"There is no forgiveness without the shedding of blood."

[CMike]

How can something be a "sin" if it was unintentional or accidental? Also, why would an understanding and merciful god require blood and death? What precisely does that sate?

Just to give some secular examples.

What if you were driving with a broken tail light and didn't know it?

What if you were speeding and didn't realize it?

You can still sin unintentionally.

 

[idav]

Nope
1
2

Can we sacrifice vegatables for remission of sin, burn them in offerings?

 

[CMike]

G-D told the whole world how to get forgiveness...

Genesis Chapter 4

6. And the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen?

7. Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, at the entrance, sin is lying, and to you is its longing, but you can rule over it."

Improve and you will be forgiven, if you don't improve you won't be forgiven.

You may be tempted to sin but "you can rule over it".

 

[Tumah]

How can something be a "sin" if it was unintentional or accidental? Also, why would an understanding and merciful god require blood and death? What precisely does that sate?

Would you like to open a thread about the meaning of sin and atonement in Judaism?

 

[CMike]

Do you have any verses to back this up? The forgiveness idea?

There are two types of sins.

Sins against G-D. You ask for forgiveness directly from G-D.


Sins against your fellow person. You must first seek forgiveness from the person you sinned against before approaching G-D.

 

[Tumah]

Can we sacrifice vegatables for remission of sin, burn them in offerings?

Here you are sir.

 

[Desert Snake]

goats, bulls,,,what animals were sacrifuiced? sheep as well I think

 

[idav]

Here you are sir.

Interesting. Seems like a sacrifice is something someone gives up in offering. Not really like the offering making the sacrifice for us, the sacrifice has to come from the person trying to repent.

So the shedding of the first borns isn't really necessary. Makes me wonder about the whole offering of Isaac compared to God offering his son.

 

[Tumah]

Interesting. Seems like a sacrifice is something someone gives up in offering. Not really like the offering making the sacrifice for us, the sacrifice has to come from the person trying to repent.

So the shedding of the first borns isn't really necessary. Makes me wonder about the whole offering of Isaac compared to God offering his son.

That seems like a good observation.

I'm not familiar with the phrase "shedding of the first born".

 

[Desert Snake]

Interesting. Seems like a sacrifice is something someone gives up in offering. Not really like the offering making the sacrifice for us, the sacrifice has to come from the person trying to repent.

So the shedding of the first borns isn't really necessary. Makes me wonder about the whole offering of Isaac compared to God offering his son.

I think that jesus 'sacrifice' stuff is later addition to theology

 

[CMike]

I made this point before.

Jesus didn't sacrifice himself.

It's not like he slit his wrists or put a bullet to his head.

He was caught by the romans, and then executed. He whinned "why have you forsaken me", indicating he didn't want to die.

That's not a sacrifice.

The great jewish martyrs proclaimed G-D's greatness right before their death.


That's not even touching the rather absurd idea that jesus being executed has anything to do with anybody else's sins.

 

[CMike]

I think that the "shedding blood" salvation myth is a post-hoc rationalization, probably motivated by the cognitive dissonance induced by seeing the alleged savior and master die on a cross.

- Our Messiah died.
- Oops, He was not the Messiah, then
- Yes, He was, He needed to die because of this and that.
- Good, for a moment I thought I may heve been wrong all along.

Ciao

- viole

I agree.

I think they needed some way to rationalize how their god can be killed.

Moses and the jews during Egypt were protected by G-D from Pharoah.

 

[CMike]

Seriously you think what he said was written down like that?
That looks like a story, a plot to me...

Written down like what?

 

[Desert Snake]

Written down like what?

I'm saying the scene is too plot like, i'm not buying some of it.

 

[Desert Snake]

I agree.

I think they needed some way to rationalize how their god can be killed.

Moses and the jews during Egypt were protected by G-D from Pharoah.

Dude, they didn't think he was God.

 

[CMike]

I'm saying the scene is too plot like, i'm not buying some of it.

You are not buying which part?

 

[metis]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you're implying that animal sacrifice was done because, an agrarian society, animals were a form of wealth... right?

... which implies that even when animals were sacrificed, it wasn't that you were supposed to sacrifice just any animal, but one of *your* animals.

Animals were something they could relate to in an ownership sense, so what you were doing is giving back, not only to God, but also to the Temple priesthood and the poor, who ate most of the animal sacrifices. If you didn't have an animal to sacrifice since you owned Penguin's Rent-a-Camel, you purchased one for sacrifice.

So, yes it is related to wealth in some way, much like people donate to religious institutions today with their money.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

He was caught by the romans, and then executed. He whinned "why have you forsaken me", indicating he didn't want to die.

Actually, it's an allusion to Psalm 22. I've heard two explanations for this:

1. Apparently, during this period, the Psalms were known by their first line, not by numbers. The Jewish witnesses would have recognized "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" as the title of the Psalm (kinda like if someone said "Amazing Grace!" today to refer to the hymn), and would have been reminded of the message of that Psalm: that God is with you even when things seem their darkest.

2. The Psalm describes events very much like the Gospel story (e.g. dying in suffering while people throw dice for one's clothes), presumably suggesting to the people assembled or a future reader that Psalm 22 "prophecied" Jesus.

1 sounds plausible-ish to me, but my money's on 2. I suspect that the phrase (and maybe the story about the soldiers gambling for Jesus' garments) came out of an attempt by the author to make a connection between Jesus and the Old Testament.

 

[arcanum]

Animals were something they could relate to in an ownership sense, so what you were doing is giving back, not only to God, but also to the Temple priesthood and the poor, who ate most of the animal sacrifices. If you didn't have an animal to sacrifice since you owned Penguin's Rent-a-Camel, you purchased one for sacrifice.

So, yes it is related to wealth in some way, much like people donate to religious institutions today with their money.

Apparently Jesus interpreted the temple scene as corrupt and serving to support the priesthood more than the people, which is why he got himself in trouble by declaring it a den of thieves and toppling over the money tables.

 

[metis]

Apparently Jesus interpreted the temple scene as corrupt and serving to support the priesthood more than the people, which is why he got himself in trouble by declaring it a den of thieves and toppling over the money tables.

What was happening with the money-changers is that the conversion of currency was being heavily taxed by the Romans, which undoubtedly created even more hardship for the poor, so one can easily see why Jesus might be upset with that. Because the Sadducees had to cooperate to a large extent with the Roman authorities, Jesus probably viewed this as compliance that he felt was morally wrong.

The turning over of the money-tables in the Temple area would have really upset the Romans and sent up some major red-flags, and Jesus' talk about a "kingdom" different than that of the Romans certainly would add fuel to their fire. Authoritarian political systems don't like competition.