Can you explain the concept of ancient Hebrew blood sacrifices?

Question

I'm an atheist but a former Christian, and I'm trying to understand something that never made sense to me even while I was a believer. That would be the Christian idea that Jesus died to take the place of the Hebrew sacrifices for atonement, but a few things seem amiss to me in their explanation so I'm asking about the Hebrew tradition in hope that will shed some light on the subject.

From what I have been led to understand, the Jewish tradition of these sacrifices halted when the Holy Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 CE because the Holy Temple was the only valid place to make such sacrifices. But prior to that, what was it about the offerings and sacrifices that worked? Was it showing a willingness to destroy something of value to you, or was it to appease G-d with a gift, or was it something entirely different?


Thanks for your answers. BTW, any Jews answering, please feel free to include your thoughts on the potential for one human sacrifice (Jesus) to replace all offerings and sacrifices.

Answer 1

BECAUSE IT'S SICK!!!

Answer 2

Hi, I am a Christian not Jewish and have learnt that what Christians view as the concept of atonement and blood sacrifice is not what the Jews view it as, so you are going to get to different explanations.

For Christians we understand as you rightly put it that the animal sacrifices were subsitutes for the sinners sin. That the perfect lamb was the sacrifice which pointed to the death of the Christ.

In the Christians view the Messiah was not merely human. God does indeed abhore human sacrifice, but Jesus was not just human. He was righteous. God who is righteous, can only offer rightousness through a righteous sacrifice. Jesus was the only righteous offering fit and worthy...no human could do it. Jesus was divine in human form. Not just a man. Hence the symbolism of the perfect lamb.



The offering was indeed showing willingness to put to death something of great value but it was to focus the sinner to his/her sin, and who it was who would atone that sin through His death in the prophecised time. Atonement= AT ONE ment....God and man not seperated by his sin at that point.

Answer 3

The practice of sacrifice is found in the oldest human records. The archaeological record contains human and animal corpses with sacrificial marks long before any written records of the practice. In Judaism, a sacrifice is known as a Korban, from the Hebrew root karov, meaning "to [come] close [to God]".



The centrality of sacrifices in Judaism is clear, with much of the Bible, particularly the opening chapters of the book Leviticus, detailing the exact method of bringing sacrifices. Sacrifices were either bloody (animals) or unbloody (grain and wine). Bloody sacrifices were divided into holocausts (burnt offerings, in which the whole animal was burnt), guilt offerings (in which part was burnt and part left for the priest) and peace offerings (in which similarly only part of the animal was burnt). Yet the prophets point out that sacrifices are only a part of serving God and need to be accompanied by inner morality and goodness.

Answer 4

Among the offerings made voluntarily as gifts or as an approach to God to gain his favor were the burnt offerings, grain offerings, and communion offerings. Some scholars hold that the Hebrew term for “burnt offering” means “an offering of ascent” or “an ascending offering.” This is fitting because in a burnt offering, the slaughtered animal was burned on the altar and a sweet-smelling, or restful, odor ascended heavenward to God. The distinctive feature of the burnt offering was that after its blood was sprinkled around the altar, the animal was offered in its entirety to God. The priests made “all of it smoke on the altar as a burnt offering, an offering made by fire of a restful odor to Jehovah.”—Leviticus 1:3, 4, 9; Genesis 8:21.

Answer 5

>>>what was it about the offerings and sacrifices that worked?



The New Testament explicitly states in Heb 9:22 , "...and without blood-shedding there is no remission." Even the Jewish Rabbis wrote "there is no atonement but by blood" (read T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 5. 1. Zebachim, fol. 6. 1. & Menachot, fol. 93. 2.)



It was the shedding of blood that appeased the Righteous demands of a HOLY GOD. Ezekiel 18:20 "The soul that sinneth, it shall die."



The idea was not to show God a willingness to sacrifice what was precious to you - that would be a rather silly idea for God created everything, what can you give God what HE has not created. Nor is God a despot who likes to ruin your fun....



Rather, a HOLY and a solemn transaction took place at the point of sacrifice - when God, instead of judging the sinner, instead judges the sacrificial animal instead.



Jesus Christ, in anti-type become the culmination and the perfect fulfillment of ALL sacrifices - in fact all animal sacrifices looked forward to that one precious sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, and God retrospectively was propitiated with the sinner because of the perfect sacrifice of the Lord Jesus.

Answer 6

I could be wrong but I believe it is because blood was considered the life force and what could be a more potent sacrifice than the actual life force of a creature. Many religions used blood sacrifices in the past and some still continue this practice.

Answer 7

Few today truly understand the significance of blood sacrifice or even blood itself. The lifeforce as it is called is pure energy. Very powerful energy. Blood sacrifices release energy into the spell/prayer, really no difference in those 2. The purpose is then empowered to do as the one performing the sacrifice has requested. That in itself makes it impossible for one man, "even the son of god", to save the world. Not enough energy in one sacrifice.

Answer 8

The most informative thing I have read on the explanation of sacrifices to God is in Smith's Bible Dictionary. It is very informative and explains the Old Testament sacrifices of how and why as well as the 'one' New Testament sacrifice and how it represents the atonement for the sins of all.



Basically, there were 3 main offerings:



1- the sin offering (to prepare access to God-because God is so righteous and holy, He cannot look upon sin)



2-burnt offering (to mark their dedication to His service; self-dedicatory)



3- meat offering (Eucharistic (unbloody); offering of first-fruits, peace or thanksgiving)



From the prophets and the epistle to the Hebrews, we learn that the sin offering represented that covenant as broken by man, and as knit together again, by God's appointment through the shedding of the blood, the symbol of life, signified that the offender deserved death for sin, but that the death of the victim was accepted for His death by the ordinance of God's mercy.



Beyond all doubt, the sin offering distinctly witnessed that sin existed in man. And that the "wages of sin is death", and that God had provided an atonement by the vicarious suffering of an appointed victim. (Jesus Christ)



The burnt offering was also represented in the death of Christ because it was self-dedicatory, devoting body and soul, His blood was shed; and not to mention he even went to hell (coming back with the keys to hell and some fellow believers!)



The meat offerings (or the peace or thank offering) were done as a sign of thankful homage and as a means of maintaining His service and His servants. The characteristic ceremony in the peace offering was the eating of the flesh by the sacrificer. It was like a token representing the enjoyment of communion with God. The Last Supper between Jesus and the disciples paints a clear picture of that.



Also, to add to the main idea of this view of atonement. Without the sin offering of the cross, our burnt offering would be impossible, so also without the burnt offering, the sin offering, to us, will be unavailing.



The epistle to the Hebrews contains the key of the whole sacrificial doctrine. The objective is to show the typical character of sacrifices and to show that in it, as well, is a spiritual meaning.

Answer 9

The worship of Yahweh was based on animal sacrifices and altar offerings. If you read Ezekiel 44 and Daniel 9 which is prophecy of the messiah you will then see their that the foretold messiah even is describing as bringing back animal sacrifice. Nothing replaces what Yahweh says from the beginning. Because he never changes Malachi 3:6.

Answer 10

I think it has roots in "destroy something of value to you" as evidenced by the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur, when Jews are supposed to fast to atone for sins.



Obviously, fasting isn't the same as blood sacrifice, but that is my best guess.

Answer 11

Have you heard the phrase "scape goat"

well this is were it came from



They would get two goat's sacrifice one

then confess to the other one then let it go

this would be done with a crowd watching (so this would count for the all in the city I think)

Answer 12

God is a Holy God and He can only accept a blood sacrifice over sin, that is why the lambs were killed in the O.T. God sent His Son in the N.T. to forgive man of his sins by the blood of His Son (the spotless lamb) You are free of your sins by the blood of Jesus, if you accept Him as your savior.

Answer 13

Let's see. First off, the use of human sacrifice (Jesus) as a replacement of animal sacrifices, makes no sense in Judaism. The animals were killed humanely (kosher style), cooked & eaten. In other words a BBQ with prayer. This is not replaceable with the death of a human being-God. Nor with any human sacrifices of the day, which were often obvious & painful such as throwing a child into a fire.



More importantly from a Jewish theology point of view, the story of Abraham is read very clearly as saying by God "NO MORE HUMAN SACRIFICE." I used caps because it is that emphasized within Judaism reading of the story. God says, there are better ways to relate to me & this is no longer a valid method.



The sacrifices were -not- blood sacrifices. Often people used burnt flour instead. (Those priests needed more than meat in their diets. --I'm being tongue in cheek, but from an anthrological point of view, this makes sense). This site has a good scriptural description of that -lack- of requirement of blood: http://www,whatjewsbelieve.org, a link on the left. Blood for sacrifice was used a lot in those days & Judaism moves AWAY from that concept.



The words I use are that the animal offerings were acts of contrition, vs. other cultures offerings as acts of appeasement.



Appeasement is that if I give this thing, then the Gods will be happier & provide less trauma in my life. The Jesus story is similar in that, "if I believe, God will be please (appeased), & I will get something better in return than if I didn't believe, i.e. heaven instead of hell."



The Jewish sacrifices were ONLY for -unintentional- sins. For intentional sins one needed to make acts of amendment with the person harmed & ask God for forgiveness. Since for unintentional sins it is harder to do this (for obvious reasons), this was used as a substitute. However, one could not make the offering until -after- being repentant in one's heart. This was simply an act to restate one's regret. The reward clears up oneself, which feels good, but also allows for a cleared out connection to God once again. The "reward" is the more complex human interaction element of "relating" to another, in this case an important other-God, in a full way. This makes sense within the complex relationship the Jewish spiritual individuals have with God in the Torah, Abraham, Moses, Jonah, Job... (For example, they argue, bargin, even get God to change his plans.) In Judaism one is responsible for one's own actions, so making amends is critical & an animal offering can not take away the sin by itself.



I'll add that the entire Christian theology explanation of Judaism's animal sacrifices makes no sense to Jewish ears when one first hears it. The idea that it was overwhelmingly central to Judaism & required blood, were both foreign even back then. Add the idea that sin & needing to be perfect to be acceptable is a Christian concept, and foreign to Judaism... Thus the Christian ideas of Judaism stops making sense of declaring that blood sacrifices of animals to wipe away sin, were a central theme that needed to be replaced with the image of the killing of a human/God to take away our imperfection. ...instead of the Jewish concept of celebrating our life efforts to improve our own selves constantly as God's wish & our goal & an empowerment he gave to us.



*Judaism also does not use a concept that pain leads to joy. In Christian theology, the pain of Jesus leads to the joy of being saved. Judaism focuses on trying to reduce pain in the world & does not excuse any pain as unpainful in some way to anyone viewing it.



It looks like Mama_Pajama has done her usual excellent job of answering from a scriptural & spiritual point of view. I hope this added to that answer.



Edit: I added a few additions throughout since writing this, to add details.



I do not intend any of this to be offensive to Christians. However, Christianity makes comments on Judaism, so it is appropriate for Judaism to describe it's corrections. If my descriptions of Christianity seem unappealing to a Christian one can either email me better word choices - or look inside to see what's bothering them about their own beliefs as I've described.

Answer 14

well the blood sacrifices prefigured the coming sacrifice of Jesus, note how it prefigured int terms that Humans could understand



(Genesis 22:11-17) . . .But Jehovah’s angel began calling to him out of the heavens and saying: “Abraham, Abraham!” to which he answered: “Here I am!” 12 And he went on to say: “Do not put out your hand against the boy and do not do anything at all to him, for now I do know that you are God-fearing in that you have not withheld your son, your only one, from me.” 13 At that Abraham raised his eyes and looked and there, deep in the foreground, there was a ram caught by its horns in a thicket. So Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up for a burnt offering in place of his son. 14 And Abraham began to call the name of that place Je‧ho′vah-ji′reh. This is why it is customarily said today: “In the mountain of Jehovah it will be provided.” 15 And Jehovah’s angel proceeded to call to Abraham the second time out of the heavens 16 and to say: “‘By myself I do swear,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘that by reason of the fact that you have done this thing and you have not withheld your son, your only one, 17 I shall surely bless you and I shall surely multiply your seed like the stars of the heavens . . .



But you See Jehovah really did sacrifice his OWN SON



you see Adam spilled perfect blood, & God's law requires JUSTICE , an EYE for an Eye is NOT revenge, but ACCOUNTABILITY



So for God to redeem mankind, something of EQUAL value had to be paid



(Matthew 20:28) Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.”



(Hebrews 9:11-14) . . .However, when Christ came as a high priest of the good things that have come to pass, through the greater and more perfect tent not made with hands, that is, not of this creation, 12 he entered, no, not with the blood of goats and of young bulls, but with his own blood, once for all time into the holy place and obtained an everlasting deliverance [for us]. 13 For if the blood of goats and of bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who have been defiled sanctifies to the extent of cleanness of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of the Christ, who through an everlasting spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works that we may render sacred service to [the] living God?

15 So that is why he is a mediator of a new covenant, in order that, because a death has occurred for [their] release by ransom from the transgressions under the former covenant, the ones who have been called might receive the promise of the everlasting inheritance. 16 For where there is a covenant, the death of the [human] covenanter needs to be furnished. 17 For a covenant is valid over dead [victims], since it is not in force at any time while the [human] covenanter is living. 18 Consequently neither was the former [covenant] inaugurated without

Answer 15

I must first begin by saying that I'm answering from a perspective of a believing Jew. The Torah teaches repeatedly that human sacrifice is something God does not want and finds abhorrent, so the concept that there is any "potential" for a human sacrifice is not there at all. Jesus as a sacrifice for sin is contradictory to the Torah, that alone would invalidate for all time even the most remote possibility of his being a "messiah"...using the Hebrew definition of that word..an anointed ruler.

I didn't come here to contrast Judaism with Christianity, but sometimes in order to explain what it is that Jews believe now or believed in ancient times it is necessary to dispel mistaken notions that appear commonplace and are directly related to what the New Testament says *about* Jewish belief and practice, versus what the Torah and Tanakh directly state.



There is a concept in Christianity *alone* that only blood (animal)sacrifice may atone for sin. That concept has ALWAYS been utterly foreign to the faith of the covenant nation, Israel. Before I can even begin to adequately explain the sacrificial system using the laws of Torah in Leviticus, I must first show that the perspective of Christianity on this issue is dependent on having taken a few key passages out of the Torah and completely out of their context to try to support a human sacrifice as being compatible with the Temple sacrificial system.

Also, rather than reinvent the wheel, I will copy-paste a brief portion from my friend's web page. I sincerely hope you will read the thorough explanation in full there at the link. Rabbi Stuart Federow has read both religion's Bible's and has addressed the differences very well in explaination from a Scriptural perspectifve what it is that Jews believe about things that differ from Christianity. First of all, Jews don't have a concept of "original sin", being born with a burden of sin that must be reconciled. Animal sacrifice has never been the exclusive means to seek atonement. God does not become a man. There is no demi-god Devil in Torah. There is no fall of angels. but for the purposes of this question ..PLEASE read the portion at http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/ regarding the question that Blood is not necessary for atonement. Jews then and now trust that God will do as promised if we do our part.



Animal sacrifice was never the only way to atonement. *A Korban Chatas (sin sacrifice) was only brought for an accidental transgression of the most severe sins. A Korban Asham Talוi (A sacrifice for doubtful guilt) was only brought if a person was uncertain if they had transgressed a sin for which they were compelled to bring a Korban Chatas.



In the days of borh First and Second Temple, a king or Kohen Gadol (High Priest) had to bring a bull. A normal person (kohen or otherwise) had to bring a female lamb, a poor person brought two birds (either pigeons, doves or swallows- the exact species is subject to debate) and a really poor person brought flour, oil and frankincense.*



There is no blood in flour, oil and frankincense. The important thing was the repentance and the act of showing you had done what was necessary to then ask God to forgive you.



***The centrality of the animal sacrifices ceased, not with the second destruction of the Temple by the Romans, but rather with the first destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians. Please remember that the vast majority of Jews never returned to the Promised Land under Cyrus of Persia. They remained in Babylonia. By the time Jesus was born, eighty percent of the world's Jewish community lived outside of the Promised Land, and could not have cared less about the cessation of the animal sacrifices. When the Temple was reestablished, the Jews of Babylonia made an annual financial gift for the maintenance of the Temple, and the land, but never worried that God was not going to forgive them their sins without a blood sacrifice, just as Diaspora Jews do today. And the reason why they had no such fear, was that the Bible makes it explicitly clear that no blood sacrifice is necessary for the forgiveness of sins, or that the exclusive means for the God-man relationship was through the animal sacrifices.***

Please read at the link below ( topic on the left side of the page) for the scriptural references as to what it is that believing Jews do.

EDIT: With regard to the Second Temple destruction. Some Christians try to tell Jews it was destroyed because we "rejected" Jesus. Here is a bit of background and Biblical/Historic/Jewish perspective that if understood in context, will give a very different viewpoint.

TAMMUZ täˈməz, ancient nature deity worshiped in Babylonia. A god of agriculture and flocks, he personified the creative powers of spring. He was loved by the fertility goddess Ishtar, who, according to one legend, was so grief-stricken at his death that she contrived to enter the underworld to get him back. According to another legend, she killed him and later restored him to life. These legends and his festival, commemorating the yearly death and rebirth of vegetation, corresponded to the festivals of the Phoenician and Greek Adonis and of the Phrygian Attis. The Sumerian name of Tammuz was Dumuzi. In the Bible his disappearance is mourned by the women of Jerusalem (Ezek. 8.14).



Hmm Man/god born of virgin dies and Ishtar resurrects him in the spring...Ishtar ( Easter) spring resurrection...striking isn't it?

Sunrise services in honor of Tammuz and praying for his resurrection is an ancient heathen custom. It is actually described and condemned in the book of Ezekiel.



12. And He said to me, "Have you seen, son of man, what the elders of the house of Israel are doing in the darkness, each one in his paved chambers? For they say, 'The Lord does not see us; the Lord has left the earth.' "

13. And He said to me, "You will yet see again greater abominations that they are doing."

14. And He brought me to the entrance of the gate of the house of the Lord that is to the north, and behold there the women were sitting, weeping for Tammuz.

15. And He said to me, "Have you seen, son of man? You will yet see again greater abominations than these."

16. And He brought me to the inner court of the house of the Lord, and behold, at the entrance of the Temple of the Lord between the porch and the altar, about twenty- five men, their backs to the Temple of the Lord and their faces toward the east, and they were prostrating themselves eastward to the sun.

17. And He said to me, "Have you seen, son of man? Was it [too] trivial to the house of Judah to prevent them from performing the abominations that they have done here? For they have [already] filled the land with violence, and repeatedly provoked Me, and behold they send disgrace into their nose.

18. I too, shall act with fury; My eyes will not spare, neither will I have pity, and they will call into My ears with a loud voice, but I shall not listen to them."



This was a warning prior to the destruction of the FIRST Temple. The Second Temple was destroyed just after another man/god began being worshipped in Jerusalem.



Coincidence?

edit: I think Cher's answer explains things very well.

I hope that together these two answers help others to understand the Jewish view better :)