Sin Tranference

[Purple Knight]

Sin transference seems to be a universal concept in monotheism. Christians believe* Jesus can make up for their sins, and Jews believe* that chickens can make up for their sins.

[youtube][/youtube]

(*some)

So here's my question: If you tortured a baby to death, or even just killed it, could it still potentially work? Could that baby carry your sins away somehow?

I understand that God said no more human sacrifices at one point, so perhaps it wouldn't work... but I'm asking if the act has that potential. Could it work, not would it work.

Another really, really weird question... Let's say there are humanoid aliens, and you stole one of their babies and killed it. Could that work?

[Elijah John]

There are Judaists who still practice the rights.

Where? Not without the Temple they don't. And only a very small minority of Jews want the resumption of blood sacrifices even if the Temple is ever rebuilt.

[Difflugia]

God cancelled it, according to progressive revelation.

The yearly ritual of the scapegoat, which commanded the sprinkling of a goat's blood upon Yahweh's mercy seat, was to be a "statute forever" (Lev. 16:29), an "everlasting statute to you, to make atonement for the children of Israel because of all their sins once a year." (Lev. 16:34).

If that was later repealed, what did God mean by "forever" and "everlasting" in this context?

[1213]

Sin transference seems to be a universal concept in monotheism. Christians believe* Jesus can make up for their sins, ...

By what Jesus told, the forgiveness is in his words. Jesus declared sins forgiven, before he died. So, killing is not required for to forgive sins.

The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, "Who is this that speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?" But Jesus, perceiving their thoughts, answered them, "Why are you reasoning so in your hearts? Which is easier to say, 'Your sins are forgiven you;' or to say, 'Arise and walk?' But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (he said to the paralyzed man), "I tell you, arise, and take up your cot, and go to your house." Immediately he rose up before them, and took up that which he was laying on, and departed to his house, glorifying God.
Luke 5:21-25

Disciples of Jesus have the right to forgive sins (no blood or sacrifices needed):

Whoever's sins you forgive, they are forgiven them. Whoever's sins you retain, they have been retained."
John 20:23

[SallyF]

God cancelled it, according to progressive revelation.

The yearly ritual of the scapegoat, which commanded the sprinkling of a goat's blood upon Yahweh's mercy seat, was to be a "statute forever" (Lev. 16:29), an "everlasting statute to you, to make atonement for the children of Israel because of all their sins once a year." (Lev. 16:34).

If that was later repealed, what did God mean by "forever" and "everlasting" in this context?

Which FURTHER demonstrates that "God" had nothing to do with the writing of this stuff.

It demonstrates that humans cobbled together a bunch of contradictory human fabrications and called them the "Word of God".

The contradictions are further indications that there was a reformation, a change of God concept in Jewish-Canaanite society …

From the older Elohim gods - written as "God" in English …

To the newer Yahweh god - written as "Lord" in English.

Many contradictions are simply explained by the Reformation Hypothesis.

No gods, no angels, no magic, no talking animals.

[Purple Knight]

Stopping right here, please demonstrate the veracity of this statement.

I suppose I should have said Abrahamic monotheism and excluded Islam (they do sacrifice, but not, it seems for the same reason). But note that I said it seems that way. And I did post a video of Jews doing it today.

Doesn't fit the narrative, so inconvenient passages like this are often ignored by YHVH's detractors.

I'm not ignoring it. In fact I clearly mentioned that the Biblical God at one point said he didn't want any more human sacrifices.

"I don't want you to do it anymore," does not equal "The concept of sin transference is no longer valid." Clearly it is valid, with Jesus offered up as a sort of last sacrifice.

But my questions remain. And they don't hinge on every monotheist doing it. They hinge on the concept of sin transference being basically valid.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 10 by Elijah John]

For pete's sake. Really?
Men cancelled them.
Psalms itself says that they are thank offerings.
If "modern Judaists" aren't giving them, it must be because they are not grateful, or in context, transferring sin.

You said he doesn't need or desire blood.

Yet you posted that he does not need, but does desire, blood.

The "no sacrifice without a temple," rationale is man-made nonsense, but if I am wrong this will be easily shown by you.

[Replying to post 11 by Elijah John]

You seem uninformed about a religion you somewhat adhere to. There are controversies about animal cruelty nearly every year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapparot

This demonstrated Purple Knight was right in his claim about sin transference and monotheism.

[Elijah John]

.

Yet you posted that he does not need, but does desire, blood.

Where? If I did say that God DESIRES blood, that was not what I intended and I will fix it. My position here has always been (with the support of many Scriptures) that God does NOT desire blood.

Also, are you disregarding the statements from the prophets that indicate God doesn't need blood sacrifice in order to forgive sin?

Are you disregarding the Jewish sage Maimonides position on this subject? (I already provided the quote about his position.) You did not address the quotes I provided in post #10 Please do.

[Elijah John]

Regarding "sin transferance", this is not something that Judaism teaches. And Jews often used Ezekiel 18.20 to make their point:

The person who sins is the one who will die.

Whatever was taught in the past to the contrary, the position against "sin transference" won out, based on the ancient verse from Ezekiel and the abolition of sacrifice in Judaism dating back to post-Temple times.

[Tcg]

By what Jesus told, the forgiveness is in his words. Jesus declared sins forgiven, before he died. So, killing is not required for to forgive sins.

That sounds good, unfortunately there are scriptures that contradict this claim:

• Hebrews 9:28 - So Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
  
  Ephesians 5:2 - And walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
  
  1 Corinthians 15:3-4 - For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.
  
  Mark 10:45 - For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
  
  1 John 1:7 - But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.
  
  Hebrews 9:14 - How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

Some try to resolve this contradiction by claiming that any forgiveness of sins before Jesus' blood sacrifice was based on that future sacrifice. I'm not sure that is taught in scripture, but it is one attempt to resolve the contradiction.


Tcg

[Willum]

[Replying to post 17 by Elijah John]

Good luck, it is right there in Psalms.
Indeed, where did Moses and Abraham get the idea, if not from God?

Regarding "sin transferance", this is not something that Judaism teaches. And Jews often used Ezekiel 18.20 to make their point:

The person who sins is the one who will die.

Whatever was taught in the past to the contrary, the position against "sin transference" won out, based on the ancient verse from Ezekiel and the abolition of sacrifice in Judaism dating back to post-Temple times.

Sin transference is Essene and from the Pharisee.
I trust you can check that out yourself.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Essene