Sacrifice has its roots in human psychology, and the desire to appease authority with material goods and things of importance.

God is just a protection of hyper active agency awareness.

Hopefully you don't chew me out for this, but I'm only asking as an inquiring mind that would like to know.

..It refers to Eve. (Meaning your quote)

..do later versions hold more value then the original ones that you'd reference those over the earlier?

Like, for example..

Lincoln becomes president, makes a speech, plays a major role in ending slavery. (Original Text)

Lincoln becomes 16th president, makes a speech to the general public of the NE States, only did what the British told him to do and, ended slavery in America. (Restated later text.)

As you can see by this example, whether ridiculous or not; the versions aren't the same, but for the sake of argument, let's say they are both true. Lincoln was the 16th president and made the speech, but the original just didn't specify all that. But what about the last part?

Let's even go as far to say the first version was written across a 10, 15, even 20 year gap.

Which is actually correct?

I only ask because.. who actually wrote Adam and Eve's story? Outside of language, did they, once banished, suddenly know how to read, write, and forge a language from that good and evil knowledge?

I notice you do it a lot, meaning you invalidate an earlier 'quote' by stating a later published quote; from the same book of course. So, I was just curious how you relate these terms to one being more valid and substantial than its earlier counterpart?

Again, mean no 'anger' or 'malcontent' I'm just curious.

If the facts coincide with truth, they can both be correct. One just goes into more detail than the other. (there are 2 creation accounts, did you know that?)








First of all, you must accept the fact that I do NOT consider the Bible the "Infallible Word of God". While there are many truths in it, the ancient Hebrews told it all, the good, the bad and the ugly.
They did not paint themselves as perfect, far from it actually.

The prophets chastise the Israelites on numerous occasions, calling them out on their BS.

But, I make no claims about the truths contained therein. Instead, I choose to debate the facts, those things that are actually written.
Chronological order should be the way it's read. So if in one chapter, the Israelites say it's OK to keep slaves and in a later chapter a prophet condemns them for the practice, I would say the prophet's writings are the correct ones.

Here's a good video that may give you a better understanding of who wrote the Bible and why.
http://video.pbs.org/video/1051895565

I doubt if Moses ate it himself. More likely he was using it to feed the poor within the tribes.

Each tribe did bring something...

Did it not.

Philippians 3:20a
"For our conversation (citizenship) is (where?) in heaven…"
How did our citizenship get transplanted from the earthly domain to heaven? Colossians 1. God the Father has transplanted us from darkness into the Kingdom of His dear Son.
Now that isn’t so deep and yet very few people have this concept. Very few people understand that when they were saved, they were literally made a citizen of a heavenly kingdom, which will tie us then to when Christ returns and sets up His kingdom on earth. And we’ll be part of that. So our citizenship is in Heaven. And lest you think it’s a play on words,Paul, by inspiration, tells us exactly what heaven he’s talking about. The abode of God. From whence we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. And so that is what God has done by virtue of our faith in the Gospel. He has opened our eyes, broken those chains of darkness and He has transplanted us into the Kingdom of His dear Son. Now let’s look at verse 14 of Colossians 1 and the first thing you’re going to notice in these new translations is that the word "blood" isn’t in there. And for whatever reason, I’m not going to make comment on it, but my good old King James still has it. And here it is.
Colossians 1:14
"In whom (that is in the Son up there in verse 13) we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins:"
Now let’s go all the way back to Hebrews and let’s look at a verse that we haven’t used for a long time. We certainly have in the past but it’s been awhile. Hebrews chapter 9 and verse 22.
Hebrews 9:22
"And almost all things are by the law (back in the sacrificial economy) purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission."
Now I call that an absolute. You know, they’re trying to tell us today that there are no absolutes. I beg to differ. There are absolutes and this is one of them. Without the shedding of blood there has never been any forgiveness of sin. You go right back to the Garden of Eden and Adam and Eve had sinned and were expelled and what’s the first thing that God does to restore them? He kills the animals. It was a blood sacrifice.
Now it’s amazing how that Satan counterfeits everything that is perfect in God’s economy and adulterates it in the process. Now if you know anything about paganism, if you’ve ever had missionaries come home, especially years back, from some of these almost uncivilized areas, what were they constantly doing in their tribal rituals? Killing animals, or roosters or birds and sprinkling or spattering the blood all over. Why? That was Satan’s counterfeit. And so almost every culture up through human history has had a constant bath of sacrificial blood. But that was the counterfeit. That was the adulteration.
The true system of blood sacrifice was what God instituted with Adam and Eve and then bought it up and perfected it with the Law and the Temple worship. And it all was centered on the animal sacrifices. You know all of that. The Passover Lamb and I’ve shown you from Scripture that when Israel would sin a particular sin, there was a particular sacrifice that they would have to bring. It could be a turtledove, a goat or whatever, but it was always a blood sacrifice. Because without the shedding of blood there has never been forgiveness. Now I know that today we don’t hear anything anymore about the blood concept. But listen, it’s the way the Sovereign God ordained it. That without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin. And of course, I feel that the reason for that is that back in Genesis chapter 9 it tells us that life is in the blood. And you cannot get new life without death happening first and death is signified by shed blood. And so you follow this all the way through God’s dealing with the whole human race leading up to His own supreme sacrifice, which had to be a shedding of blood. That’s why He could have never been hung. He could have never died a death by hanging which was a typical capital punishment way of putting people to death. But it wouldn’t have worked because then there wouldn’t have been the shed blood. And it had to be a death where there would be that shedding of blood. It had to be! Because this is the way the Sovereign God ordained it and who are we to say that the shed blood is no longer of consequence. Well, anyone who does is in danger of Hellfire because without the shedding of blood there is no remission. Now let’s see how Paul enlarges on it. Come back to Romans chapter 3 starting at verse 23.
Romans 3:23-24
"For all have sinned (every last single human being) and come short of the glory of God. 24. Being justified freely by his grace (that unmerited favor) through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:"
Now you all know what redemption means. It’s the process of paying the price and gaining something back. Now verse 25
Romans 3:25a
"Whom (Christ) God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his (what?) blood,…"
You can’t take that out. We have to maintain that it was His shed blood which was in accordance with His whole divine plan for the ages beginning with Adam and Eve’s sin just outside the garden all the way up through the Old Testament economy of Law and temple worship, all bringing us up to the supreme sacrifice of all time, the death of Christ Himself. And that’s when sacrificing stopped biblically. There was no more need for sacrifice once Christ died. Now the pagans kept it on. But biblically there was no more need for sacrifice.
But never forget that without the shedding of blood there is no remission.
Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. 5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; 13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

It was an old testament practice, before Jesus. Once Jesus went to the cross, the need to have a blood offering was lifted.

Mark 12:32-33
New International Version (NIV)

32 “Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33 To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

I agree. But, I'm wondering how Pagans knew about it. The Israelites were instructed by God to do it. How did the Pagans know it was necessary? (Granted they used humans which God abhorred)

My guess is that it was one of those things people just "knew" to do. They felt it was necessary.

Just wondering if anyone saw that I posted this earlier...


Jeremiah 7:21-23
New King James Version (NKJV)

21 Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: “Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat meat. 22 For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. 23 But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people. And walk in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you.’

I take that literally. Any "laws" about sacrifice were man-made and NOT from God.
I may as well show this verse too..

Jeremiah 8:8
New International Version (NIV)

8 “‘How can you say, “We are wise,
for we have the law of the LORD,”
when actually the lying pen of the scribes
has handled it falsely?








All my life I have wondered how people could/can think sacrifice is an OK thing. I still wonder....


I think the idea of sacrifice comes from a denial of accountability. Bribe the boss instead of fixing the problem???

No, I missed this. Thanks for reposting. So, what you are saying is the laws regarding animal sacrfice did not come from God.

Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God and was offered as the ultimate sacrfice? I'm just curious as I know we think differently on a few things.

Hades no do I believe that crap. Did you see the other passage I posted recently? Yeshua's (Jesus') words... Mark 12:32-33

32“Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33 To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”


Yes, I see it. We are going to disagree about Jesus being the sacrfice. I believe he was and that the verses above do not indicate that he was not. Loving your neighbor is more important than all the burnt offerings and sacrifices. This is true. But, one thing being more important than another does make the one untrue.

"How did the Pagans know it was necessary? (Granted they used humans which God abhorred)"


??????????????????????

IMO:

It was Jesus who sacrificed himself, not God.

I think God had other intentions.

Question: "If God hates human sacrifice, how could

Jesus’ sacrifice be the payment for our sins?"




Answer: The Bible makes it quite clear that God hates human

sacrifice. The pagan nations that surrounded the Israelites

practiced human sacrifice as part of the worship of false gods. God

declared that such “worship” was detestable to Him and that He

hates it (Deuteronomy 12:31, 18:10).



Furthermore, human sacrifice is associated in the Old Testament with

evil practices such as sorcery and divination, which are also

detestable to God (2 Kings 21:6). So, if God hates human

sacrifice, why did He sacrifice Christ on the cross and how could

that sacrifice be the payment for our sins?




There is no doubt that a sacrifice for sin was necessary if people

are to have any hope of eternal life. God established the necessity

of the shedding of blood to cover sin (Hebrews 9:22). In fact, God

HIMSELF PERFORMED the very FIRST animal sacrifice to COVER,

TEMPORARILY, the SIN of Adam and Eve. He killed an animal,

shedding its blood, and made from it a covering for Adam and Eve

(Genesis 3:21), thereby instituting the principle of animal

sacrifice for sin. When He gave the Law to Moses, there were

extensive instructions on how, when, and under what circumstances

animal sacrifices were to be offered to Him.




This was to continue until Christ came to offer the ULTIMATE

PERFECT SACRIFICE which made animal sacrifice no longer

necessary. “But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins,

because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take

away sins (Hebrews 10:3-4).




There are several reasons why the sacrifice of Christ on the cross

does not violate the prohibition against human sacrifice. First,

JESUS WASN'T MERELY HUMAN. If He were, then His sacrifice would

have also been a temporary one because one human life couldn’t

possibly cover the sins of the multitudes who ever existed. Neither

could one finite human life atone for sin against an INFINITE GOD .



The ONLY viable sacrifice must be an INFINITE one, which means ONLY

GOD HIMSELF COULD ATONE FOR THE SINS OF MANKIND.

ONLY GOD HIMSELF, ANN INFINITE BEING COULD PAY THE PENALY

OWED TO HIMSELF !!!!!!


This is WHY GOD HAD TO BECOME A MAN AND DWELL AMONG MEN.

God had to BECOME MAN and DWELL among men (John 1:14). No

other sacrifice would suffice.




Second, God didn't sacrifice Jesus. Rather, JESUS ,AS GOD

INCARNATE ,SACRIFICED HIMSELF. NO ONE FORCED HIM .He LAID DOWN

HIS LIFE WILLINGLY , as He made clear speaking about His life:

“NO ONE TAKES IT FROM ME, BUT I LAY IT DOWN OF MY OWN ACCORD. I

HAVE AUTHORITY TO LAY IT DOWN and AUTHORITY TO TAKE IT UP AGAIN ”

(John 10:18).


God the Son sacrificed

HIMSELF to God the Father and thereby

FULFILLED ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW . Unlike the temporary

sacrifices, JESUS'S ONCE-AND-FOR-ALL-TIME

SACRIFICE was FOLLOWED by His RESURRECTION..

He laid down His life and took it up again, thereby

PROVIDING ETERNAL LIFE FOR ALL WHO WOULD EVER BELIEVE in Him

and ACCEPT His sacrifice for their sins.

He did this OUT OF LOVE FOR THE FATHER and for ALL THOSE THE

FATHER HAD GIVEN HIM (John 6:37-40).

gotquestions.org

Question: "Why did the sacrificial system require a blood sacrifice?"



Answer: The whole of the Old Testament, every book, points toward

the Great Sacrifice that was to come—that of Jesus’ sacrificial

giving of His own life on our behalf. Leviticus 17:11 is the Old

Testament’s CENTRAL STATEMENT about the significance of blood in

the sacrificial system. God, speaking to Moses, declares: “For the

LIFE of a creature IS IN THE BLOOD, and I HAVE GIVEN IT TO YOU

TO MAKE ATONEMENT for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood

that makes atonement for one’s life.”




A “sacrifice” is defined as the offering up of something precious

for a cause or a reason. Making atonement is satisfying someone or

something for an offense committed. The Leviticus verse can be read

more clearly now: God said “I have given it to you (the creature’s

life, which is in its blood) to make atonement for yourselves

(covering the offense you have committed against Me).” In other

words, those who are covered by the blood sacrifice are set free

from the consequences of sin.




Of course the Israelites did not know of Jesus per se, or how He

would die on their behalf and then rise again, but they did believe

God would be sending them a Savior. ALL of the many, many blood

sacrifices seen throughout the Old Testament were FORESHADOWS OF

THE TRUE,ONCE-AND-FOR-ALL-TIMES SACRIFICE TO COME so that the

Israelites would never forget that without the blood, there is no

sacrifice.



This shedding of blood is a substitutionary act.Therefore the last

clause of Leviticus 17:11 could be read either “the blood ‘makes

atonement’ at the cost of the life” (i.e. the animal’s life)

or “makes atonement in the place of the life,”

i.e. the sinner’s life, with Jesus Christ being the One giving life

through His shed blood.




Hebrews 9: 11-18 confirms in the New Testament the symbolism of

BLOOD AS LIFE and applies Leviticus 17:11 to the sacrifice of the

Lord Jesus Christ. Verse 12 states clearly that the Old Testament

blood sacrifices were temporary and only atoned for sin partially

and for a short time, hence the need to repeat the sacrifices

yearly.



But when Christ entered the holy place, He did so to offer

His own blood once for all time, making future sacrifices

unnecessary. This is what Jesus meant by His dying words on the

cross: “IT IS FINISHED” (John 19:30). NEVER AGAIN would the blood

of bulls and goats cleanse men from their sin. Only by ACCEPTING

Jesus’ blood, shed on the cross for the REMISSION of sins, can we

stand before God COVERED in the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF CHRIST (2 Corinthians 5:21).

gotqustions.org

Question: "What is the meaning of the blood of Christ?"



Answer: The phrase “blood of Christ” is used several times in the

New Testament and is the expression of the sacrificial death and

full atoning work of Jesus on our behalf. References to the

Savior’s blood include the reality that He literally bled on the

cross, but more significantly that He bled and died for sinners

. The blood of Christ has the power to atone for an infinite number

of sins committed by an infinite number of people throughout the

ages, and all whose faith rests in that blood will be saved.





The reality of the blood of Christ as the means of atonement for sin

has its origin in the Mosaic Law. Once a year, the priest was to

make an offering of the blood of animals on the altar of the temple

for the sins of the people. “In fact, the law requires that nearly

everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of

blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22). But this was a blood

offering that was limited in its effectiveness, which is why it had

to be offered again and again. This was a foreshadowing of

the “once for all” sacrifice which Jesus offered on the cross

(Hebrews 7:27). Once that sacrifice was made, there was no longer a

need for the blood of bulls and goats.




The blood of Christ is the basis of the New Covenant. On the night

before He went to the cross, Jesus offered the cup of wine to His

disciples and said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood,

which is poured out for you” (Luke 22:20). The pouring of the wine

in the cup symbolized the blood of Christ which would be poured out

for all who would ever believe in Him. When He shed His blood on

the cross, He did away with the Old Covenant requirement for the

continual sacrifices of animals. Their blood was not sufficient to

cover the sins of the people, except on a temporary basis, because

sin against a holy and infinite God requires a holy and infinite

sacrifice. “But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins,

because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take

away sins” (Hebrews 10:3). While the blood of bulls and goats were

a “reminder” of sin, “the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without

blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19) paid in full the debt of sin we

owe to God, and we need no further sacrifices for sin. Jesus

said, “It is finished” as He was dying, and He meant just that—the

entire work of redemption was completed forever, “having obtained

eternal redemption” for us (Hebrews 9:12).




Not only does the blood of Christ REDEEM believers from sin and

eternal punishment, but “His blood will make our consciences pure

from useless acts so we may serve the living God” (Hebrews 9:14

NCV). This means that not only are we now free from having to offer

sacrifices which are “USELESS” to obtain salvation, but we are FREE

from having to rely on worthless and unproductive WORKS OF THE

FLESH TO PLEASE GOD. Because the blood of Christ has REDEEMED us,

we are now NEW CREATIONS IN CHRIST (2 Corinthians 5:17), and BY

HIS BLOOD (there is LIFE in the blood) we are FREED FROM SIN ,

SO WE CAN NOW SERVE THE LIVING GOD, AND GLORIFY HIM , AND

ENJOY HIM FOREVER.

AMEN.

gotquestions.org



( ps....all info shared in the above posts have been

thoroughly checked out before posting ,to be sure it all lines

up with the Word of God.)

I'm not sure what your question is. I'm talking about the need for blood sacrifice. God did not want them using humans as the blood sacrifice.

After his Accension...

There is no need for blood sacredfice (else he died in vain by your own reasoning)... i.e. he was the ultimate sacradfice as the long post stated.

So then why do some still 'eat' of his flesh and 'drink' of his blood in the rituals they practice?

His death freed us from this need.

His accension carries more weight.

and the Holy Grail is in you pooring out its truth in one long song.

Ruth is that... Spider? o.O

Wow.

Either he's really tall or.. well, heh. :X