Animal Sacrifice: Why turn a blind eye?

[jgh7]

There are detailed rules in the Old Testament for conducting animal sacrifice both as a means of praise to God and as a means of seeking forgiveness/atonement for sins.

I view animal sacrifice as barbaric nonsensical cruelty to animals. The notion that forgiveness or worship of God are linked to killing an animal is disturbing.

How do Christians reconcile the rules of animal sacrifice in the OT? They eventually were phased out, but they certainly existed for a long time when the OT was in effect (thousands of years perhaps).

To me, this is enough to completely dismiss Christianity from a religious standpoint. I will not partake in a religion whose God once condoned animal sacrifice. I mean, my common sense tells me it's disturbing to the point that it would be silly to partake in such a religion.

Questions:

Do you view animal sacrifice as barbaric/cruel/disturbing?
If yes, then doesn't this mean that the bible God is barbaric/cruel/disturbing since He approved of it and had detailed rules for it written in the OT?

[marco]

A perfect example of Israel hearing God through a mirror darkly, i.e., the twisted context of a fallen world. Hearing what they wanted to hear versus what God was really telling them / asking for...

They heard correctly. If God did not intend animals to be sacrificed, then why did he supply the ram for Abraham to do just that? It seems, at best, God complied with the customs of the people he favoured.

[marco]

I don't think Jesus would mind as it's not about "singing hymns to the humanitarians." Pretty sure that's not what Jesus was after (think of teachings where it's better to give in secret, i.e., no self-interest). He's not like Achilles wanting to be remembered down the ages in song. The remembrance that Jesus calls for is that we follow the way that he showed us. Not that we proclaim him as the first and only and greatest.

You are entitled to paint your own picture of Jesus, as did the Renaissance artists. Examination of his words suggests he was as keen as Achilles on being the centre of the universe. Take Luke:


If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. KJV

You are the one who raised a Christian priest who acted in noble ways. I don't think he was the only one inspired by the life of Jesus.

I did not say nor do I conclude he was inspired to surrender his life through inspiration from Christ. Believers of every faith and none are capable of doing something similar; it is altruism. When God seems directly involved in the sacrifice, it is sometimes called terrorism.

And lest we believe Jesus is several thousand miles away from such, let's turn to Luke again:

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

[1213]

I think it was originally peoples idea to sacrifice animals, not something that God really demanded.

"An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee." -- God.

That is only teaching how they should do it, when they want to do it, not any commandment to sacrifice anything.

[marco]

I think it was originally peoples idea to sacrifice animals, not something that God really demanded.

"An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee." -- God.

That is only teaching how they should do it, when they want to do it, not any commandment to sacrifice anything.

Come on! THOU SHALT MAKE is a command in no uncertain terms.

What on earth would the point be of commanding the procedure for sacrifice if sacrifice is not wanted? The simple words, which I'm sure Jehovah knew, would be: "Don't bother!"

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 1 by jgh7]

I view animal sacrifice as barbaric nonsensical cruelty to animals. The notion that forgiveness or worship of God are linked to killing an animal is disturbing.

I take it you are a vegetarian?

The majority of animal sacrifices concluded with eating. So the difference between them and the modern butcher is that religious significance was attached to the former.

Did God need to eat animals? Unlike humans he does not require things like protein for his wellbeing. So why would God ever desire animal sacrifices made to him when he doesn't need to eat them himself?

You can't compare killing animals for food to killing animals as sacrifices to gods.

We as human kill our animals to put food in our bellies. Animals brutally slaughtered for gods have absolutely no benefit to any gods whatsoever, do they? It's just a brutal unnecessary act. God can forgive without the need for this carnage, can't he?

[JehovahsWitness]

Your point would be very good were it not for the importance of burnt offerings, which went entirely to God, except from the skin that was given to priests.

Please provide support for the statement that the skin was "given to the priests".

Thanks

JW

[theophile]

[Replying to marco]

A perfect example of Israel hearing God through a mirror darkly, i.e., the twisted context of a fallen world. Hearing what they wanted to hear versus what God was really telling them / asking for...

They heard correctly. If God did not intend animals to be sacrificed, then why did he supply the ram for Abraham to do just that? It seems, at best, God complied with the customs of the people he favored.

Ummm, pretty sure Abraham saw the ram and took it as the providence of God. Don't think it anywhere says that God actually supplied the ram or requested that the ram be sacrificed in Isaac's place. That is all Abraham reading into the situation.

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."

You can't just cite a verse like that out of context. This one for example follows a parable which is critical to understanding it, and which I think is insightful to the matter at hand.

But let's not get all soft here. Sure, Jesus was all about serving life through self-sacrifice. But sometimes serving life means cutting off that which holds life back (perhaps the hardest thing we are called to do). Put otherwise, sometimes you need to destroy life to save life. Christianity gets this at its heart. Why do you think God flooded the earth? Or destroyed Sodom? If your eye is leading you astray, pluck it out...

[marco]

Your point would be very good were it not for the importance of burnt offerings, which went entirely to God, except from the skin that was given to priests.

Please provide support for the statement that the skin was "given to the priests".

Thanks

The important point is that the meat was burnt entirely and not eaten. We can get this in Leviticus. Various sources suggest that the skin was all that the priest got. Dispute this if you wish - it is of minimal import. Here's WIKI:

" A burnt offering in Judaism (Hebrew: קָרְבַּן עוֹלָה, korban olah), is a form of sacrifice first described in the Hebrew Bible. The term is first used of the sacrifices of Noah. As a tribute to God, a burnt offering was entirely burnt on the altar. A sacrifice (short for sacrifice of well-being) was partly burnt and most of it eaten in communion at a sacrificial meal.[1]

During the First Temple and Second Temple periods, the burnt offering was a twice-daily animal sacrifice offered on the altar in the temple in Jerusalem that was completely consumed by fire. The skin of the animal, however, was not burnt but given to the priests respective of their priestly division. These skins are listed as one of the twenty-four priestly gifts in Tosefta Hallah."


I have no reason to suppose this is false.

[PghPanther]

There are detailed rules in the Old Testament for conducting animal sacrifice both as a means of praise to God and as a means of seeking forgiveness/atonement for sins.

I view animal sacrifice as barbaric nonsensical cruelty to animals. The notion that forgiveness or worship of God are linked to killing an animal is disturbing.

How do Christians reconcile the rules of animal sacrifice in the OT? They eventually were phased out, but they certainly existed for a long time when the OT was in effect (thousands of years perhaps).

To me, this is enough to completely dismiss Christianity from a religious standpoint. I will not partake in a religion whose God once condoned animal sacrifice. I mean, my common sense tells me it's disturbing to the point that it would be silly to partake in such a religion.

Questions:

Do you view animal sacrifice as barbaric/cruel/disturbing?
If yes, then doesn't this mean that the bible God is barbaric/cruel/disturbing since He approved of it and had detailed rules for it written in the OT?

Yes its cruel and barbaric.......and reeks of insecure humans thinking they can find favor in the cause of things they didn't understand in nature and life in general by assuming some existential being would like something like that...........is an embarrassment to think of these things as a human in the age of scientific reason.......

[marco]

Yes its cruel and barbaric.......and reeks of insecure humans thinking they can find favor in the cause of things they didn't understand in nature and life in general by assuming some existential being would like something like that...........is an embarrassment to think of these things as a human in the age of scientific reason.......

The problem for many is that if they discard this aspect then they start to question other aspects of the Bible. It is obviously ludicrous to have God prescribing how to skin animals and the best way to roast them. Fine if this is Greek mythology and Zeus is up to his amusing tricks; but we must remember that some people place trust in this hideous being even though the telephone has been invented. It is sad that we have not replaced him with something more attractive to the masses. Muhammad hit on a good idea by telling men that in his bargain basement were virgins waiting for lusty men. That was a crowd puller though I often wonder why women are Islamified.