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.

[Elijah John]

The point that I'm trying to make is not that God is a "bad Father" but rather that this good Father that Jesus preached never needed blood (of any kind) in the first place in order to forgive the sins of humanity.

The need to be appeased in incompatible with Jesus' teaching of God as loving Father.

The notion of God as the benevolent and loving Father is at odds with the legalistic judge who needs blood in order to "balance the books".

If this is not the case, how can the understanding of God as Father be reconciled with the image of God as blood-"thirsty" judge?

[polonius]

The point that I'm trying to make is not that God is a "bad Father" but rather that this good Father that Jesus preached never needed blood (of any kind) in the first place in order to forgive the sins of humanity.

The need to be appeased in incompatible with Jesus' teaching of God as loving Father.

The notion of God as the benevolent and loving Father is at odds with the legalistic judge who needs blood in order to "balance the books".

If this is not the case, how can the understanding of God as Father be reconciled with the image of God as blood-"thirsty" judge?

RESPONSE God must be terribly conflicted then. In fact, possibly unbalanced if the Gospels accounts are reliable historically. Are they?

[ttruscott]

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?

IF it is a truth that there is no forgiveness without blood decided at the GODly level, then The Son offering up blood for Their creation hardly fits the characterization of 'a bloodthirsty deity who must be appeased by the blood'...but rather is the most selfless act a father could do for a child or a child for a father. That His love for His creation is proven by His blood being freely given to achieve redemption is a wonderful thing that is not changed by false estimations of those who don't understand.

[polonius]

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?

IF it is a truth that there is no forgiveness without blood decided at the GODly level, then The Son offering up blood for Their creation hardly fits the characterization of 'a bloodthirsty deity who must be appeased by the blood'...but rather is the most selfless act a father could do for a child or a child for a father. That His love for His creation is proven by His blood being freely given to achieve redemption is a wonderful thing that is not changed by false estimations of those who don't understand.

RESPONSE: Perhaps you can tell us why an infinite God demands a blood sacrifice to forgive sins committed against him.

[Willum]

I am trying to make this make sense in terms of history or mythology.
I confess for once, I am not having much luck.

I am thinking it may be a recursion of the Abraham-Isaac story.
Abraham being a solar Armenian myth, but if the Armenians had the son-sacrifice, it is lost to us.

Still, Jesus is called the lamb of God, and male lambs are rams.
Could it be that those pesky Romans used that myth to transcribe their own into Jewish faith?

Hmmm.
Needs more cogitating.

It does answer the question of HOW:
How would one distinguish a savior from any other mad prophet?
A sacrifice - a-la Isaac?
Is there a better way?

Hmmm...

[Elijah John]

The point that I'm trying to make is not that God is a "bad Father" but rather that this good Father that Jesus preached never needed blood (of any kind) in the first place in order to forgive the sins of humanity.

The need to be appeased in incompatible with Jesus' teaching of God as loving Father.

The notion of God as the benevolent and loving Father is at odds with the legalistic judge who needs blood in order to "balance the books".

If this is not the case, how can the understanding of God as Father be reconciled with the image of God as blood-"thirsty" judge?

RESPONSE God must be terribly conflicted then. In fact, possibly unbalanced if the Gospels accounts are reliable historically. Are they?

The historical Jesus seems to have taught God as merciful Father. Paul is the one who painted him as needing blood, and Paul went back to the Priestly tradition in order to do so.

The Prophets were pretty much against all the blood letting, and preached instead that God desires "mercy not sacrifice".

Jesus seems to have been squarely in the Prophetic, not the Priestly tradition.

As was John the Baptist.

No it was not God who was terribly conflicted, but rather His devotees, each conflicting camp who had a hand in writing the Bible.

[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?

IF it is a truth that there is no forgiveness without blood decided at the GODly level, then The Son offering up blood for Their creation hardly fits the characterization of 'a bloodthirsty deity who must be appeased by the blood'...but rather is the most selfless act a father could do for a child or a child for a father. That His love for His creation is proven by His blood being freely given to achieve redemption is a wonderful thing that is not changed by false estimations of those who don't understand.

RESPONSE: Perhaps you can tell us why an infinite God demands a blood sacrifice to forgive sins committed against him.

He doesn't:

21 Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel: Add your burnt-offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat ye flesh. 22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices: 23 but this thing I commanded them, saying, Hearken unto my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and walk ye in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you. 24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in their own counsels and in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and [a]went backward, and not forward.

Jeremiah 7.21-24 (ASV)

Seems YHVH considered blood-sacrifice as backsliding ..back to pagan ways.

And notice His sarcasm in verse 21, in effect saying about sacrificial offerings.. "eat it yourselves".

And then there's this:

12
If I were hungry, I would not tell thee;
For the world is mine, and the fulness thereof.
13
Will I eat the flesh of bulls,
Or drink the blood of goats?
14
Offer unto God the sacrifice of thanksgiving;
And pay thy vows unto the Most High;
15
And call upon me in the day of trouble:
I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.

Psalm 50.12-15 (ASV)

YHVH asks rhetorically...and presumably He would not eat the flesh or drink the blood of humans either, including His Son.

So I would say to Ted, no, it is not "a truth" that there is no forgiveness without blood.

The writer of Hebrews is contradicted by YHVH through Jeremiah, and through other Prophets.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 3 by polonius.advice]


[center]The most powerful being on the planet[/center]

God must be terribly conflicted then. In fact, possibly unbalanced if the Gospels accounts are reliable historically. Are they?

Well, for one thing, we are talking about stories here that are presented as historical "facts". Nobody has a time machine.

We can't go and verify the claims.
No matter how much people BELIEVE the claims.. they remain unverified.

Second, in this part of the forum, we are asked to take the Bible as the final authority. We can take the Bible stories on their face in here.

When I read what the god of the Bible does.. I think that he must be insane, psychopathic, evil and magical.

Yeah, I'd call that character "unbalanced" alright.
And with the magic powers, the most dangerous psychopath imaginable.

He drowns the whole planet... Great magic.
Lots of death and destruction.
The very WORST kind of global tsunami imaginable for those times, in my opinion.

Watch out if God gets angry... he might even tweet nonsense in the middle of the night.

Unstable?.. oh, you bet.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 4 by ttruscott]



[center]
It's sure is "selfless" when the father doesn't have his OWN self murdered, but sends his son. It's also insanely evil.[/center]

is the most selfless act a father could do for a child or a child for a father.

Having his child murdered is a SELFLESS act?
He should have killed HIMSELF, not his son.

You are describing the so called "love" of a filicidal psychopath.