzheremi said:
Animal sacrifice was necessary within the Jewish understanding of the covenant. With the coming of Christ, those who follow Him do not understand things in that same way. Christ's command that the man bring animals to sacrifice was in keeping with His fulfillment of the law of Moses (Christ being a Jew and all), but now that it is fulfilled in Him, such things are not necessary.

I reckon that it is impossible to pray the Psalms and come away with the idea that they are necessary anyway, as it is written therein (Psalm 51:16-17; Western numbering):

For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it;
You do not delight in burnt offering.
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit,
A broken and a contrite heart—
These, O God, You will not despise.

+++

The law of Moses does not bound us, because we are in Christ Who has fulfilled (not discarded) it. What could the sacrifice of an animal for any reason do for us that Christ's own willing sacrifice did not already do?

David sacrificed animals, he was born from the tribe of Judah (2 Samuel 6:13)

Mercy74 · Nov 10, 2019

dqhall said:
Jesus tipped over the tables of those selling doves, sacrificial animals and the tables of the money changers in the temple. He reminded them of a quote from Hosea 6:6, “I desired mercy and not sacrifice.” If Jesus asked this man healed of leprosy to offer the doves for his cleansing, it was because of the Torah law requiring such an offering. Jesus got death threats for not observing Sabbath law in the way dictated by the teachers of the law and for calling God his father.

It was Christians who banned animal sacrifice that was prevalent in the Roman Empire and earlier civilizations. Christians also banned gladiator fights to the death in the coliseum.

In the days of Hosea the prophet; the children of Israel were unrepentant. Therefore their sacrifices were unacceptable. We know that obedience is better than sacrifice but you must be obedient to be proven worthy to offer an appropriate sacrifice. For example Cain and Abel; Cain offering was not accepted because he was wicked.

dqhall · Nov 10, 2019

Mercy74 said:
In the days of Hosea the prophet; the children of Israel were unrepentant. Therefore their sacrifices were unacceptable. We know that obedience is better than sacrifice but you must be obedient to be proven worthy to offer an appropriate sacrifice. For example Cain and Abel; Cain offering was not accepted because he was wicked.

Christian banned animal sacrifice. It was an unnecessary waste of livestock.

Mercy74 · Nov 10, 2019

dqhall said:
Christian banned animal sacrifice. It was an unnecessary waste of livestock.

Hebrews 13:10

Search

Search

The arguments for ancient animal sacrifice

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member

More options

Andrewn

Well-Known Member

More options

Soyeong

Well-Known Member

More options

ewq1938

I love you three.

More options

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator

More options

Mercy74

Mercy Messianic Judaism

More options

Mercy74

Mercy Messianic Judaism

More options

dqhall

Well-Known Member

More options

Mercy74

Mercy Messianic Judaism

More options

Similar threads