Consider: Abraham did not actually have to offer up his son as burnt offering to God, but he did had to offer up a Ram instead. Was the burnt offering necessary as a sacrifice to God and what purpose did it actually serve to him to request it as the holy thing to do to be obedient to him?

I was reading Genesis 22:13 and I was inspired to ask this question?

asked 19 Aug '11, 06:51

Inactive%20User's gravatar image

Inactive User ♦♦

edited 19 Aug '11, 06:55

IQ%20Robot's gravatar image

IQ Robot ♦

I don't know the answer to that, Vee, but it seems to me like a loving Creator would never test us in such a way, or ask such a thing. It also seems to me that sacrificing animals is more of a pagan thing, and cruel. I have always felt that many of the Old Testament stories are just that....stories, from humans, and not inspired of God at all.


answered 19 Aug '11, 22:42

LeeAnn%201's gravatar image

LeeAnn 1

i agree LeeAnn it is stupid and barbaric. and the only one that can repay your debt in sin or other wise is you. if you did a wrong do a right to compensate to the same mesure. but killing animal or human does not change anything at all your sin is not payed and you continue to sin thinking you will just have to kill something else.

(20 Aug '11, 10:04) white tiger

I totally agree with you. Thank you, White Tiger for your insight. A person could go on just sinning and killing. Not a good system!

(20 Aug '11, 23:21) LeeAnn 1

@ LeeAnn: Thank you for your answer, and although I can relate to everything you have said, I cannot help thinking it was a way of life in those days, and as it appears, it was a practiced of the people in those days.

(20 Aug '11, 23:30) Inactive User ♦♦
showing 2 of 3 show 1 more comments

I have been pondering this question. My thought is that it was not necessary to God that the Isrealites made these animanl sacrifices, of which Issac was and example, but that it was what was necesary for the Isrealites to feel that their mistakes had been forgiven. It all comes back to what strengthens our faith. It wasn't God that demanded the sacrifices, but the people.It all comes back to what strengthens our faith.

Now, as far as Isaac went, it was a test of faith. Abraham and Isaac both trusted God enough to procede with God's instruction. God knew he was going to provide the ram.


answered 19 Aug '11, 22:58

Fairy%20Princess's gravatar image

Fairy Princess

edited 20 Aug '11, 14:55

Thank you for your answer, and I can personally relate to what you are saying, and I agree it was a test of faith, strength, and trust.

(20 Aug '11, 23:50) Inactive User ♦♦

Concerned Citizen and I had an excellent conversation on this very topic of spilling of blood for our sins. It was about Jesus being the Lamb of God for us but it is very fitting here as well.

Hello, Wade Casaldi... Excellent question! If you remove the BLOOD from a body, you remove the LIFE. If you die with your sins on you, you die the death of Jesus Christ on the cross (in type), shed your own BLOOD, and lose your LIFE. But, Jesus Christ offered Himself as your substitute on the cross, shed His own BLOOD, in order to GAIN your LIFE. The BLOOD had to come from a sinless man (to pay for man's sins) and be eternal (to wash you forever). Because the Bible says that the LIFE of the flesh is in the BLOOD, it is the BLOOD that makes an atonement for the soul [Leviticus 17:11]. – Concerned Citizen Jun 17 2010 at 15:12

Thank you so much for clearing that up, so it wasn't that it was a sacrifice TO God to appease him and his "desire for blood" as that seemed a very pagan thing to me that bothered me not understanding. It was more like a way to help us trapped by a law of fact that has been destroying us before Jesus died for us. Now this reveals his love for us is even greater because he saw his children suffering and it is not that he had a desire for blood and love for us it was entirely to save us and had nothing to do with appeasing him it was entirely for us. – Wade Casaldi Jun 18 2010 at 17:37

Here is the original from "Is there a valid PAYMENT for sins other than the blood sacrific of Jesus the Christ?"


answered 20 Aug '11, 04:08

Wade%20Casaldi's gravatar image

Wade Casaldi

Thank you for your answer, and the link, and after reading the answers you posted, I can assure you I have a sense of relief now that I have a clearer understanding of the true meaning of why the sacrifice was done. Very informative and inspiring!

(20 Aug '11, 23:44) Inactive User ♦♦

Actually Concerned Citizen deserves the credit for this not me, but we do agree.

(21 Aug '11, 04:18) Wade Casaldi

it was more of a religious tradition so that the priest could eat. religion and God are 2 different thing. ask yourself this question who eat the animal? you could also ask yourself who needs the money?

Animal sacrifice is the ritual killing of an animal as part of a religion. It is practised by many religions as a means of appeasing a god or gods or changing the course of nature. Animal sacrifice has turned up in almost all cultures, from the Hebrews to the Greeks and Romans and from the Aztecs to the Hindus.

Remnants of ancient rituals of animal sacrifice are apparent in many cultures, for example the Spanish bullfights, or kapparos in Judaism, or ritual slaughter procedures like shechita or ḏabīḥah in Judaism and Islam, respectively.

Human sacrifice is the act of killing one or more human beings as part of a religious ritual (ritual killing). Its typology closely parallels the various practices of ritual slaughter of animals (animal sacrifice) and of religious sacrifice in general. Human sacrifice has been practised in various cultures throughout history. Victims were typically ritually killed in a manner that was supposed to please or appease gods, spirits or the deceased, for example as a propitiatory offering, or as a retainer sacrifice when the King's servants are killed in order for them to continue to serve their master in the next life. Closely related practices found in some tribal societies are cannibalism and headhunting. By the Iron Age, with the associated developments in religion (the Axial Age), human sacrifice was becoming less common throughout the Old World, and came to be widely looked down upon as barbaric already in pre-modern times (Classical Antiquity). Blood libel is a false charge of ritual killing.

ask your self this: why God that is eternal i am that i am the alpha and the omega would need something material from you?

did jesus ever sacrifice animal or human to god for the sin?

Jesus came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10). We would expect, therefore, that while the Son of God was on earth, he taught much regarding sin. Indeed he did, and we would profit from a humble reflection on some of the sayings of Jesus about sin.

Some of the Lord’s remarks about sin have been misapplied. For example, when a woman was taken in the act of adultery, she was brought to Jesus for judgment. He dispersed the multitude by stating, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (John 8:7). ”

the Lord did not condone this woman’s sin. He commanded her to “go thy way; from henceforth sin no more” (John 8:11). Third, Jesus revealed the hypocrisy of the accusers who were more interested in ensnaring the Lord than preserving holiness in their community (cf. Mark 7:1-13). And where was the man who also was caught in “the act of adultery” (cf. Leviticus 20:10)? Jesus respected the Mosaic law that prohibited adultery and the punishment that the law prescribed. He also regarded the laws of accusation and testimony, which may not have been satisfied in this case. the Son of God had the right to forgive sins (cf. Mark 2:10). The response to this situation by Jesus, the Son of God, was not designed to insulate wicked and impenitent individuals from rebuke or discipline in the Christian Age.

Some of the sayings on sin by Jesus are perplexing. He said on one occasion, “If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin” (John 15:22). they have no excuse because now they know about it.

and even with all this said they still killed him and sinned against god. and now they have the audacity to say that jesus sacrifice was neccessary to wash the sin from the world. they have not learned annything yet and they have no excuse. to take someone else live does not wash your sin away. if you have sin you are the only one that can repay that debt.

i know that some will not agree with me and will judge me but they have no excuse and let them cast the first stone.


answered 20 Aug '11, 09:36

white%20tiger's gravatar image

white tiger

edited 20 Aug '11, 09:57

Thank you for your answer, it was refreshing to read, and of course we cannot over look the fact that the wages for sin is death etc. (Romans 6:23)

(21 Aug '11, 00:15) Inactive User ♦♦
Click here to create a free account

If you are seeing this message then the Inward Quest system has noticed that your web browser is behaving in an unusual way and is now blocking your active participation in this site for security reasons. As a result, among other things, you may find that you are unable to answer any questions or leave any comments. Unusual browser behavior is often caused by add-ons (ad-blocking, privacy etc) that interfere with the operation of our website. If you have installed these kinds of add-ons, we suggest you disable them for this website

Related Questions