Friday, November 30, 2018

A Study On The Jewishness Of Jesus Christ's Atonement

  • In The Old Testament, Animals Were Offered For The Sins Of God's People:
          -"Then to the sons of Israel you shall speak, saying, ‘Take a male goat for a sin offering, and a calf and a lamb, both one year old, without defect, for a burnt offering." (Leviticus 9:3)
  • Jesus Christ Offered Himself As A Sacrifice Once For Our Sins:
          -"and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption." (Hebrews 9:12)
          -"and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)
  • The Animal Sacrifices Of The Old Testament Were To Be Unblemished:
          -"Your lamb shall be an unblemished male a year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats." (Exodus 12:5)
          -"and he said to Aaron, “Take for yourself a calf, a bull, for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering, both without defect, and offer them before the Lord." (Leviticus 9:2)
  • Christ Is The Final Unblemished Sacrifice For The Sins Of Mankind:
          -"knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ." (1 Peter 1:18-19)
  • The Animal Sacrifices Of The Old Testament Were Peace Offerings:
          -"Then Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people and blessed them, and he stepped down after making the sin offering and the burnt offering and the peace offerings." (Leviticus 9:22)
  • The Lord Jesus Christ Is Our Peace Offering:
          -"Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God." (Romans 5:1-2)
          -"For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven." (Colossians 1:19-20)
  • The Blood Of Animals In The Sacrifices Served As A Temporary Covering For Sin:
          -"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. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement." (Leviticus 17:10-11)
          -"For as for the life of all flesh, its blood is identified with its life. Therefore I said to the sons of Israel, ‘You are not to eat the blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off." (Leviticus 17:14)
  • The Shedding Of Blood Was Foundational To The Entire Levitical System:
          -"And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness." (Hebrews 9:22)
  • Insightful Comments On The Shedding Of Blood And The Law:
          -"Even though the Law does mention some cleansing rites apart from sacrifice (for example, Num. 19:11–12), we must remember that once a year, on the Day of Atonement, blood was offered for the sins of the entire nation (Lev. 16). As such, all of the cleansing rites of the old covenant were subsumed under the absolute necessity of a blood sacrifice once every year. Likewise, the grain offerings that in some cases could atone for sin were ultimately effectual only because of this annual, “bloody” event. The shedding of blood was absolutely necessary for atonement under the old covenant, and, as we are to infer from these verses, death is also absolutely necessary for atonement in the new covenant."
  • Offerings In The Old Testament Produced "Pleasing Aromas" (A Theme Of Propitiation) To The Lord
          -"Present with this bread seven male lambs, each a year old and without defect, one young bull and two rams. They will be a burnt offering to the LORD, together with their grain offerings and drink offerings—a food offering, an aroma pleasing to the LORD." (Leviticus 23:18)
  • Christ's Sacrifice Also Had A "Pleasing Aroma" To It:
          -"Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. 2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God." (Ephesians 5:1-2)
  • Just As The Blood Of Lambs and Goats Were Offered For The Sins of Israel In The Old Testament, So Jesus Christ Had His Blood Shed For The Sins Of Mankind:
          -"for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." (Matthew 26:28)
  • This All Accounts For Him Being Called The "Lamb Of God" In New Testament Texts With Sacrificial Connotations:
          -"The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29)

3 comments:

  1. Keep studying this subject.

    https://youtu.be/P45BHDRA7pU

    You might enjoy this video.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi De Maria,

    I must confess that Dr. Brant Pitre is quite an eloquent speaker. But naturally, we would have to disagree on the Roman Catholic dogma of transubstantiation.

    The fact the Israelites ate the flesh of the animals that they sacrificed does not support the Catholic notion of literally eating Jesus Christ's flesh and blood because no transubstantiation took place during the Old Testament.

    The Lord's Supper is a New Testament institution. It is the New Covenant form of Passover, but no transubstantiation takes place in the latter any more than it did in the former. Paul refers to the bread as bread and wine as wine even after both have been consecrated (1 Corinthians 11:23-27).

    There is no mention of an ordained ministerial priesthood in the New Testament. What we find instead is a universal priesthood of believers who offer spiritual sacrifices to God under the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ.

    In the Lord's Supper, we eat bread and wine. Jesus instituted them as the signs of His body and blood, both of which point to His final atonement sacrifice on the cross. Also, the animal sacrifices were not Christ but types or pointers to Christ, so the Levitical Passover was not an actual eating of the Lamb (i.e. Jesus), but eating a type.

    1 Corinthians 5:7-8 (one of the speaker's proof texts) does not mention anything about transubstantiation. It says that Christ is our Passover. He was sacrificed on the cross. When we celebrate the Lord's Supper, we are to do so without malice.

    The Book of Hebrews emphatically says that the work of Jesus is not ongoing or reenacted:

    "And where these have been forgiven, sacrifice for sin is no longer necessary." (Hebrews 10:18)

    If a person wishes to defend transubstantiation, then he or she is required to not be consistent and throw common sense out the door.

    ReplyDelete

  3. Immediately the speaker tells a lie when he says Paul said that it was really the blood, body and soul of Jesus.  Nowhere does the Bible say that. He then just asserts there has to be a "new" passover.  In fact he does a lot of asserting, with non sequitur arguments.

    And just because Jesus is the Lamb of the Passover, that doesn't make the bread and wine actually his literal body and blood to eat. Jesus could NOT have taught that it was his actual blood and flesh if he is sitting there drinking and eating himself!

    Yes, the last supper was during the Passover, and they were celebrating a Passover meal, but it is a non sequitur to say therefore the last supper was actually eating and drinking literal blood and flesh of Christ.

    The speaker makes assertions claiming that Christ rearranged the Passover to be a new Passover -- no Biblical evidence.  Then he says only priests can pour out the blood, and that Christ and the Apostles were the new priests. BALDERDASH!  Why does the Bible not say this?

    And the Passover continued to be celebrated by Jews in the NT times so they did NOT see the last supper/eucharist as a replacement. Ergo you don't have to eat the flesh of the lamb.

    And no, the eucharist was NEVER seen as a re-sacrifice of Christ until Rome made the claim.

    This crap is just another way to assert that the Papist ideology that says the eucharist is more than a symbol.  

    So then he says that manna (wafers, like papists use for the eucharist) and flesh (quails) from heaven are analogous to the eucharist and was pointing to it. Why does the Bible not say this? 

    Then the reference to Baruch supposedly points to the eucharist.  Eisegesis.

    And, typical of Papists, he used John 6 as supposedly pointing to the Eucharist!! "The most important" text about the eucharist?!?!  But they never continue in the passage where Jesus says it is spiritual, not literal.

    Pure eisegesis to make the Lord's Prayer meaning/pointing to the eucharist. "supersubstantial" points to “transubustantial"?!?!?!

    Nothing like using current bias and eisegesis to conclude that Papist ideology is correct--talk about circular reasoning.

    Nothing in Scripture even HINTS at the eucharist being the new manna, "miraculous bread from heaven." Why didn't Jesus teach this?

    The remaining of his talk is just more assertions to support his thesis.

    I've heard some stretches before to support the Papist version, but this is the first time I've heard such assertions and non sequiturs.

    ReplyDelete