People can interpret verses in their own way. It is not as if the verses were crystal clear to all readers. If it is seen that blood sacrifice was not wanted by God, then suggesting that Christ was killed as a blood sacrifice is clearly wrong. The simple question is: did God suggest that he no longer wanted people to shed blood for him? If we can find verses that suggest this, then it does put a huge question over the claim that Christ was a blood sacrifice.Checkpoint wrote:
That is all very well, if debatable, but your questions arise, not from apparent contradiction as such, but from your total rejection of the very concept of ransom through any form of sacrifice.
Which means a failure to recognise the authenticity of all relevant verses.
Surely it seems macabre that civilised people would be expected to accept that a loving God wanted human blood, by way of atonement for some sin. Christ came to give good news not to demonstrate savagery.