PDA

View Full Version : The Invalidity of the Crucifixion of Jesus



Ansar Al-'Adl
03-03-2005, 03:34 AM
The Invalidity of the Crucifixion of Jesus As An Atonement of Sin: A Study of the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament)


Dr. JosephG



Below is a reproduction of a posting from Dr. JosephG, a retired physicist and practising Jew residing in America, explaining why Jesus' death on the cross could not have been a valid sacrifice from the Jewish point of view.*

Here is a partial list of reasons for why the death of Jesus on the cross couldn't possibly have served as a valid sacrifice - any one of these would render a sacrifice as unacceptable for the purpose of expiation of sins.

GIVEN that, at the time of Jesus’ death, the Second Temple was still standing in Jerusalem and the Hebrew Bible was the Scripture in force, here are some of the reasons why the death of Jesus on the cross cannot be a valid sacrificial offering:

FIRST, the Hebrew Bible requires that the sacrificial ritual be administered by a Priest (see Leviticus Chapters 1-7) – according to the accounts in the New Testament, Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers (Mt 27:35; Mk 15:24; Lk 23:33; Jn 19:18, 23).

SECOND, the Hebrew Bible requires that the blood of the (sin) sacrifice had to be sprinkled by the Priest on the veil of the sanctuary and on the altar in the Temple (e.g., Lev 4:5-6) – there is no evidence in the New Testament that this was done.

THIRD, the Hebrew Bible requires that the (sin) sacrifice be without any physical defects or blemishes (e.g., Lev 4:3) – according to the accounts in the New Testament, Jesus was beaten, whipped, and dragged on the ground before being crucified (Mt 26:67, 27:26, 30-31; Mk 14:65, 15:15-20; Lk 22:63; Jn 18:22, 19:1, 3). Moreover, as a Jew by birth, Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day after being born, a ritual that leaves a scar (“sign of the covenant”). According to the NT, circumcision is tantamount to mutilation (Phil 3:2, Gal 5:12).

FOURTH, the Hebrew Bible requires that the Passover (sin) sacrifice, a male-goat, be offered on an individual (per household) basis (Num 28:22), not as a communal offering – according to the New Testament, Jesus’ death (termed a ‘sin sacrifice’) expiated the sins of mankind (Ro 6:10; He 9:12, 10:10, 10:18).

FIFTH, the Hebrew Bible directs that the Paschal Lamb wasn’t to be offered for the removal of sins - it was a commemorative/festive offering (see also under “Fourth” above and “Sixth” below). A more appropriate time for a sin offering would have been on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement; Num 29:11 [individual sin-offering – male goat]; Lev 16:15 [communal sin-offering – male goat]).

SIXTH, the Hebrew Bible requires that the sacrificed Paschal Lamb had to be roasted and eaten, and it’s blood used to place markings on the side-posts and lintel of the doors (Exod 12:7-8) – there is no record in the New Testament that this was, in fact, done (lest it be suggested that Christianity promotes cannibalism).

SEVENTH, the Hebrew Bible states that the sacrificial sin offering could only atone for unintentional sins, with few notable exceptions as stated in Lev 5:1-6, 20-26 [Lev 6:1-7 in Christian Bibles] (e.g., Num 15:27-31).

EIGHTH, the Hebrew Bible teaches that sacrifices can atone only for sins committed prior to the offering of the sacrifice; no sacrifice could ever atone for sins committed after the sacrifice was offered and, thus, no sacrifice could ever atone for people born after the sacrifice was offered (e.g., Leviticus 1-7). So, even if it were true that Jesus was some kind of super-sacrifice that atoned for all sins of all mankind, then his death could only atone for the sins committed before his death, not for any sins committed after his death by people who were born after he died.

NINTH, the Hebrew Bible strictly forbids (human) vicarious atonement (e.g., Exod 32:31-33; Num 35:33; Deut 24:16; II Kgs 14:6; Jer 31:29 [30 in Christian Bibles]; Ezek 18:4,20; Ps 49:7).

TENTH, the Hebrew Bible strictly prohibits human sacrifices (e.g., Lev 18:21, 24-25; Deut 18:10; Jer 7:31, 19:5; Ezek 23:37,39).

It is simply astonishing that so many people believe what their preachers “feed” them, as well as how the New Testament writings contradict the teachings of the Hebrew Bible.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Sinner
03-03-2005, 07:50 AM
The Jewish sacrificial system was but imperfect representation of the work of Christ.

Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers , true, but it was the High Priest who made this arrangement and it was Jesus who freely gave up his own life.

Joh 11:49 But a certain one of them, Caiaphas being high priest of that year, said to them, You know nothing,
Joh 11:50 nor consider that it is profitable for us that one man die for the people, and not all the nation to perish.
Joh 11:51 But he did not say this from himself, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was about to die on behalf of the nation,

Second, the Tabernacle and Jewish Temple, were but representive of things which exist in the Heavenlies [Exo 25:40, He 8:5 ]. Once Jesus died, he, as our High Priest offered his own blood in the Heavenly Tabernacle for the forgiveness of sins.

Heb 9:11 But Christ having appeared as a High Priest of the coming good things, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation,
Heb 9:12 nor through the blood of goats and of calves, but through His own blood, He entered once for all into the Holy of Holies, having procured everlasting redemption.
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and goats, and ashes of a heifer sprinkling those having been defiled, sanctifies to the purity of the flesh,
Heb 9:14 by how much more the blood of Christ (who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God), will purify your conscience from dead works, to serve the living God!

Jesus death and it redemptive power, was planned in Eternity and considered "a done deal" even before the Earth was created. Thus it is available to all people of all times -

Revelation 13:8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast -- all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world. (NIV)

The Hebrew Bible required that the (sin) sacrifice be without any physical defects or blemishes. This is just a picture that the Lamb of God, would be perfect, free of any sin or moral defects.

Lastly, Jesus instituted the New Convenant. While something like the old this convenant offers -

1) Better promises - He 8:7-13
2) A better sanctuary - He 9:1-28
3) A better sacrifice - He 10:1-18

http://www.ccel.org/contrib/exec_outlines/he/he_18.htm
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-03-2005, 09:25 PM
Thanks for your post Fasiq,
I appreciate your attempt to clarify the issue, but it seems that you have only touched upon the points and have not dealt with them adequately.

Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers , true, but it was the High Priest who made this arrangement and it was Jesus who freely gave up his own life.
I'm not sure how 'freely' Jesus gave up his life.

We all know:
Matthew 27:46 About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?”–which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

Forsaken? Doesn't sound like a glorious sacrifice.

Also,
Matthew 26:50-51 ...Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.

Is it to much for Jesus to let his disciples know that this was supposed to be a planned sacrifice?

Matthew 26:55 At that time Jesus said to the crowd, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me.

Why the need for the above? This whole incident doesn't make sense if this was a planned sacrifice. Why didn't Jesus say, "Yes. This was planned. Let's go. I must die for your sins." ???

And arranging a sacrifice is NOT the same as conducting it. The sacrifice of Jesus was NOT conducted by a high priest.

Moreover, you haven't reconciled the sevre torture Jesus underwent. This is alien to the law.

:w:
Reply

Sinner
03-04-2005, 09:00 AM
At any time, Jesus could have kept himself from being arrested. He says so himself.

Mat 26:51 And, behold, one of those with Jesus, stretching out the hand, drew his sword and struck the slave of the high priest and took off his ear.
Mat 26:52 Then Jesus said to him, Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword shall perish by a sword.
Mat 26:53 Or do you think that I am not able now to call on My Father, and He will place beside Me more than twelve legions of angels?
Mat 26:54 How then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must happen this way?
Mat 26:55 In that hour, Jesus said to the crowds, Have you come out to take Me with swords and clubs, as against a plunderer? I sat with you daily teaching in the temple, and you did not lay hands on Me.
Mat 26:56 But all this is happening that the Scriptures of the prophets may be fulfilled. Then all the disciples ran away, forsaking Him.

The reason that Jesus was not arrested in the Temple was that the authorities were too scared to do it. If Jesus was able to heal any sick person, raise the dead to life, what would happen someone tried to arrest him? This couldn't of been a very comforting thought, who knows what would of happened. Judas told the authorites what they needed to know. During the Last Supper, Jesus was talking about his death and giving his life freely. This indicated that Jesus was prepared to die, and wouldn't resist arrest. No worry about fire from Heaven, and people dropping dead and other nasty stuff. The Jewish leadership took this as their golden opportunity to do away with someone who said things they didn't want to hear.

>Forsaken? Doesn't sound like a glorious sacrifice.

You forget, these were the opening lines to Psalm 22 which described the suffering Jesus underwent in great detail. The Jewish Leaders were too clever for their own good. Jesus was put to death because he claimed to be equal to God. According to Jewish law, he should of been stoned to death, but they pressured the Romans for the most horrific death possible. The Jewish leaders must of been stunned to hear the words to Psalm 22 from Jesus dying lips, for prophecy was occuring before their very eyes, and they played a part in it.

http://www.carm.org/questions/why_forsake_me.htm

> Moreover, you haven't reconciled the sevre torture Jesus underwent. This is alien to the law.

The law was just a shadow of things to come, according to Christian theology, not a 100% perfect representation. According to the prophets, the Christ would be a Suffering Servant -

Isa 53:5 But He was wounded for our transgressions; He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His wounds we ourselves are healed.
Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have each one turned to his own way; and Jehovah made meet in Him the iniquity of all of us.
Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and He was afflicted, but He did not open His mouth. He was led as a lamb to the slaughter; and as a ewe before her shearers is dumb, so He opened not His mouth.
Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from justice; and who shall consider His generation? For He was cut off out of the land of the living; from the transgression of My people, the stroke was to Him.
Isa 53:9 And He appointed Him His grave with the wicked, but He was with a rich man in His death; though He had done no violence, and deceit was not in His mouth.
Isa 53:10 But Jehovah pleased to crush Him, to make Him sick, so that If He should put His soul as a guilt offering, He shall see His seed; He shall prolong His days; and the will of Jehovah shall prosper in His hand.
Isa 53:11 He shall see the fruit of the travail of His soul; He shall be fully satisfied. By His knowledge the righteous One, My Servant, shall justify for many, and He shall bear their iniquities.
Isa 53:12 Because of this I will divide to Him with the great, and with the strong He shall divide the spoil; because He poured out His soul to death; and He was counted with those transgressing; and He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for those transgressing.

Heb 9:12 says that Jesus offered the blood he shed, as High Priest
in the true Tabernacle which is in Heaven.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Ansar Al-'Adl
03-04-2005, 10:49 PM
Salaam Fasiq,
I appreciate your explanation, but I don't think you have answered the contradictions well.

Some you haven't answered at all:
TENTH, the Hebrew Bible strictly prohibits human sacrifices (e.g., Lev 18:21, 24-25; Deut 18:10; Jer 7:31, 19:5; Ezek 23:37,39).
It seems to me that your only possible explanation is
The law was just a shadow of things to come, according to Christian theology, not a 100% perfect representation.
This explanation does not seem logical. The Law is revealed and determined by god. Christians are strongly against abrogation and claim that abrogation cannot occur in God's law.

"God is not a man, that he should lie ; neither the son of man that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" (Numbers 19:23)

The Bible contains the revealed law of God. Since the sacrifice of Christ does not conform to the law, we can discard the event as an invalid sacrifice according to GOD'S LAW.

Reply

Sinner
03-05-2005, 07:21 AM
It is true that God hated human sacrifices. If you look in the Old Testament, where God is angry because someone engaged in them, you will find that it always involved children and unwilling victims. Jesus was neither. http://www.christian-thinktank.com/sacra.html
Having said that, the Hebrew Scriptures, early Jewish writings and the NT clearly teach that the death of the righteous had redeeming power. The Midrash reads, "Moses said to God,"will not the time come when Israel shall have neither Tabernacle nor Temple? What will happen with them then?" God answers, "I will then take one of their righteous men and keep him as a pledge on their behalf so I may pardon all their sins." (Exodus Rabbah, Terumah 35:4) In Biblical times, before a man was stoned to death for his crimes, he was asked to make a public confession for his sins. The Mishnah teaches this person was to say, "Let my death be an atonement for all my transgressions." (m. Sanhedrin 6:2). There are examples where the death of representative sinners made atonement for a nation. In Num. 25:4 God's wrath on Israel was averted when the leaders of those who rebelled against God's commandments were slain. Another case where the shedding of human blood atones:

Num 35:33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.
Num 35:34 Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell: for I the LORD dwell among the children of Israel.

The Bible makes a fine distinction between unlawful human sacrifices and the shedding of human blood which under special conditions atones for sins.
Reply

Sinner
03-05-2005, 07:29 AM
This explanation does not seem logical. The Law is revealed and determined by god. Christians are strongly against abrogation and claim that abrogation cannot occur in God's law.
The prophet Jeremiah predicted that there would be a time when God would make a new covenant with the nation of Israel.

"'The day will come,' says the Lord, 'when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah....But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,' says the Lord. 'I will put my law in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people" (Jeremiah 31:31,33). Jesus Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses (Matthew 5:17) and create a new covenant between God and His people. The old covenant was written in stone, but the new covenant is written on our hearts, made possible only by faith in Christ, who shed His own blood to atone for the sins of the world. Luke 22:20 says, "After supper, [Jesus] took another cup of wine and said, 'This wine is the token of God's new covenant to save you – an agreement sealed with the blood I will pour out for you.'"

http://www.gotquestions.org/new-covenant.html
Reply

yoshiyahu
03-10-2005, 05:26 AM
Sacrificies weren't required to atone for one's sins while the temple stood. In fact, it was only done in regards to unintentional sins. Even then, you didn't have to offer an animal. You could bring a sacrifice of flour.

See: http://www.messiahtruth.com/atone.html
Reply

yoshiyahu
03-10-2005, 05:30 AM
Originally Posted by Sinner
The prophet Jeremiah predicted that there would be a time when God would make a new covenant with the nation of Israel.

"'The day will come,' says the Lord, 'when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah....But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,' says the Lord. 'I will put my law in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people" (Jeremiah 31:31,33). Jesus Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses (Matthew 5:17) and create a new covenant between God and His people. The old covenant was written in stone, but the new covenant is written on our hearts, made possible only by faith in Christ, who shed His own blood to atone for the sins of the world. Luke 22:20 says, "After supper, [Jesus] took another cup of wine and said, 'This wine is the token of God's new covenant to save you – an agreement sealed with the blood I will pour out for you.'"

http://www.gotquestions.org/new-covenant.html
Jeremiah 31 also says in the day that the "new covenant" is enacted, that:

And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD
Obviously, however, not everyone follows the teachings of G-d, and many Christian Missionaries use the saying "Know Jesus, Know Peace; No Jesus, No Peace" in realization of that fact. Thus, we see one example that this "New Covenant" is not in effect yet.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-10-2005, 01:18 PM
:sl:
Welcome to the forum Yoshiyahu!

I hope you enjoy your stay!

:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-10-2005, 10:19 PM
Peace Sinner,
The Bible makes a fine distinction between unlawful human sacrifices and the shedding of human blood which under special conditions atones for sins.
I don't know how you can possibly justify this statement. Judaism is very clearly against the use of human blood for atonement. And even with animals, they can only be used for the atonement of a restricted category of sins. Sacrifices are not required to atone for sins, and sacrifices must take place within a temple.

A Jewish friend has written the following:
Originally Posted by JoeJew
What you have to understand about Isaiah's prophecies is they are about the Jewish people and not Jesus. All the suffering did occur but the Suffering Servant are the Jews who have suffered throughout time for being G-d's messengers. Why would Isaiah have written about one single man when thousands of Jews were also crucified by the Romans? Why was Jesus crucifiction any worse than anyone elses? It was not. Therefore it makes sense that Isaiah would make a prophecy about the people of Israel and not some insignificant man.

The Christians have altered the words from Isaiah to make them appear to be referring to Jesus. Please read this article and you can see how the Hebrew does not read like the english translation does because it was not altered.

This is in six parts and it clearly shows how the Xtians altered verses over and over again to make it look like he was referring to Jesus.

http://www.messiahtruth.com/isaiah53a.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/isaiah53b.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/isaiah53c.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/isaiah53d.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/isaiah53e.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/isaiah53f.html
And furthermore:
Originally Posted by Medini
The "fore-shadowing" stuff is a bunch of nonsensical misuse of Greek Platonism that has nothing to do with Tanach.

The idea of a man's death atoning for sins in later Jewish writings is badly misused here - a man's death ONLY can atone for his own sins not that of others (the Sanhedrin quote is not saying anything more than that). The martyrdom of the righteous can be weighed by G-d against the corporate sins of the people as whole in considering punishment agianst the people as whole. I highly doubt that the midrash cited as "Exodus Rabbah, Terumah 35:4" says what it is quoted as - perhaps Drashi can tell us, since I don't have that document available to me right now.

Finally, the bit about the "New Covenant" is utter nonsense - Jer. 31 clearly shows that the context of this covenant, which is Torah put in our hearts and not an additional teaching (31:33), is with both Judah and Israel (31:31) after the teshuvah of both from sin and their redemption from Exile back to Eretz Israel (31:16-30). At the time of JC, there had been no such teshuvah, and all of Israel and many of Judah were in Exile. In fact, there was no identifiable house of Israel (the northern tribes) then or now. Thus, it CANNOT apply to the time of JC, but is yet to occur, and has nothing to do with JC.
Originally Posted by sophiee
Originally Posted by Sinner
Jsus was crucified by Roman soldiers , true, but it was the High Priest who made this arrangement and it was Jesus who freely gave up his own life.
To be a priest Jsus would have been a descendent of Aaron (Moses') brother on his father's side. He would have to have been of the tribe of Levi -- yet Xians say Jsus is of the tribe of Judah.

Can't be both. Ergo Jsus could not have been a priest, let alone a hig priest.

Xians like to say he was a "priest like Melchitzedek." I won't get into all the details here but Melchi (King) Tzedek (Righteous) is not a name but a "title" and the only one mentioned as being a priest in Torah was not Jewish priest and ergo could not bring a Jewish sacrifice.


The Hebrew Bible required that the (sin) sacrifice be without any physical defects or blemishes. This is just a picture that the Lamb of G-d, would be perfect, free of any sin or moral defects.
Nonsense. Just ask Mel Gibson, Jsus was bloodied and beaten. Not to mention that he wasn't a one year old kosher animal. And BTW G-d forbids human sacrifices.

Lastly, Jsus instituted the New Convenant. While something like the old this convenant offers -
Tell you Xian friend to read the Tanach. Jeremiah 31:31:

“Behold, days are coming,” declares the L-rd, “when I will make a new covenant (bris) with the House of Israel and with the House of Judah.
The GT takes this quote from Jeremiah and distorts it saying that J* and Xianity is the “fulfillment” of Jeremiah’s prophecy:

In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:13)
The Hebrew word “ba’altee,” means a “husband.” It in no way can be translated as “to disregard.” The GT just totally ignores the REAL of the words of Jeremiah! To be a “husband” is the precise opposite of “disregarding” someone.

Show me where Jeremiah says the old one is obsolete. WRONG. The new covenant (really "renewed") is with us Jews (Judah and Israel). The GT distorts Jewish scripture quite a bit.

At any time, Jesus could have kept himself from being arrested. He says so himself.
The problem with these Xians is that they take a sentence here or a word there totally out of context. They ignore where Jeremiah clearly says that he will never "divorce" us Jews.

Add to that they believe the GT got it right so don't double check to see if the Tanach says what the GT says it says. . .

Amazing isn't it?
Originally Posted by sophiee
Originally Posted by Sinner
Having said that, the Hebrew Scriptures, early Jewish writings and the NT clearly teach that the death of the righteous had redeeming power. The Midrash reads, "Moses said to God,"will not the time come when Israel shall have neither Tabernacle nor Temple? What will happen with them then?"

Midrash is ALLEGORY. It is not scripture. Midrash aggudah is used to make a moral point and is not meant to be taken literally as your Xian is attempting to use it.

Tell him/her to read Torah:

Exodus 32:31 Moses went back up to G-d, and he said, 'The people have committed a terrible sin by making a golden idol.

32:32 Now, if You would, please forgive their sin. If not, You can blot me out from the book that You have written.'

32:33 G-d replied to Moses, 'I will blot out from My book those who have sinned against Me.


So Moses offered himself as a sacrifice. G-d turned him down.

Tell your Xian to read the Tanach and spend less time digging through Jewish books he / she doesn't understand (like midrashim).
What do you say, Sinner?

:w:
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-11-2005, 04:50 AM
Originally Posted by Sinner
In Num. 25:4 God's wrath on Israel was averted when the leaders of those who rebelled against God's commandments were slain.
Gee, you mean that sinners who die are no longer siners? How long did that take you to come up with? HaShem killed all the rebels who deserved death. HaShem shall reward those who merit it, and so too will HaShem punish those who merit it...
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-13-2005, 09:14 PM
Are we going to hear a Christian response?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-19-2005, 12:05 AM
Sinner, we are still waiting for your response! :)

Where are you?
Reply

Sinner
03-19-2005, 06:12 AM
To be a priest Jsus would have been a descendent of Aaron (Moses') brother on his father's side. He would have to have been of the tribe of Levi -- yet Xians say Jsus is of the tribe of Judah.
There is a reason that Jesus was not from the tribe of Levi. It was not possible for a priest from Levi to be a King, or a King to be a Levi priest. Jesus could not have been King and High Priest had he been born a Levi. Jesus however is a priest of a higher order, that of Melchizedek-

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
Gen 14:19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth

Here was priest, pre-dating the Levi Order who served as both King and Priest. Accordingly, the New Testament states that Jesus was of this order. Jesus existed before Adam, and serves as our High Priest and will assume the role of King.

Heb 5:4 And no one takes the honor to himself, but he being called by God, even as Aaron was also.
Heb 5:5 So also the Christ has not glorified Himself to become a high priest, but He speaking to Him, "You are My Son; today I have begotten You." Psa. 2:7
Heb 5:6 As He also says in another place, "You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek," Psa. 110:4
Heb 5:7 who in the days of His flesh was offering both petitions and entreaties to Him being able to save Him from death, with strong crying and tears, and being heard from His godly fear;
Heb 5:8 though being a Son, He learned obedience from what He suffered
Heb 5:9 and having been perfected, He came to be the Author of eternal salvation to all the ones obeying Him,
Heb 5:10 having been called out by God as a High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

"He is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek. This is shown to be a higher order than that of Levi and Aaron (Heb 5:5-11 Psa 110:4)."
http://members.datafast.net.au/sggram/f316.htm
Reply

Sinner
03-19-2005, 06:34 AM
What you have to understand about Isaiah's prophecies is they are about the Jewish people and not Jesus
Ok, let us say this is true and see how just some of Isaiah reads by replacing 'he' and 'him' with 'Israel' or 'the Jewish people'-

52:13 Behold, Israel (my servant) shall prosper
he shall be exalted and lifted up,
and shall be very high.
52:14 As many were astonished at Israel (him);
the Jews (his) appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance,
and their (his) form beyond that of the sons of men **
52:15 so shall Israel (he) sprinkle many nations;
kings shall shut their mouths because of the Jews (him);
for that which has not been told them they shall see,
and that which they have not heard they shall understand.
53:1 Who has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
53:2 For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
Israel (he) had no form or comeliness that we should look at them (him),
and no beauty that we should desire the Jewish people (him).
53:3 Israel (He) was despised and rejected by men;
a country (man) of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
53:4 Surely the Jewish people (he) has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.
53:5 But Israel (he) was wounded for our transgressions,
he was bruised for our iniquities;
upon them (him) was the chastisement that made us whole,
and with his stripes we are healed.
53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned every one to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on the Jewish people (him)
the iniquity of us all.
53:7 Israel (He) was oppressed, and they (he) was afflicted,
yet the Jews (he) opened not their (his) mouth; ......

This absurd reading shows that Isaiah must of been speaking of one person when he used 'he' and 'him', not a country or group of people.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-19-2005, 04:33 PM
Welcome back to the discussion, sinner. Very interesting point you made.
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-20-2005, 12:35 AM
It may sound ridiculous to you, but that doesn't change the truth:

Isaiah 41:8-9 - (8) But you, Israel, are My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham My friend. (9) You whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called you from its farthest corners, and said to you, “you are My servant; I have chosen you and I [will] not cast you away".

Isaiah 44:1-2,21 - (1) Yet hear now, O Jacob My servant, and Israel, whom I have chosen. Thus says the L-rd your Maker, and He who formed you from the womb shall help you. (2) Fear not, My servant Jacob, and Jeshurun whom I have chosen. (21) Remember these, O Jacob and Israel, for you are My servant; I have formed you; you are My servant, O Israel, you shall not be forgotten of Me.

Isaiah 45:4 - For the sake of My servant Jacob, and Israel My chosen one, I called to you by your name

Isaiah 49:3 - And [G-d] said to me: "you are My servant, O Israel in whom I will be glorified!"
Reply

yoshiyahu
03-20-2005, 02:01 AM
In the previous verse, Isaiah 52:13, Isaiah prophesies that, in the end, Israel will prosper and take its rightful place in G-d's plan. In Isaiah 52:14, the prophet foretells that this event will cause much surprise and astonishment among the (Gentile) nations, since they habitually looked down upon the Jewish people. Still being the narrator here and speaking for G-d, Isaiah quotes what the (Gentile) nations will be saying about Israel in their astonishment. The dismayed (Gentile) nations will see a people, thought to be disfigured and "sub-human", being exalted and successful, a people who have G-d with them and not against them (e.g., Is 52:9-10). Isaiah reassures his people, Israel, that those who had such visions of them will be stunned when they see that Israel is the one who will be exalted in the end.
Another good quote from the Messiah Truth Organization :D
Reply

mule
03-20-2005, 02:32 AM
So how is Isreal going to pay for my sins?
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-20-2005, 03:07 AM
Originally Posted by mule
So how is Isreal going to pay for my sins?
Christians always think they can get off easy, don't they? They're not ours to pay for. The only person who can make amends for your sins (be it with HaShem or Man) is you.

Don't commit the crime if you won't do the time.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-20-2005, 03:16 AM
well said. :) It's a lazy doctrine of salvation that makes them that way.
Reply

Sinner
03-20-2005, 06:17 AM
Welcome back to the discussion, sinner.
Thank you for the welcome. Some of my replies may not be timely. There comes a point where my eyes get tired and I have to get away from the computer for awhile. I prefer to give questions some thought rather then just doing cut and paste jobs. Lastly, trying to 'win' an argument, as some posters here have attempted is counter productive. There comes a point where one just gives out information for others to think about and if they challenge it, one just has to kindly let them have the last word.
Reply

Sinner
03-20-2005, 06:38 AM
Christians always think they can get off easy, don't they?
No. Christians believe that Salvation is a free gift from God based only by God's own grace, period. This does not mean we are free from the effects of sin should we sin. If I happen to be driving around carelessly in my car and I run someone over, God is not going to step in and keep me from going to prison.

SpaceFalcon2001, Mule asked what I believe is a very good question. In what way or sense has Israel paid for our transgressions (sins) if that is who Isaiah speaks of in 53:5? I also prefer to give the benefit of a doubt to God that He knew what He was doing when He inspired Isaiah to use singular pronouns, instead of plural in these passages.

Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions,
he was bruised for our iniquities;

I can't help but mention that Israel is usually refered as a "she" in Scripture.

" What thing shall I take to witness for thee? what thing shall I liken to thee, O daughter of Jerusalem? what shall I equal to thee, that I may comfort thee, O virgin daughter of Zion? for thy breach is great like the sea: who can heal thee?" (Lam 2:13 KJV)

"Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem! Lo, your King comes to you; triumphant and victorious is He, humble and riding on an ass, on a colt the foal of an ass." (Zechariah 9:9 RSV)

"Have mercy upon me, O Lord; consider my trouble which I suffer of them that hate me, Thou that liftest me up from the gates of death: That I may show forth all Thy praise in the gates of the daughter of Zion: I will rejoice in Thy salvation." (Psalm 9:13-14 KJV)
Reply

Sinner
03-20-2005, 06:53 AM
Another good quote from the Messiah Truth Organization
I agree with the assessment this organization gives as to what the final state of the world will be like when God steps in. I don't think the passage in Isaiah in question deals with this, for reasons I have raised. Passages like the last few chapters in Ezekiel does.
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-20-2005, 07:03 AM
Originally Posted by Sinner
SpaceFalcon2001, Mule asked what I believe is a very good question. In what way or sense has Israel paid for our transgressions (sins) if that is who Isaiah speaks of in 53:5?
Translation check:
5. But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed.

Look it over again, he is pained because of our transgressions, this is true of every Rebbe ever known, their obvious pain causes others to repent.

Even better, let's continue on:
6. We all went astray like sheep, we have turned, each one on his way, and the Lord accepted his prayers for the iniquity of all of us.


He accepted his prayers and was appeased concerning the iniquity of all of us, that He did not destroy His world. It has long been known in Judaism that any righteous man may pray on another's behalf to help support his repentance of sin to HaShem, still nothing new.

Moving on...

11. From the toil of his soul he would see, he would be satisfied; with his knowledge My servant would vindicate the just for many, and their iniquities he would bear.

"and their iniquities he would bear" He would bear, in the manner of all the righteous, as it is said (Num. 18:1): “You and your sons shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary.”

I also prefer to give the benefit of a doubt to God that He knew what He was doing when He inspired Isaiah to use singular pronouns, instead of plural in these passages.
Again, singulars are often used when referring to Israel. We very often use singulars when referring to a single group. Wow I just did it there!
Reply

Sinner
03-20-2005, 07:14 AM
Look it over again, he is pained because of our transgressions, this is true of every Rebbe ever known, their obvious pain causes others to repent.
The pain of the Jewish people rarely cause others to repent. Hitler is a good case in point. He and his thugs LOVED the suffering of Jews, as do certain terrrorist today.
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-20-2005, 07:28 AM
Originally Posted by Sinner
The pain of the Jewish people rarely cause others to repent.
I actually was talking about a Rebbe which is a specific Jewish spritiual leader, but you raised a point.

The pain of the Jewish people does make others repent. The effects of the holocaust on the Jewish people were so terrible, it practically broke down the church's view on Jews, not to mention provided a little wake-up call for most of the world
Reply

Sinner
03-20-2005, 08:37 AM
The only act which the world acted positively as the result of the holocaust, was the creation of the state of Israel. I firmly believe this was God's doing and not from the kindness of human hearts. The UN since then has been hostile to Israel. I dare say making and passing resolutions against Israel seems to be its number one function these days. The Catholic Church is no friend to Israel, and many liberal Protestant denominations, sad to say, are begining to act against Israeli interest as well. Anti-semitism is on the rise worldwide, especially in Europe. I think even grimmer days are ahead for the Jewish people and the nation of Israel.
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-20-2005, 08:10 PM
As always, humans have free will. Israel was not the work of HaShem anymore than my choosing to drink milk. The only Israel that will be the work of HaShem will be that of the Moshiach.

We know you just want all Jews to go to Israel so they can be converted and/or be sent to hell for eternity afterward. Such Doctarine is no friend of ours.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-20-2005, 10:44 PM
Sinner, what's your opinion on what this fellow has said:
Originally Posted by sophiee
The priest / king of Salem was:

1) Not a Jew -- he pre-dated the covenant with Abraham, let alone Moses.

2) Since the levitical priesthood was AFTER the King of Salem and G-d told Aaron his was the only priesthood after Sinai and that it was an ETERNAL priesthood what does it matter what came before Aaron???

Yep it is not possible for a priest from Levi to be a King or a King to be a Levi.

But since they need to somehow explain that a priest made the sacrifice they grasp at the Melchitzedek straw.

Melchi-tzedek as your Xian also stated (but seemed to ignore) was not a Jew let alone a Jewish priest, ergo he could not bring a Jewish sacrifice.

Xians like to say "Abraham brought tithes to Melchitzedek." They think this because that is what the GT says. The GT gets it wrong (as it gets so much wrong). It was ABRAM, not Abraham who brought tithes to the King of Salem.

This is important bcause Abram did not yet have a covenant with HaShem.

But who IS the King of Salem? The Xians say he was some mythical being without parentage. Nonsense. Salem is Jerusalem and the King of Jerusalem (Salem) in those days was Shem, the son of Noah.

He was a g-g-g-gandfather to Abram BTW. Which also means he was a g-g-g-g-g-g(etc) grandfather to Aaron and the Levitical priests (as well as all the other tribes).

I wish Xians could get the concept of chronology!! :D

BTW, Melchitzedek is not a name, it is a description: righteous (tzedek) king (melchi). So all Genesis is saying is that the King of Salem was a righteous king.

The Xians further confuse things by misreading Psalm 110 where King David is called a righteous king (melchitzedek).

Tell your Xian friend to read the Tanach where it says repeatedly that ONLY the Levites, descendents of Aaron can be Jewish priests. It is an ETERNAL priesthood. These are the little details Xians tend to ignore.

]• “And they shall have the Priesthood as a statute forever, and you shall consecrate Aaron and his sons.” (Ex. 29:9)

• “Bring close Aaron your brother and his sons with him from among the children of Israel to become Priests to Me [for all time].” (Exodus 28:1)

• “And anoint them as you anointed their father, that they may serve Me, and it shall be for them an appointment to an everlasting Priesthood throughout their generations.” (Exodus 40:15)

• “You and your sons with you shall keep your Priesthood. I give your Kehuna/Priesthood as a gift of service.” (Numbers 18:7)

• “It is an everlasting covenant of salt before G-d with you and with your descendants.” (Numbers 18:19)

• “And it shall be to him and to his descendants after him a covenant of everlasting Kehuna/Priesthood.” (Numbers 25:13)

• “For G-d your G-d has chosen him of all your tribes to stand and serve with the name of G-d he and his sons forever.” (Deuteronomy 18:5)
Originally Posted by sophiee
As for the Isaiah 52-53 quotes -- again you need to read the FAQ and archives on the subject of Isaiah 52-53. This gets dragged up a lot.

Ask your Xian friend if s/he speaks Hebrew. It is obvious that s/he doesn't since s/he says the singular can't be used to speak of the nation of Israel.

Torah does that all the time! Just as in English we'll say "America the Beautiful" "the" infers singular, no? Because America is a singular for the 250 million or so citizens. Just as Israel is the singular for the nation of Israel.

Israel is CLEARLY the servant as Isaiah himself states:

Isaiah 41:8-9

But thou, Israel, art My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham My friend. Whom I grasped from the ends of the earth, and from it nobles I called you, and I said to you, “You are My servant”; I chose you and I did not despise you.

Isaiah 44:1-2

Yet hear now, O Jacob My servant and Israel, whom I have chosen. So said the Lord your Maker, and He who formed you from the womb shall aid you. Fear not, My servant Jacob, and Jeshurun whom I have chosen.

Isaiah 44:21

Remember these, O Jacob and Israel, for thou art My servant; I have formed thee; thou art My servant, O Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten of Me.

Isaiah 45:4

For the sake of My servant Jacob, and Israel My chosen one, and I called to you by your name . . . .

Isaiah 48:20

Leave Babylon, flee from the Chaldeans; with a voice of singing declare, tell this, publicize it to the end of the earth; say, “The Lord has redeemed His servant Jacob.”

Isaiah 49:3

And said to me, thou art My servant, O Israel in whom I will be glorified!
Originally Posted by drashi
There is one more key problem.

Nowhere in the Torah does it say that a manifestation og G-d is to be treated as though it were G-d.

To the Christian, Jesus is G-d, and there is no seperation.

So replace the word "servant" with "G-d" and "he" with "He" and ask yourself from a non-Christian point of view, does this work?
:w:
Reply

mule
03-20-2005, 10:46 PM
The only act which the world acted positively as the result of the holocaust, was the creation of the state of Israel. I firmly believe this was God's doing and not from the kindness of human hearts. The UN since then has been hostile to Israel. I dare say making and passing resolutions against Israel seems to be its number one function these days. The Catholic Church is no friend to Israel, and many liberal Protestant denominations, sad to say, are begining to act against Israeli interest as well. Anti-semitism is on the rise worldwide, especially in Europe. I think even grimmer days are ahead for the Jewish people and the nation of Israel.
I also think that grimmer days are ahead for the Jewish people. I think too that christians are going be more persecuted as the days pass. That's how the bible reads anyways.
Reply

mule
03-20-2005, 10:53 PM
I think that's rotten posting responses on a board which hates Christians.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-20-2005, 10:57 PM
Originally Posted by mule
I think that's rotten posting Sinners responses on a board which hates Christians.
They don't hate Christians. Besides, this makes for a very informative discussion.
Reply

mule
03-20-2005, 10:58 PM
:zip:

Nevermind.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-20-2005, 11:06 PM
Sorry, that you're upset, however I distinctly recall you promising to do the same to one of my posts a while back.
Reply

mule
03-20-2005, 11:54 PM
I simply do not recall posting your posts on an radical hateful conservative christian board. I would hope that I would never do that to you.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-21-2005, 01:56 AM
Every Christian forum is hateful to muslims. I've been on many of them, mule.
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-21-2005, 02:02 AM
And to Jews too. Except they often like to call us pharisees if they don't like something we say.
Reply

yoshiyahu
03-21-2005, 06:36 AM
Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon2001
We know you just want all Jews to go to Israel so they can be converted and/or be sent to hell for eternity afterward. Such Doctarine is no friend of ours.
Oh come on SF2K. Do you seriously believe that is the only reason why many Christians are pro-Israel?
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-21-2005, 12:33 PM
That's where the big christian support is coming from. It's why Bush is pro-Israel.
Reply

yoshiyahu
03-21-2005, 09:29 PM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-Haq
Every Christian forum is hateful to muslims. I've been on many of them, mule.
I'm dissapoined that that has been your experience. I have been on Christian forums that are not hateful to Muslims.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-21-2005, 09:59 PM
I'm sure you have met very nice Chrsitans, and I have as well, but I find that on most forums, the bad drown out the good and you just have to defend Islam against lies in almost every thread.

I'm glad you have found a forum that is not like that. That must be a very nice forum. :)
Reply

Sinner
03-23-2005, 06:10 PM
But since they need to somehow explain that a priest made the sacrifice they grasp at the Melchitzedek straw.
The story of Melchitzedek is not a Christian invention. In Scripture it is the greater who blesses the lesser. We find that it is the King-Priest Melchitzedek who blesses Abraham, who carried the seed of the Levitt priesthood and it is Melchitzedek who accepts Abrahams offerings. Melchitzedek is also called priest of The Most High. If this is a "straw" to expain Christ priesthood, a finer one could not have been created by the human mind. It is just one more example of how things in the Old Testament foreshadow those in the New.
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
03-23-2005, 10:09 PM
Melchi-Tzedek means "righteous king" in Hebrew. At one point David is called melchitzedek as well.

It's a weak straw because hellanists aren't very smart.
Reply

morrissey
04-08-2005, 03:02 AM
Originally Posted by Sinner
The pain of the Jewish people rarely cause others to repent. Hitler is a good case in point. He and his thugs LOVED the suffering of Jews, as do certain terrrorist today.
Well, I must be one of those 'rarities' you mention.....

It's definately not as rare as you think.....We Noachides are an ever expanding bunch.....
Reply

morrissey
04-08-2005, 03:02 AM
Also, the entire city of Ninevah was brought to repentence through Jonah.....
Reply

AboBakar
07-02-2016, 05:10 AM
The point is that Al Nabi Al Masiih 'Iisa Ibn Al Maryam AS did not get scared from being crucified . If you know , getting a person to be crucified is never an atonement of sin for someone else , it is a form of Al Adzab which Aallah SWT sent to people who wage war against Aallah SWT instead .
Reply

dwa2day
09-17-2016, 11:45 AM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
The Invalidity of the Crucifixion of Jesus As An Atonement of Sin: A Study of the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament)


Dr. JosephG .................................New Testament writings contradict the teachings of the Hebrew Bible.
Hi Ansar Al-'Adl
I know this is an old post of yours, however I trust you will find my thoughts some additional value to what sinner has already mentioned.
Jesus as the High Priest.

Dose Jesus Christ fulfil the legal requirement to be our High Priest? A Christian would say absolutely while a Muslim would argue no. Not been a Muslim and understanding the dynamics of one’s personal bias to their faith I would like to bring to your attention some important points in seeking the truth with regards to the topic.

Firstly there can be only one High Priest, it would be ludicrous to claim there was atonement for the Jews via Caiaphas the Temple High priest and Jesus Christ atonement for man’s sins. Mathew 26:62-65 tells us that Caiaphas put Jesus under oath and asked Him “Tell us you are the Christ (Messiah), Son of God. Jesus reply “It is as you say” and Caiaphas tears his cloths, say He has blasphemed.

The tear of ones cloths in the Jewish tradition is associated with mourning, grief, and loss. Here Caiaphas shows his grief from his view of a mere man claim to be God. Two examples of this are seen in Genesis 37:29. “When Reuben returned to the cistern and saw that Joseph was not there, he tore his clothes” A short time later in Genesis 37:34, “Jacob tore his clothes, put on sackcloth and mourned for his son many days” when he thought that Joseph had been killed.

It is interesting that the high priest was not allowed to tear his clothes: Leviticus 21:10 “The high priest, the one among his brothers who has had the anointing oil poured on his head and who has been ordained to wear the priestly garments, must not . . . tear his clothes”. The special nature of the high priestly office dictated a separation from some of the common customs, including that of mourning. Thus Caiaphas defiled himself and removed himself as the High Priest for the Jews. The concertation of High Priest took seven day see Leviticus 8:33 and thus with few days before Passover it would be impossible for a new high Priest to be Consecrated as per the law.

Secondly as with a number of covenants in the bible there is the sheading of blood. The most important of these is the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision and the most detailed in the bible as seen in Genesis 17. Here again in the consecration of the High Priest life blood of an animal is shed as an indication of the seriousness of the promises.

Thirdly The New Covenant (or New Testament) is the promise that God makes with humanity that He will forgive sin and restore fellowship with those whose hearts are turned toward Him. Jesus Christ is the mediator of the New Covenant, and His death on the cross is the basis of the promise Luke 22:20 “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. Take note this fulfils prophesies of the New Covenant predicted while the Old Covenant was still in effect—the prophets Moses, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel all allude to the New Covenant.

Fourthly Jesus came to fulfil the law see Matthew 5:17-18. This is the fulfilling of the sacrificial laws as well as what I view as the Jewish leaders biggest sin, that they did not promote their faith with the world they kept it to themselves. See Genesis 9:12-17

Fifthly how does Jesus become High Priest and does he fulfil the legal requirements? Let us look at the law.

Leviticus 8 - The Consecration of Priests
Exodus 29 records the command God gave to Moses to carry out this consecration ceremony. The stated the purpose for the ceremony: To hallow them for ministering to Me as priests. That is, it was to set the priests aside for God’s purpose and will.
Already the Israelites through the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision have been set aside for Gods purpose and will. Moses as an Adult male of 80 years old was circumcised when he began his ministry. No doubt Jesus was also circumcised under Jewish law after birth. Thus Jesus fulfils the Abrahamic covenant and is separated to do God purpose and will.

The washing of the priests Leviticus 8:6
The process of consecration began with cleansing. All priestly ministries began with cleansing, and a cleansing that was received. Moses washed Aaron and his sons and was done publicly. Some Jewish interpreters have maintained that the washing of Aaron and his sons was by immersion, as was required of the high priest on the day of atonement (Leviticus 16:4).

The fulfilment of this can be seen in John 1:19:28 when John the Baptist baptises Jesus at the beginning of His ministry.
Six days before the crucifixion Jesus feet are washed by Marth’s sister Marry, John 12:1-3
Note the significance of this:- Leviticus 8:33 tells us the priestly consecration takes seven day. Thus the Passover was on the seventh day, which in turn Jesus fulfilling the Passover sacrifice as recorded in Exodus 12 and Isaiah 53:5-12.
For Christians the significance is seen in Revelation 1:5 by the cleansing work accomplished by the death of Jesus for our sins.

The clothing of the priests in priestly garments. Leviticus 8:7-9
I draw your attention to two items, robe and the turban. Referencing Mathew 27:27-31 the Roman soldiers mock Jesus by stripping him of his cloths, put a scarlet robe on Him and a crown of thorns (turban), place a read in his hand and kneel before Him mocking say King of the Jews. Take note scarlet was highly prised and a symbol of wealth and position. 2 Samuel 1:24
Thus Jesus fulfils the second requirement of a High Priest consecration.

The anointing of the priests. Leviticus 8:10-13
Moses took the anointing oil and poured some of the anointing oil on Aaron's head and anointed him, to consecrate him. Priests also had to be anointed. The oil was poured over their heads, indicating that it was given in great measure, not in small measure see Psalm 133:2 Things were sprinkled, but upon people the oil was out-poured. Jesus is anointed on the head with a flask of costly oil of spikenard two day before Passover see Mark 14:1-9

The sacrifice and the blood. Leviticus 8:22-24
To express the idea of consecration, blood from the ram was placed on the ear, thumb, and toe of the priest. It was blood from the ram - not the wool, not the fat. God wanted the life of the sacrificial victim to mark His consecrated priests. Leviticus 17:11 is one of many passages that expresses this principle: For the life of the flesh is in the blood. God wanted the life of the sacrificial victim to be evident in the body of the priest.

After the beating Jesus incurred by the Roman solders is would be prudent for anyone to deny that the blood of the sacrificial victim, Jesus was not present.

Blood is sprinkled on the priestly garments. Leviticus 8:30
Then Moses took some of the anointing oil and some of the blood which was on the altar, and sprinkled it on Aaron, on his garments, on his sons, and on the garments of his sons with him; and he consecrated Aaron, his garments, his sons, and the garments of his sons with him. See John 19

After Christ beating by the Roman soldiers they place a scarlet robe on him, in doing this fulfilled the above law, sprinkling of blood on the priestly garments. See Mathew 15:16-20

A fellowship meal with God. Leviticus 8:31-32
The remaining meat portions of this ram were given to Aaron and the other priests, after those portions were presented to God as a wave offering. It was then cooked and eaten by the priests during the days of their consecration ceremony.
The eating speaks of the continuing relationship of the priest with God.
In this way, eating is a good picture of a healthy, continuing relationship with Jesus. Fellowship over a meal is a worldwide practice, Jesus did this with his disciples in the upper room known as the last supper. See Mathew 26:17-30. I must also draw your attention to Revelation 3:20 Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.

Tearing of the Holy of Holies Veil. Mathew 27:51
As Jesus died on the cross the veil of the Holy of Holies in the Jewish Temple was torn from top to bottom. The holy temple in Jerusalem was the centre of Jewish religious life. Hebrews 9:1-9 tells us that in the temple a veil separated the Holy of Holies—the earthly dwelling place of God’s presence—from the rest of the temple where men dwelt. This signified that man was separated from God by sin, Isaiah 59:1-2. Only the high priest was permitted to pass beyond this veil once each year, Exodus 30:10; Hebrews 9:7, to enter into God's presence for all of Israel and make atonement for their sins Leviticus 16.

What significance does this torn veil have for us today? Above all, the tearing of the veil at the moment of Jesus' death dramatically symbolized that His sacrifice, the shedding of His own blood, was a sufficient atonement for sins. It signified that now the way into the Holy of Holies was open for all people, for all time, both Jew and Gentile.

Please note Solomon's temple was 30 cubits high, 1 Kings 6:2, but Herod had increased the height to 40 cubits, according to the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. There is uncertainty as to the exact measurement of a cubit, but it is safe to assume that this veil was somewhere near 60ft (18m) high. An early Jewish tradition says that the veil was about four inches thick (100mm), but the Bible does not confirm that measurement. The book of Exodus teaches that this thick veil was fashioned from blue, purple and scarlet material and fine twisted linen. Not an average veil to tear.


The sacrifice of the sin offering. Leviticus 8:14-17
Thus in the crucifixion becomes the new covenant with God for all His people through the offering of Jesus Christ as our King and High priest in the order of Melchizedek.

Dealing with the Goat Leviticus 16:9-10
Then Aaron shall offer the goat on which the lot for the LORD fell, and make it a sin offering. But the goat on which the lot for the scapegoat fell shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, to send it into the wilderness as the scapegoat.

Thus the scapegoat is seen in Jesus as a person who has taken the blame for our sins. The fulfilment of the Day of Atonement, were a priest would confess all the sins of the Israelites over the head of a goat and then drive it into the wilderness, symbolically bearing their sins away.


Dealing with the forbidden rule of human sacrifice.
The Bible makes it quite clear that God hates human sacrifice. The pagan nations that surrounded the Israelites practiced human sacrifice as part of the worship of false gods. God declared that such “worship” was detestable to Him and that He hates it, Deuteronomy 12:31; 18:10. Furthermore, human sacrifice is associated in the Old Testament with evil practices such as sorcery and divination, which are also detestable to God 2 Kings 21:6.
So, if God hates human sacrifice, why did He sacrifice Christ on the cross and how could that sacrifice be the payment for our sins?

There is no doubt that a sacrifice for sin was necessary if people are to have any hope of eternal life. God established the necessity of the shedding of blood to cover sin. In fact, God Himself performed the very first animal sacrifice to cover, temporarily, the sin of Adam and Eve. After He pronounced curses upon the first couple, He killed an animal, shedding its blood, and made from it a covering for Adam and Eve Genesis 3:21, thereby instituting the principle of animal sacrifice for sin. This was to continue until Christ came to offer the ultimate, perfect sacrifice, which made animal sacrifice no longer necessary.

There are several reasons why the sacrifice of Christ on the cross does not violate the prohibition against human sacrifice.
Firstly, Jesus wasn’t merely human. If He were, then His sacrifice would have also been a temporary one because one human life couldn’t possibly cover the sins of the multitudes who ever existed. Neither could one finite human life atone for sin against an infinite God. The only viable sacrifice must be an infinite one, which means only God Himself could atone for the sins of mankind. Only God Himself, an infinite Being, could pay the penalty owed to Himself. This is why God had to become a Man and dwell among men, John 1:14. No other sacrifice would suffice.

Secondly, God didn’t sacrifice Jesus. Rather, Jesus, as God incarnate, sacrificed Himself. No one forced Him. He laid down His life willingly, as He made clear speaking about His life: “No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again” John 10:18.

God the Son sacrificed Himself to God the Father and thereby fulfilled all the requirements of the Law. Unlike the temporary sacrifices, Jesus’ once-for-all-time sacrifice was followed by His resurrection. He laid down His life and took it up again, thereby providing eternal life for all who would ever believe in Him and accept His sacrifice for their sins. He did this out of love for the Father and for all those the Father has given Him John 6:37–40.

Dealing with a sacrifice without blemishes.
The concept of the unblemished sacrifice is be free from imperfections. The sacrifice is for human sin, thus for a Jesus to be the unblemished sacrifice should be free from sin, in other words a pure and clean heart.
Thus the question is not about defect but rather is Jesus without sin. Mathew 4 tell us how Satan tempted Jesus in three way, “the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life” Examine the temptation and sin of Eve, as well as the temptation of Jesus, and you will find that the temptations for each came from these three categories. Jesus was tempted in every way and in every area that we are, but remained perfectly holy. 1ohn 2:16 says, For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—is not of the Father but is of the world.
Further the bible is clear that Jesus was free from sin see, Hebrews 4:15, 2 Corinthians 5:21, 1 Peter 2:22.

Regards
Doug
Reply

Born_Believer
09-23-2016, 09:54 PM
The Resurrection account is...I apologise if it sounds funny...but hilarious at times. I say this because the various gospels contradict each other in regards to everything from when it occurred, to who was there, to who buried him, to who saw him again and whether or not he was recognised. In the span of a few pages, these contradictions all occur. So how does a rational human being, read the Bible and go, "Oh well, Jesus was definitely crucified, no doubt in my mind". ^o)
Reply

goodwill
09-28-2016, 10:38 PM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
TENTH, the Hebrew Bible strictly prohibits human sacrifices (e.g., Lev 18:21, 24-25; Deut 18:10; Jer 7:31, 19:5; Ezek 23:37,39).
God was not interested in the human sacrifices of the pagans, although even they may have expressed a true, though very distorted, principle. But God, rather, demands something more. Each of us must become a human sacrifice, if you catch my drift.
Reply

goodwill
09-28-2016, 10:53 PM
Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon2001

...and the Lord accepted his prayers for the iniquity of all of us.
Judging by my Hebrew books, it appears that this is not the only possible translation of Isaiah 53:6, but it is a moving translation all the same. When I read it, I immediately associated it with the Messiah's prayer from the cross: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."
Reply

goodwill
09-28-2016, 10:55 PM
Originally Posted by Born_Believer
The Resurrection account is...I apologise if it sounds funny...but hilarious at times. I say this because the various gospels contradict each other in regards to everything from when it occurred, to who was there, to who buried him, to who saw him again and whether or not he was recognised. In the span of a few pages, these contradictions all occur. So how does a rational human being, read the Bible and go, "Oh well, Jesus was definitely crucified, no doubt in my mind". ^o)
Could you give a specific example of a "hilarious" and irreconcilable contradiction? Also, how would you as a Muslim prove to our Jewish friends that Jesus was the Messiah?
Reply

Born_Believer
09-29-2016, 05:56 PM
Originally Posted by goodwill
Could you give a specific example of a "hilarious" and irreconcilable contradiction? Also, how would you as a Muslim prove to our Jewish friends that Jesus was the Messiah?
I'm sure many have already pointed out the same contradictions I would point out. The Bible can't even explain how many days he was "dead" before resurrection.

In terms of proving Jesus is the Messiah, I don't believe he was. The messiah is Prophet Muhammad PBUH, saviour for all mankind, for all time. Jesus was one of our beloved messengers. But I would have no interest in proving that to any Jew or anyone for that matter. Your salvation comes through acceptance of Allah and Allah's final message through Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

Whether you or the Jews want to believe it is of no concern to me. Enough evidence has been provided to you. Make your choice before it's too late and Jesus does return and when you go to, claiming "Lord, Lord", he will turn away from you. The Quran speaks of this as does your own Bible.
Reply

anatolian
09-29-2016, 07:09 PM
Originally Posted by Born_Believer
I'm sure many have already pointed out the same contradictions I would point out. The Bible can't even explain how many days he was "dead" before resurrection.

In terms of proving Jesus is the Messiah, I don't believe he was. The messiah is Prophet Muhammad PBUH, saviour for all mankind, for all time. Jesus was one of our beloved messengers. But I would have no interest in proving that to any Jew or anyone for that matter. Your salvation comes through acceptance of Allah and Allah's final message through Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

Whether you or the Jews want to believe it is of no concern to me. Enough evidence has been provided to you. Make your choice before it's too late and Jesus does return and when you go to, claiming "Lord, Lord", he will turn away from you. The Quran speaks of this as does your own Bible.
Salam bro. I think you have a misconception. Isa a.s. was titled as the Massiah. He was the Messiah of the sons of Israel. Muhammed a.s. doesnt have this title.
Reply

anatolian
09-29-2016, 07:14 PM
Originally Posted by goodwill
Could you give a specific example of a "hilarious" and irreconcilable contradiction? Also, how would you as a Muslim prove to our Jewish friends that Jesus was the Messiah?
If the sons of Israel accepted him as their Messiah He was going to become their King and give them salvation both in this world and hereafter. Actually there is no way for me to "prove" this to them right now. It has been 2 thousand years...
Reply

goodwill
09-29-2016, 10:03 PM
Originally Posted by Born_Believer
I'm sure many have already pointed out the same contradictions I would point out. The Bible can't even explain how many days he was "dead" before resurrection.

In terms of proving Jesus is the Messiah, I don't believe he was. The messiah is Prophet Muhammad PBUH, saviour for all mankind, for all time. Jesus was one of our beloved messengers. But I would have no interest in proving that to any Jew or anyone for that matter. Your salvation comes through acceptance of Allah and Allah's final message through Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

Whether you or the Jews want to believe it is of no concern to me. Enough evidence has been provided to you. Make your choice before it's too late and Jesus does return and when you go to, claiming "Lord, Lord", he will turn away from you. The Quran speaks of this as does your own Bible.
The Bible is clear that Jesus the Messiah rose from the dead on the third day. But few probably have heard that there were two different calendars in use in 1st century A.D. Palestine—a Galilean calendar, which reckoned days from sunrise to sunrise, and a Judean calendar, which reckoned days from sunset to sunset. I can suggest a couple of links to articles if you wish to explore the matter further.

Anyway, if there are contradictions in the Bible, then that it is problem for you too, since the Quran repeatedly confirms the Scriptures of the Jews and the Christians. See, e.g., the discussion of sura 5:47 in the thread, Did Jesus Predict Muhammad?
Reply

Born_Believer
09-30-2016, 10:55 PM
Originally Posted by goodwill
The Bible is clear that Jesus the Messiah rose from the dead on the third day. But few probably have heard that there were two different calendars in use in 1st century A.D. Palestine—a Galilean calendar, which reckoned days from sunrise to sunrise, and a Judean calendar, which reckoned days from sunset to sunset. I can suggest a couple of links to articles if you wish to explore the matter further.

Anyway, if there are contradictions in the Bible, then that it is problem for you too, since the Quran repeatedly confirms the Scriptures of the Jews and the Christians. See, e.g., the discussion of sura 5:47 in the thread, Did Jesus Predict Muhammad?
The Quran confirms what was revealed to the Prophets of old, so that includes Jesus and the injeel (what may be labeled as the Bible) and the books revealed to other Prophets to, i.e. Moses and David. A lot of Christians bring this up but what you ALL fail to mention is that the Quran also labels these books having been corrupted, with additions and deletions and so on having occurred. So we believe in the Prophets and the books they ONCE brought, but sadly are no longer in their correct, divine form.

I don't think there is a single Christian, who has any comprehension of history, who would argue that the Bible is truly the word of God, considering it has been changed almost periodically in every century.
Reply

Karl
10-01-2016, 12:14 AM
Hmmm this wont go down well with the "Hammer Christians", who believe Jesus was a seven foot Viking that died for their sins so they can carry on with the glory of eternal slaughtering war.
Reply

goodwill
10-03-2016, 12:29 AM
Originally Posted by Born_Believer
The Quran confirms what was revealed to the Prophets of old, so that includes Jesus and the injeel (what may be labeled as the Bible) and the books revealed to other Prophets to, i.e. Moses and David. A lot of Christians bring this up but what you ALL fail to mention is that the Quran also labels these books having been corrupted, with additions and deletions and so on having occurred. So we believe in the Prophets and the books they ONCE brought, but sadly are no longer in their correct, divine form.

I don't think there is a single Christian, who has any comprehension of history, who would argue that the Bible is truly the word of God, considering it has been changed almost periodically in every century.
Please cite the exact Quran verse or verses that label the Bible as corrupted and therefore no longer a reliable source of light and guidance or a resource by which to make valid judgments.


Please provide a few examples of the changes that have been made to the Bible “in every century.” Since you claim a “comprehension of history,” please also provide the history surrounding alleged changes to the Bible, that is, the specific names, places, and dates involved, along with specific changes made by the person or persons involved. Please also provide the original uncorrupted text with the later altered text, so that we can compare the two texts and see whether or not any substantive changes have been made.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-23-2013, 09:37 PM
  2. Replies: 118
    Last Post: 09-17-2006, 04:14 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-01-2006, 07:10 AM
  4. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-19-2006, 01:33 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!