Posted on 03/01/2007 8:30:44 PM PST by blasater1960
Animal sacrifices should be renewed on the Temple Mount, a member of the radical Sanhedrin organization told Ynetnews.
In ancient Israel and Judea, the Sanhedrin served as the highest court in the land, and was made up of 71 top judges. Now, a group of îåãòä
fringe rabbis say they have reformed the group, although the organization has received no recognition from Israel's official religious authorities.
"In the Torah there are around 200 commandments dealing with animal sacrifices," said Rabbi Dov Stein, of the Sanhedrin organization. "The Torah of Israel demands animal sacrifices. When the people of Israel were in the Diaspora, it couldn’t be done. But now, there is the supreme institution, the Sanhedrin, made up of experts, and it can be done. The new Sanhedrin, like the old, will educate the people of Israel on how to keep and safeguard the Torah."
(Excerpt) Read more at ynetnews.com ...
Those who "sacrifice" (ie carry out ritualistic murder for bloodsport) others, are not noble -- they are blood lusting psychopaths, who get away under the cover of religion. Islam is tops in this, followed by some Jews and some phony Hindus. Probably some Christians too.
It is.
You are right. There is no difference, though I personally do not condone either.
I mean this kindly, but what you've said displays an incredible ignorance of what Christians believe.
In fact, in the entire Bible, the only sins that any sacrfices could redeem were unintentional sins.
I happen to know a little bit about this
I'm sorry but you really don't.
If you are a vegetarian, please keep your comments to yourself. These animals that were sacrificed were eaten as part of a rich meal, not thrown away or discarded.
Do you eat meat?
Those who "sacrifice" (ie carry out ritualistic murder for bloodsport) others, are not noble -- they are blood lusting psychopaths, who get away under the cover of religion. Islam is tops in this, followed by some Jews and some phony Hindus. Probably some Christians too.
I think you should educate yourself about the Old Testament sacrificial system, its intent and purpose in Salvation History. You're looking pretty silly at this point.
For your own soul's sake you need to understand how it fits into God's plan for mankind.
Aha, finally the vegetarian admits it. Why don't you confine yourself to a thread about the evils of eating meat. The slaughtering in this thread is religious.
UMMM...looks like you should read the book
Au contraire, Christ's teachings show that Jews don't get it.
Blood was needed to purify the altar of the temple. That ain't A-1 sauce. That's blood. And, they didn't do "donations" to get it. They did "sacrifices."
Blood from the sacrifice on the Cross by the Lord purifies from all impurities. Not just individual sins, but sin in the collective.
ping
Um... no. You evidently know nothing about Judaism, or Tanakh (what you call the "old testement"). Show me a single source about blood "purifying" the Altar.
Yes, I do. You see, I've actually read Tanakh (in the original Hebrew, btw). Show me a single source from JEWISH writings (including Tanakh and Talmud) that the Passover sacrifice was for "sin" or that sacrifices redeemed for intentional sins. You won't find them. The idea that Judaism believed or believes that sacrifices "save" from sin is a Christian fantasy manufactured to support the idea that a guy who died and accomplished nothing (i.e. didn't kick out the Romans, bring back the exiles, bring Jews back to Torah, etc.) was somehow the "Messiah."
I agree.
How about if Someone gives His only begotten son to be sacrificed?
I never said the passover was a sacrifice for sin. I said you were mistaken about what Christians believe, and you demonstrated that in spades when you say
a guy who died and accomplished nothing
That statement leaves me absolutely speechless. I cannot believe that someone could be so ignorant of secular history, if nothing else.
Actually there's a bit of a disconnect here regarding the Passover and the atonement for sin.
"guy who died and accomplished nothing (i.e. didn't kick out the Romans, bring back the exiles, bring Jews back to Torah, etc."
He did die, He did rise again and will come back a second time.
That's the problem with the Jewish interpretation, Jesus wasn't going to be an earthly ruler and that's what they were looking for.
"Incidentally, it is for this reason that the Christian belief that Jesus was a "Passover lamb who saves from sin" displays an incredible ignorance of the Torah and Judaism. The Passover ceremonial BBQ had nothing to do with "saving" from sin. It was a ceremony done for and in remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt, when the Jews slaughtered lambs to mark their homes, allowing the Angel of Death to passover them."
I am afraid you yourself show an "incredible ignorance" of basic Christianity--not to mention a complete lack of tactfulness about the most sacred and centrally important fact of others' religious belief.
Passover is understood by Christians, as it appears to be throughout the Tanak, as having as fundamental the SALVATION of the people of Israel from Egypt. The fact that they were kept safe from the Angel of Death, and, were finally released from 400+ years of slavery the very next day, is understood as a real historic event, which prophetically looked forward to the eventual spiritual release from death and slavery by made possible by the Messiah, Jesus.
Christianity has never taught that Passover itself was a sin (spiritual) sacrifice, merely that the great defining event of the physical God the King saving of Israel from both death and slavery which itself looked forward to the greater event of the heir of King David saving His people, by voluntarily sacrificing Himself in their place.
Even the 10 Commandments, have at the beginning the rationale of "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt, out of the house of bondage" i.e. that saving them came first, and their obedience to the Law was only a rational response, in light of what God had already done for them. That "salvation" from Egypt though, was fully an act of grace...Israel's law-keeping was not the reason God freed them (as they didn't even have the Law before then).
I've read through the entire Torah (have you read the New Testament?), and it very much appears to me that blood sacrifice--starting from the skins given to Adam and Eve, through Abel's good sacrifice, to the various sacrifices of Abraham, into the Law of Moses, on to King David's (intentional) sin with Bathsheba and his sorrow and repentence over that, into the time of the Exile--were an absolute central part of Jewish religion--and these were very solemn affairs, not merely big barbecues as you describe. In practice too, sacrifices were offered for all kinds of sin, not merely the unintentional.
2nd Temple Judaism and before had blood sacrifice as a very CENTRAL rite, (offering (many)lambs every single day) as does in principle Christianity, by reliance on the blood of Jesus on the cross. You are right though, since the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, Judaism has not had blood sacrifice as a central part, as that was seen as impossible without the Temple.
Since for nearly 2000 years now sacrifices have not been a part of Judaism, it doesn't seem unreasonable that Jewish theology and the understanding of the Torah would also reflect (in a big way) that change in practice and have a complete de-emphasis on the central importance of blood sacrifice. The bible doesn't lie though, and we Christians can read and understand it at least as well as modern Jews. Biblical Judaism definitely had blood sacrifice as its central religious act--following closely with obedience to the Torah Law.
The Bible does say that the sacrifice and oblation will resume at some point.
I am curious about what you said about the tanakh ...are you saying there is no such thing as a sin offering or a guilt offering in your scriptures? The story of the scapegoat is not in there...is the Christian Bible so far off the mark ...even though it was translated from the hebrew manuscripts...? There is no talk of sin offerings in Exodus? Didn't the Lord spend an awful amount of time in the book of Numbers telling the Hebrews how and what to sacrifice...and why did the priest go into the holy of holies once a year? Wasn't that to make atonement for the sins of Israel? Didn't that include the sacrifice of animals?
The tanakh does not have this in it??
Moses said to Aaron, "Come to the altar and sacrifice your sin offering and your burnt offering and make atonement for yourself and the people; sacrifice the offering that is for the people and make atonement for them, as the LORD has commanded."Leviticus 9:7
or this?
"Then the priest is to sacrifice the sin offering and make atonement for the one to be cleansed from his uncleanness. After that, the priest shall slaughter the burnt offering. Leviticus 14:9
Not being able to read Hebrew...I am curious as to how these scriptures relate to the Hebrew text?
and I am also curious as to wheteher you have read the New Testament to see if they line up with anything in your Torah. If you haven't, I think you'd be surprised.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.