What kind of Father demands the blood of His Son?

[Elijah John]

Is the God of Jesus a merciful forgiving Father?

Or a bloodthirsty deity who must be appeased by the blood of animals, then later, by the blood of His favorite Son?

I realize these are loaded questions, and that my bias is apparent.

But which is it, merciful Father or Judge who demands blood?*

Which kind of God did Jesus himself teach? (not Paul, but Jesus)

What kind of Father demands the blood of his favorite Son in order to be able to forgive his other children?

--------------------

(note.. this thread is about forgiveness and atonement, not about the wars of YHVH's people etc.)

*if you answer "both" then please demonstrate how the two notions are compatible.

[ttruscott]

And you still have not addressed Psalm 50.9-13

Psalm 50:9-13New International Version (NIV)

9
I have no need of a bull from your stall
or of goats from your pens,
10
for every animal of the forest is mine,
and the cattle on a thousand hills.
11
I know every bird in the mountains,
and the insects in the fields are mine.
12
If I were hungry I would not tell you,
for the world is mine, and all that is in it.
13
Do I eat the flesh of bulls
or drink the blood of goats?

Or humans for that matter?

Both animals and humans fall short of the glory of the Son and the efficacy of His blood. Animals because they have no choice and can only be a symbol of the blood necessary for the blood that can open the door to forgiveness by first assuaging GOD's instincts of hostility to sinners.

And humans because they are sinful and cannot fulfill the reason for blood, the sign they are under the Son's keeping that assuages YHWH's anger at evil. How can evil assuage HIS anger at evil?

It was the blood of the slain Lamb [Revelation 13:8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast--all whose names have not been written in the Lamb's book of life, the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.] spread on the door posts / lives of His people that caused the angel of destruction, YHWH HIMself, to pass over them though they were still in their sins, unrepentant. Leaven, symbol for the invasive nature of evil, had been swept out of their houses / lives but not from their hearts...as proven by their rebellion at the edge of the Sea: Ex 14:11 They said to Moses, Was it because there were no graves in Egypt that you brought us to the desert to die? What have you done to us by bringing us out of Egypt? 12 Didnt we say to you in Egypt, Leave us alone; let us serve the Egyptians? It would have been better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the desert! and every day after that.

Being under the blood keeps the sinner alive while GOD visits him and sanctifies him with painful discipline. Either that or the Passover was just a cool story to break the monotony of winter...

[ttruscott]

"I desire mercy, NOT sacrifice.

GOD instituted sacrifice yet here you seem to think HE denies sacrifice all sacrifice...very close to the edge and tipsy, eh?

Consider

6. mercy"put for piety in general, of which mercy or charity is a branch.

not sacrifice"that is, "rather than sacrifice." So "not" is merely comparative (Ex 16:8; Joe 2:13; Joh 6:27; 1Ti 2:14). As God Himself instituted sacrifices, it cannot mean that He desired them not absolutely, but that even in the Old Testament, He valued moral obedience as the only end for which positive ordinances, such as sacrifices, were instituted"as of more importance than a mere external ritual obedience...

Sacrifice where sacrifice on behalf of the sinner is needed (the passover, in the garden for Adam and Eve) and charity when the sinner is being called to perfection of action.

[Claire Evans]

He offered His life for us and it so happened that blood was shed because of the actions of man. That had nothing to do with God. He didn't want it but the point was for Jesus to die so sin and Satan could be defeated and to have the resurrection.

That may have been his laudable aim but it didn't work as Satan and sin are flourishing still. Obviously those who would have been good before Christ's suicide would remain good after. So it is hard to see what it was all for.

In the spiritual world, Satan has been defeated because the victory is not subjected to time. The physical realm is different. Evil is running its course here until we see evil has been defeated. If the victory had not happened, then how Revelation say Jesus is victorious if it hasn't happened. It is not enough merely to be good. A good person cannot save themselves because they still sin. And what makes you think Jesus committed suicide?

We aren't considered God incarnate when humans are referred to as sons and daughters of God.

And perhaps this applies equally to Jesus.

Can we rise from the dead and have supernatural powers?

God was reaching out to all people through Jesus, not just to the Jews.

His reach was defective then, since "all people" did not get the message of Christ. I'm sure God could have found a more efficient way, but even gods make mistakes it seems. All the same, he had another try when he sent Muhammad. That looks a bit more promising judging by the number of converts to the Religion of Peace.

Jesus didn't have Twitter then. How could the gospel of Christ be taught around the world back then? What has happened is that the gospel of Christ is known now worldwide. Since when did God send Mohammed? It is blasphemous to call Jesus the Son of God in Islam.

[marco]

In the spiritual world, Satan has been defeated because the victory is not subjected to time. The physical realm is different.

Since we occupy the physical world it is safe to say, as far as humans are concerned, evil has not been defeated. In the stuff of spirit worlds it may well have been, but that's got nothing to do with the mugging of some old lady or the murder of a child.

And what makes you think Jesus committed suicide?

He had the power to walk away unharmed. He walked into his death quite determined to die. And he did - for a time.

Jesus didn't have Twitter then. How could the gospel of Christ be taught around the world back then? What has happened is that the gospel of Christ is known now worldwide. Since when did God send Mohammed? It is blasphemous to call Jesus the Son of God in Islam.

Jesus is an Islamic prophet, like Muhammad. True, Jesus didn't have the Internet but God presumably isn't limited in what he can do by the inadequacies of humanity. Jesus managed to do the miraculous, without any Internet. If God''s way of sending a message was to place some individual in a remote region of the Roman Empire and have him travel on foot talking to a few people we must wonder at God's lack of imagination.

[Elijah John]

"I desire mercy, NOT sacrifice.

GOD instituted sacrifice yet here you seem to think HE denies sacrifice all sacrifice...very close to the edge and tipsy, eh?

I think you are operating under a false premise when you claim that "God instituted sacrifice". Jeremiah 7 seems to indicate otherwise. Yes, the command to sacrifice is attributed to God in the Bible, but it is also contradicted in the very same Bible by the prophets, including John the Baptist, and Jesus himself.

It is more likely that God tolerated sacrifice for a time, as transitional. That is what many Jews believe, as taught by the sage Maimonides.

Not only does Jesus quote Hosea 6.6, he teaches non-sacrificial, non-bloody alternatives to sacrifice. Namely, the Lord's prayer, the Beattitude, and the Parables.

Notice Jesus did NOT teach, "forgive us our trespasses, as we have offered blood-sacrifice".

Nor did Jesus teach, "forgive us our trespasses, for we are the blood-washed, born again."

[Elijah John]

Since when did God send Mohammed?.

Since the 6th century. Isn't it possible that God sent Mohammed to correct the errors of Paul and the Church? Namely, blood-atonement theology, and the idolatrous notion that "Jesus is God".

If not actually idolatrous (as it seems to be a clear violation of the First Commandment), then excessive hero-worship.

With Jesus considered "God" by so many, what attention does the actual God, (the "only true God, as Jesus says in John 17.3) the Father, receive anymore?

Far more Hymns have been written to Jesus' praise, then to the Father's. And that is a shame.

[JehovahsWitness]

It was the blood of the slain Lamb [Revelation 13:8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast--all whose names have not been written in the Lamb's book of life, the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.]

I have to agree with that scripture. This is why Jesus is called the "lamb of God' it's an allustion to the passover victim.

[dio9]

The idea of God the father requiring the blood of his son for our salvation is mind blowing.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 56 by JehovahsWitness]



[center]Worshiping a willing victim[/center]

I have to agree with that scripture. This is why Jesus is called the "lamb of God' it's an allustion to the passover victim.

That's why some outsiders consider the Christian faith worshiping victimhood and slavery. Your god dies on a cross... quite the lovely image. Slaughtered, like a lamb for the feast.

Yuk.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 57 by dio9]


[center]A believer's logic on God's logic[/center]

The idea of God the father requiring the blood of his son for our salvation is mind blowing.

Might still be logical. Or in God's case, PERFECTLY logical.
Can't wait to know the MIND of God.

And his logic.
Or at least a Christian's logical take on the logic of God.