Ritualistic animal sacrifice for god, in Christianity
Offline I live in a culture, where there are virtually no fundie Christians
And I am curious does this Ritualistic animal sacrifice. happen in a fundie Christian culture. as this is a commandment from God himself / Leviticus 14
"The Lord spoke to Moses. He told him to say to the people,
“To make the house pure, the priest must get two birds. He must also get some cedar wood, bright red yarn and branches of a hyssop plant. He must kill one of the birds over fresh water in a clay pot.
“Then he must take the cedar wood, the hyssop plant, the bright red yarn and the live bird. He must dip all of them into the blood of the dead bird. He must also dip them into the fresh water. He must sprinkle the house seven times"
? has anybody witnessed this practice
? do christians protest outside chemical company's headquarters.for producing cleaning products that go against the very word of God in mold removal products
- Login to post comments
leviticus as a whole is all awesomely crazy and denied by the church generally speaking =P
But the rest of it isn't?
The covenant of the Old Testament was closed with Jesus Christ's new covenant. "Covenant" means a sacred deal, not unlike a contract. The human end of the Mosaic covenant was the Law - like what you quoted from Leviticus. The purpose of the Law was to give humans an opportunity for salvation - and was less than God's true wishes, but an offered compromise.
Humans weren't able to uphold even that, so God made a new covenant. We are to have faith in Jesus Christ to redeem us, and be guided by the Holy Spirit working within us. Essentially, God knew we could not take even the first step towards our own salvation, so out of mercy and love he took it for us, and continues to take each next step through us.
"The map appears more real to us than the land." - Lawrence
That's a nice little story. Sorry, I still prefer Lord of the Rings.
Atheist Books
Yes me too, even though it is a very Catholic book.
Out of curiosity, where does it say that in the NT? Is it implied or is there a chapter/verse that states that? I know that this is a commonly held idea with Christians and I was just wondering if the bible clearly states this somewhere. (My bible knowledge is not as strong as it should be - LOL)
Yeah but Tolkien was the greatest Catholic to ever live. We can forgive him one mishap. He was indoctrinated.
Atheist Books
I bet the omniscient deity didn't see that one coming.
I'll go out on a limb and guess your Bible knowledge is about as strong as my Quran knowledge, for about the same reasons.
First some precedent in Jeremiah 31:31-43: "The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt - a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other. 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more."
In the New Testament, the relevant passages are each gospel's telling of Jesus' last passover (aka, "the Last Supper"
. Luke 22:20 is the most straightforward: "And he did the same [gave thanks] with the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."
Edit: It occured to me after posting that this quote is somewhat lackluster. If you'd like, I can elaborate in another post, but I don't want to over-edit this one.
Each "synoptic" gospel has its own account: Matthew 26:20-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:14-20. John does not, and I'm not really enough of a Biblical scholar to speak on why. "Synoptic" is a term used to group Matthew, Mark, and Luke because they seem to draw on the same root sources, likely a "sayings" collection similar to the gospel of Thomas (available online if you want to Google it).
See the Jeremiah passage quoted above.
"The map appears more real to us than the land." - Lawrence
Thank you! This is very helpful. One more curiosity question - (just because I don't want to totally derail this thread) does the NT state anywhere exactly what this new covenant is or is it supposed to be the promise of salvation through accepting Christ as the savior (duh)?
Most of my biblical knowledge comes through reading it and years of parochial school. Neither has left me with much understanding of it.
Okay, remind me to never resort to irony with you again.
My intention was to point out the absurdity of any fairy tale in which an omniscient deity first adopts a compromise policy for salvation and then abandons it when it fails.
Oh, I got it. Just presenting counter-evidence. There's more, if you need. Didn't mean to sound rude, if I did.
"The map appears more real to us than the land." - Lawrence
OK. I don't see how the passage addresses the problem, but if you do, that's fine.
Any problem in any theory can be explained away. I can conjure up a rationalization for this or any other theological problem myself and I am not even religious. The reason why such rationalizations fail to impress me is that they cannot be checked against reality.
If "God's plan" was perfect, why the change? Are we just gueni pigs he experiments with? The old laws didnt work? I thought there was a verse in the NT that said Jesus came to uphold the old laws?
If not, then why are Christians insistant on upholding the 10 commandments which is OT law?
Seems to me that you want it both ways so that you dont have to give an answer.
Why all the drama of killing to prove a point? An all powefull being needed blood to be spilled to show love? I guess that is the same type of love he showed allowing people to choke to death on water?
Not a nice guy if you ask me.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Hmph. Hebrews gives a pretty good apologetic explanation of the New Covenant when it shamelessly quote mines from Jeremiah, Psalms and Genesis.
The Jewish position is different though. They see Jeremiah's 'new' covenant as simply a renewal of the old one when the nation of Israel is re-established after one of the Babylonian captivities. He is interested in returning the Jewish people to the Lord after they have turned away from Moses' teachings.
It has nothing at all to do with a Christian covenant.
Freedom of religious belief is an inalienable right. Stuffing that belief down other people's throats is not.
But even in this new covenant, God still apparently wants all the old laws kept:
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Mark 5:17-18
From the way I read this, good ol' Levitcus and Deuteronomy are still expected to be followed.
"When you hit your thumb with a hammer it's nice to be able to blaspheme. It takes a special kind of atheist to jump up and down shout, 'Oh, random fluctuations-in-the-space-time-continuum!'"-Terry Pratchett
That's what the Jeremiah quote points out. God planned the change. The law includes its prophecies, so it includes a new covenant with the entire world, not just Israel.
The Mosaic law is still good, but it will not merit salvation. We should embody the law, not perform it like a ritual. This is of particular concern to the OP, I expect. Animal sacrifice was a means of atonement, but atonement is meaningless if it merits nothing. Our sins are already imputed to Jesus Christ.
Well sure the Jewish position is different.
Seriously though, saying the new covenant has been fulfilled outside of Christ ignores prophecy of God creating his covenant with all people instead of just Israel, and ignores prophecy of the messiah. The Jewish interpretation I know of is that non-Israelites can only be ger toshav, which doesn't fit the inclusive language God uses. The story of Jonah is a terrific illustration of the idea.
IzzyPop, I think I addressed your comment along with the others.
"The map appears more real to us than the land." - Lawrence
Ohh I see. it has moved from ritualistic animal sacrifice to ritualistic deity sacrifice. the body and blood of Christ. make sense
And ritualistic animal sacrifice to remove mold. under gods original instructions has become amended. but it still holds true
? JHenson do you believe that even low you do not practice this ritual. it still holds true. that you can remove mold.with ritualistic animal sacrifice
Sorry, but I think that's specualtion. Jeremiah seems clearly to be referring to the fact that the Israelites have fallen away from God's covenant and that this needs revived.
Freedom of religious belief is an inalienable right. Stuffing that belief down other people's throats is not.