[Tj3]

That's all in the NT. What did the OT people believe? They sinned and made sacrifices in good faith.

So are you saying that the NT is not inspired scripture?

Wow. This is interesting.

[Wondergirl]

So are you saying that the NT is not inspired scripture?

Wow. This is interesting.

The OT people knew nothing of Jesus and His salvation.

[Tj3]

The OT people knew nothing of Jesus and His salvation.

Really?

Job 19:25
25 For I know that my Redeemer lives,
And He shall stand at last on the earth;
NKJV

The book of Job is considered one of the oldest books in the Bible.

[Wondergirl]

Really?

Job 19:25
25 For I know that my Redeemer lives,
And He shall stand at last on the earth;
NKJV

The book of Job is considered one of the oldest books in the Bible.

So they all knew this.

[Tj3]

So they all knew this.

You said no one knew about it. All I have to show is that it was known by showing one example.

But here is another:

Heb 11:24-27
24 By faith Moses, when he became of age, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, 25 choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin, 26 esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward.
NKJV

[Wondergirl]

You said no one knew about it. All I have to show is that it was known by showing one example.

But Israelites' salvation was by works, the work of offering up sacrifices for sin.

[Tj3]

But Israelites' salvation was by works, the work of offering up sacrifices for sin.

Are you saying that Jesus was wrong and that there are or were two different ways to be saved?

Was the Bible wrong when it said that the sacrices never took away sin?

Heb 10:3-7
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:

"Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
But a body You have prepared for Me.
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
You had no pleasure.
7 Then I said, 'Behold, I have come--
In the volume of the book it is written of Me--
To do Your will, O God.' "
NKJV

[Wondergirl]

Are you saying that Jesus was wrong and that there are or were two different ways to be saved?

Was the Bible wrong when it said that the sacrices never took away sin?

Heb 10:3-7
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:

"Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
But a body You have prepared for Me.
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
You had no pleasure.
7 Then I said, 'Behold, I have come--
In the volume of the book it is written of Me--
To do Your will, O God.' "
NKJV

In the OT, the Israelites' salvation was by works, the work of offering up sacrifices for sin. People were saved by keeping the law God gave them through Moses. That was the Old Covenant.

[Tj3]

In the OT, the Israelites' salvation was by works, the work of offering up sacrifices for sin. People were saved by keeping the law God gave them through Moses. That was the Old Covenant.

You are going around in circles. NO ONE ever kept the law (Romans 3:23).

NO sins were ever washed away by animal sacrifice.

[Wondergirl]

You are going around in circles. NO ONE ever kept the law (Romans 3:23).

Under the Law, each person had to perform the good works of keeping the law to secure his salvation. If he failed and sinned, he had to work by offering the proper sacrifice to atone for his sin. The offender was guilty from the time of the offense until the time the sacrifice was offered, but after the sacrifice, he was forgiven and counted as clean again.

* And it shall be, when he shall be guilty in one of these things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing: And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD for his sin which he hath sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats, for a sin offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin. [Lev. 5:5-6]
* And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, even a ram for a trespass offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the LORD for his sin which he hath done: and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him. [Lev. 19:21-22]

NO sins were ever washed away by animal sacrifice.

Of course they were. That was the whole point. That was the Old Covenant between God and His people in the OT.

[Tj3]

Under the Law, each person had to perform the good works of keeping the law to secure his salvation. If he failed and sinned, he had to work by offering the proper sacrifice to atone for his sin. The offender was guilty from the time of the offense until the time the sacrifice was offered, but after the sacrifice, he was forgiven and counted as clean again.

Yes, but no one kept the law, and the animal sacrifices did not take away sins - it was only prophetic of the one sacrifice which does take away sins.

You can choose to accept what scripture says or reject it.

[Wondergirl]

Yes, but no one kept the law, and the animal sacrifices did not take away sins

Yes, the animal sacrifices took away sins. All those sin offerings done throughout the OT were just a big joke?

[Tj3]

Yes, the animal sacrifices took away sins.

Then you say that the Bible is wrong.

All those sin offerings done throughout the OT were just a big joke?

They were, as the Bible says, prophetic of the one sacrifice which does take away sins - that of Christ on the cross.

[Wondergirl]

Then you say that the Bible is wrong.

Wrong about what? OT -- “This animal of mine belongs to God, is graciously given to me by Him, and this sacrifice is, by His mercy, provided for my restoration to Him. This is my public declaration of devotion/reconciliation of my heart to Him.” In the case of the sin offering, this represented the cleansing or covering of sin – “atonement”.

They were, as the Bible says, prophetic of the one sacrifice which does take away sins - that of Christ on the cross.

But Christ was only a promise, a birthright, in the OT. Meanwhile, God gave them sacrifices for sin. Sacrifice was a fundamental regulation instituted by God for the nation of Israel.

On the Day of Atonement, for instance, the faithful Jews would go to the temple where the high priest would enter the Holy of Holies and sacrifice one of the rams on the mercy seat for his sins and the sins of the people. Not only did the animal have to die on behalf the priest and the people for their sins, but the high priest placed his hands on the other ram (i.e. the scapegoat) as a sign of imputing or placing the nation's sins upon the ram. The ram was then taken out into the wilderness to die, signifying the removal of sin from the people for that particular year.

[Tj3]

Wrong about what? OT -- “This animal of mine belongs to God, is graciously given to me by Him, and this sacrifice is, by His mercy, provided for my restoration to Him. This is my public declaration of devotion/reconciliation of my heart to Him.” In the case of the sin offering, this represented the cleansing or covering of sin – “atonement”.

Reference would be nice. As for you supposed quote from the NT, I could not find it in the Bible so I did a search and found it top be someone's interpretation ( Old Testament Sacrifices and the Death of Jesus ).

But I did agree that the animal sacrifice represented (or prophetically symbolized) the sacrifice of Christ on the cross.

I prefer what scripture actually says to what someone's interpretation of re-wording of what they think it might mean.

But Christ was only a promise, a birthright, in the OT. Meanwhile, God gave them sacrifices for sin. Sacrifice was a fundamental regulation instituted by God for the nation of Israel.

So you feel that Christ's sacrifice on the cross was not effective for those in the OT?

[Wondergirl]

Reference would be nice.

Read the OT. Note the sacrifices made. For what?

So you feel that Christ's sacrifice on the cross was not effective for those in the OT?

It hadn't happened yet. Thus, the people of the OT were part of the Old Covenant.

[Tj3]

Read the OT. Note the sacrifices made. For what?

The sacrifices were made for sins, ina prophetic ritual of the coming of Him who could take away the sins. The NT is scripture also:

Heb 10:11-14
11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.
NKJV

It hadn't happened yet. Thus, the people of the OT were part of the Old Covenant.

Have you studied the covenants? The Old Covenant was a prophetic one looking forward to the coming of the Messiah. The New Covenant shows us that fulfillment. Both were about Christ. In the Old Covenant, the ritual sacrifices symbolized that which truly takes away sin, the blood of Christ.

Heb 10:1-4
10:1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.
NKJV

Or do you think that the blood os mere animals is as good as the perfect and Holy blood of Jesus? And if that were true, then clearly Jesus did not have to come and die on the cross.

[arcura]

Wondergirl,
You have made some good thought provoking points,
Thanks,
Fred

[Wondergirl]

Have you studied the covenants?

There you go again with the dissing!

[Tj3]

There you go again with the dissing!

Really? By asking a question?