On the merits of animal sacrifice

[Father Heathen]

Neither can we choose animals as role models.

But other animals aren't moral agents.

Ah, so there is something that separates humanity from - and elevates above - the other animals.

 

[Chakra]

Ah, so there is something that separates humanity from - and elevates above - the other animals.

1) I never said that humanity is the same as animals. They do have the same understanding of pain and suffering, which is what matters.
2) So, do you want to live in a ruthless society?

 

[Father Heathen]

1) I never said that humanity is the same as animals. They do have the same understanding of pain and suffering, which is what matters.

I never said that you did, yet you responded to my post directed at those who do. And I was by no means downplaying or dismissing the pain and suffering of animals.

2) So, do you want to live in a ruthless society?

Of course not. I would like to see both suffering and waste minimized.

 

[Chakra]

I never said that you did, yet you responded to my post directed at those who do. And I was by no means downplaying or dismissing the pain and suffering of animals.

I was referring to the second part of your response, in which you implied there is a double standard when it comes to animal and human equality.

Of course not. I would like to see both suffering and waste minimized.

But that would require that we don't look at animals as role models. I'm not sure I see a double standard.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

What separates sacrificing a horse or dog from sacrificing a human -- as long as it's done humanely?

I see a worrisome devaluation of life here; living creatures as commodities, ours to use as we see fit.
Good point. I suspect the practice arose as a demonstration, to some invisible power, of commitment; or to impress others in the community.
The more costly the sacrifice the more impressed the power being importuned will be, and the more likely it will be to act favorably toward you, or, alternately, the more your community will be impressed and the greater your status will be.

Undoubtedly. Sacrificing a horse would be the equivalent of someone today tossing a Dodge Viper or a house into a blast furnace or a volcano or something. Horses were unbelievably valuable and I suspect the common view among people would have been if the gods didn't help you or grant your request after you sacrificed a horse then either you were meant to fail or they just didn't like you.

 

[Father Heathen]

But that would require that we don't look at animals as role models.

What do you mean by role models? We're not mimicing other animals by following our own nature.

 

[rusra02]

Animal sacrifices were offered to and accepted by the true God as far back as Abel. True Christians do not offer such sacrifices since " it is not possible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take sins away." Such sacrifices offered by Jewish worshippers before Christ came were acceptable to God but did not fully atone for sins. "So when he [Christ] comes into the world, he says: “‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me. You did not approve of whole burnt offerings and sin offerings.’ Then I said: ‘Look! I have come (in the scroll it is written about me) to do your will, O God.’” After first saying: “You did not want nor did you approve of sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sin offerings”—sacrifices that are offered according to the Law— then he says: “Look! I have come to do your will.” He does away with what is first in order to establish what is second. By this “will” we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time." (Hebrews 10:1-10) Thus, not only do animal sacrifices no longer have any value to God, I believe offering them would repudiate the real sacrifice for sin, the offering of the perfect man, Jesus Christ.

 

[Demonslayer]

Thus, not only do animal sacrifices no longer have any value to God

It's weird how God changes his mind on stuff like this. So for a while, God was all like "yeah man, slaughter those animals for me, I love it!" Then then God one day was like "nah, I don't really care for that anymore, stop slaughtering animals."

It's like that with a lot of things when it comes to this God fella. For a while he approved of human slavery. Now, not so much. At first he told women they had to shut up in church and wear hats, now women can talk in church. There was a time God commanded us not to eat shrimp or wear mixed fabrics. Now it's cool with God if we hit the raw bar with our polyester pants on.

He's a real flip-flopper, that God. He ought to run for public office.

 

[rusra02]

I believe the sin that Adam committed and passed by inheritance to us has alienated us from the true God. Without God's help, we would die in our sins and have no hope. We certainly would have no relationship with our Lifegiver. Gradually God revealed his purpose to save mankind from the terrible situation in which we are trapped. Animal sacrifices were necessary to approach the Sovereign and needed to be offered in the prescribed way in the nation of Israel, the only nation in a covenant with God. This emphasizes to me the holiness of Jehovah, and our own sinful state. God's dietary and other laws served to separate the nation of Israel from the debased practices of surrounding nations, and ultimately prepared the nation for the coming of the Messiah, the true "Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world." (John 1:29) Thus, "since the Law [of Moses] has a shadow of the good things to come, but not the very substance of the things, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered year after year, make those who approach perfect." Christ's sacrifice was effectively the end of the Law, IMO, with its dietary and other restrictions. ( Romans 10:4)

 

[Aštra’el]

"Sacrifice" implies one is willingly giving up something of meaning and personal value... but why? It might be done to prove yourself... it might be an act of devotion to your god(s), or offered up as a form of tribute... it might be done out of desperation in attempt to turn events in your favor... it might be used as a means to invoke powerful emotions... it might be wielded as a tactic to encourage, inspire, motivate, and boost the morale of others, and manipulate them for political, virtuous, or nefarious reasons... it might be used as a method of reaching out and connecting to forces Above or Below or Within... embraced as a method of generating mana for your god(s)... embraced as a desired or respected ritual as per one's spiritual-religious views or Weltanschauung... etc...

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Animal sacrifices were offered to and accepted by the true God as far back as Abel. True Christians do not offer such sacrifices since " it is not possible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take sins away."

Neither do carpenters, really.

Such sacrifices offered by Jewish worshippers before Christ came were acceptable to God but did not fully atone for sins.

Who says?

"So when he [Christ] comes into the world, he says: “‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me. You did not approve of whole burnt offerings and sin offerings.’ Then I said: ‘Look! I have come (in the scroll it is written about me) to do your will, O God.’” After first saying: “You did not want nor did you approve of sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sin offerings”—sacrifices that are offered according to the Law— then he says: “Look! I have come to do your will.” He does away with what is first in order to establish what is second. By this “will” we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time." (Hebrews 10:1-10) Thus, not only do animal sacrifices no longer have any value to God, I believe offering them would repudiate the real sacrifice for sin, the offering of the perfect man, Jesus Christ.

Ah, Paul, someone who doesn't seem all that interested in reading his own texts.

Without God's help, we would die in our sins and have no hope.

Without God creating sin, we couldn't.

Animal sacrifices were necessary to approach the Sovereign and needed to be offered in the prescribed way in the nation of Israel, the only nation in a covenant with God.

But even people like Samuel knew that rituals were more about mankind and God would rather you obey Him. Rituals are to placate US, not Him.

God's dietary and other laws served to separate the nation of Israel from the debased practices of surrounding nations, and ultimately prepared the nation for the coming of the Messiah, the true "Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world." (John 1:29)

The debased nations that wore mixed fabrics? The debased nations who cut their hair?

 

[YmirGF]

Even with modern industrialized raising and slaughtering of animals being somewhat of an odious practice, it is still done for a good purpose. I cannot imagine any god looking on affectionately as his/her/its devoted followers killed an animal in his/her/its name and being impressed with their offering. It's like a little kid killing a puppy and then presenting it to their mom with a flourish and a smile. "I did it for you, Mommy!"

 

[Akivah]

It's weird how God changes his mind on stuff like this. So for a while, God was all like "yeah man, slaughter those animals for me, I love it!" Then then God one day was like "nah, I don't really care for that anymore, stop slaughtering animals."

It's like that with a lot of things when it comes to this God fella. For a while he approved of human slavery. Now, not so much. At first he told women they had to shut up in church and wear hats, now women can talk in church. There was a time God commanded us not to eat shrimp or wear mixed fabrics. Now it's cool with God if we hit the raw bar with our polyester pants on.

He's a real flip-flopper, that God. He ought to run for public office.

G-d's word is eternal and has never changed. The flip-flop that you note is only your misunderstanding what the text really says.

 

[Demonslayer]

That's an inspired series of emotocons. I've been taken on an emotional journey!

 

[Demonslayer]

The flip-flop that you note is only your misunderstanding what the text really says.

How have I misread Exodus 21:20-21?

 

[Akivah]

How have I misread E x o 21:20-21?

I don't know how you are reading it. These verses, which are not flip-flopping have nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

 

[Valjean]

Animal sacrifices were offered to and accepted by the true God as far back as Abel. True Christians do not offer such sacrifices since " it is not possible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take sins away." Such sacrifices offered by Jewish worshippers before Christ came were acceptable to God but did not fully atone for sins. "So when he [Christ] comes into the world, he says: “‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me. You did not approve of whole burnt offerings and sin offerings.’ Then I said: ‘Look! I have come (in the scroll it is written about me) to do your will, O God.’” After first saying: “You did not want nor did you approve of sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sin offerings”—sacrifices that are offered according to the Law— then he says: “Look! I have come to do your will.” He does away with what is first in order to establish what is second. By this “will” we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time." (Hebrews 10:1-10) Thus, not only do animal sacrifices no longer have any value to God, I believe offering them would repudiate the real sacrifice for sin, the offering of the perfect man, Jesus Christ.

This is a lovely story, Rusra, but what makes you think it's true? How do you know it's not pure mythology?
There are many other theological stories from Islam, Hopi, The Chronicles of Narnia, Hinduism, &c. What distinguishes this Christian mythology from any other?

 

[rusra02]

This is a lovely story, Rusra, but what makes you think it's true? How do you know it's not pure mythology?
There are many other theological stories from Islam, Hopi, The Chronicles of Narnia, Hinduism, &c. What distinguishes this Christian mythology from any other?

The accounts written in the Bible are historical, not mythical. That Jesus lived and died in the 1st century C.E. is beyond reasonable doubt. The men who witnessed to and wrote about the Christ brought down on themselves hatred and intense persecution and suffering, but never recanted their testimony. Again, I believe the historical record bears testimony to the truth of the Christian Scriptures. Ultimately, each person must decide for themselves what is truth and what is myth. To me, the Holy Scriptures ring true and are supported by the evidence of history. This cannot be said for the fanciful tales in other religious writings, IMO.

 

[Chakra]

What do you mean by role models? We're not mimicing other animals by following our own nature.

So, although we are animals capable of empathy and compassion that extends to all other living beings, we should still treat animals as if they exist only for us and subject them to suffering, even though we have the technology and resources to avoid all this?

This man-made form of nature is disproportionately biased towards humans.

 

[Father Heathen]

So, although we are animals capable of empathy and compassion that extends to all other living beings, we should still treat animals as if they exist only for us and subject them to suffering, even though we have the technology and resources to avoid all this?

I've already stated that we should minimize suffering and waste, but we're still an omnivorous species.

This man-made form of nature is disproportionately biased towards humans.

What the hell is a "man-made form of nature"? Also, what species' behavior isn't "biased" toward itself?