The Death of the Messiah

Sacrifices and Offerings

FROM CREATION TO ABRAHAM

The key to the impact that Jesus of Nazareth made on humanity was not only His identity (who He was), but also how He died. His was no ordinary death. The biographical part of the New Testament speaks of His dying as being different to the death of any other individual, even different to those who were executed at the same time and in the same location as Him. What was the difference? His decease is put forward as a death that He accomplished. Not in the terms of a suicide but rather the ordering of events to fulfill those necessary pre-conditions laid down for a substitutionary sacrifice that would provide the grounds for the reconciliation of a sinful humanity with a holy God. Others might suffer death but He accomplished His. His decease had to be at a very specific time, on a very specific date, in a very specific place, in a very specific way. Although it seemed He was always in imminent danger of losing His life, He declared that none of the plots on His life would succeed until He yielded Himself to die in Jerusalem, on a day that He chose, at a time that He selected, in a pre-ordained location. To be able to flesh out this proposal we will need to examine the revelation provided by God prior to the incarnation, where we will find finger-posts and pointers to all that should be required in the death of the One who was to be ‘the Savior of the world’. The principles dealing with the restitution and recovery of a lost humanity were revealed little by little, mainly through the education of the Hebrew nation, a people specially chosen for this purpose. As we examine their Holy Scriptures we will better understand the higher purpose that was accomplished when Jesus of Nazareth was executed. To this end we have to consider the principle of blood sacrifice as it unfolds in the sacred Scriptures of the Jewish nation.

The world was in darkness due to the success of Satan in the Garden, as a result of which “death reigned” (Rom.5.14), both spiritually and physically. In the wake of the fall of Adam there came a flood of wickedness, which in turn, precipitated the deluge – a very strong reminder of the second element of the judgement of God – physical death. Humankind’s continued rebellion, evidenced by the building of the tower of Babel, brought another judgement when the majority of earth’s population were dispersed to restrict their rebellious ambitions. During this time, which was relatively close to the creation of our first parents, there had already been established the principle of blood sacrifice. Initially implied when God provided the skins of animals to clothe Adam and Eve, its necessity was much more apparent in the experience of Abel and Cain.

Abel and Cain

Abel sacrificed one of the lambs of his flock and it was accepted, providing both reconciliation and fellowship with the LORD. The testimony of Scripture is that “the Lord respected Abel and his offering” (Gen. 4:4). The value of Abel’s sacrifice is given in Hebrews: “By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts” (Heb 11:4). Abel offered a blood sacrifice, and was imputed righteous. This offering set the standard and most clearly established the principle - the sacrifice had to be offered in faith and had to be a blood sacrifice, that is, a life given for a life spared. When these two conditions were satisfied then the offerer was declared righteous, that is, he was granted imputed righteousness. While the obedience in bringing the sacrifice is important, the key element is faith. The ground on which Abel could be declared righteous was his faith – a mechanical obedience would not have been sufficient. It will be more clearly seen in the personal history of Abraham who believed in the promise of God and was accounted righteous. There was no animal involved here although later in the encounter when the covenant was ‘cut’ blood sacrifice was involved. The text puts the order – first “… he believed in the LORD, and He accounted it to him for righteousness” (Gen. 15:6); then he was instructed to bring animal sacrifices. Paul restated the principle in the clearest terms: “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” (Rom. 4:3).

The communication indicating that Abel’s offering had been accepted is vitally important, as also the fact that others knew of its acceptance. No need for trial and error, no need for any hand-wringing, and no need for mental anguish – God had spoken – this do and live. That God ‘had respect’, not only for Abel’s sacrifice but more importantly for Abel, was the final verification. The way to fellowship with God was transparent. The bringing of an animal as a substitute was to be seen as an acknowledgment of sin and evidence of a penitent heart and was the only sure way to resume a relationship with the Creator. While it appeared to be an unreasonable demand of God, to demand the life of an animal, since it was innocent of the crime for which the sinner was condemned; nevertheless it established the principle of the innocent dying in place of the guilty, which was to be the bedrock of the sacrificial system. Moreover, it was not as wasteful as first appears, since the animals designated for sacrifice were to be used as meat to nourish the body and their hides and wools used for clothing. Thus the animal provided life for the offerer in several beneficial ways.

However, the bringing of an animal sacrifice did not remove the sin of the individual, but it did articulate a plea for mercy and allow God to respond in grace. That it was necessary to wait for the inspired New Covenant ministers to elucidate how the principle of substitution was acceptable to a Holy God was entirely appropriate, since the righteousness apportioned to Abel was a righteousness that had not yet been paid for. That only became clear when the full anti-type of the offerings of the Old Testament dispensations was unveiled, activated and accepted. The death of Christ, the Lamb of God’s providing, was needed to complete Abel’s sacrifice, and also the myriad subsequent sacrifices offered in the same spirit, as indicated by the text: “to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel” (Heb. 12:24).

The divine requirement of an offering of a blood sacrifice in faith was further validated by the negative experience of Cain. He also brought an offering - some produce he had grown; but it was rejected. It had two weaknesses – (i) it was not a blood sacrifice and (ii) it was not offered with faith. Cain received a warning from the Lord which amounted to – ‘try again or face the consequences’. Alas, Cain was angry and killed his brother and through this act he lost fellowship with God, which in turn lost him the blessing of God and the strength of the crops: “So now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. A fugitive and a vagabond you shall be on the earth” (Gen. 4:11-12).

Noah

Apart from some exceptional individuals, the downward spiral of humanity continued unchecked. At the time of the flood only Noah’s family were using animal sacrifice as a means of grace to be reconciled to God. Consequently this was the family that God chose to save. By faith Noah built an ark. That Noah acted as a priest for his family and offered sacrifices, and in consequence was both in fellowship with God and could receive His Word, while not specifically mentioned prior to the flood (although it does say that Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord), is identified in his first actions after the deluge. When he exited the ark, he resumed his office as priest and offered sacrifices. “Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.” (Gen. 8:20) Noah’s actions pleased the Lord for “… the Lord smelled a soothing aroma” (v.21).

Noah, as head of his family, was practiced in filling the office of priest. But at that time his was the only family, and because of those exceptional circumstances, his priestly activity had consequences for humanity. That God viewed his sacerdotal duties as including intercession for the world is supported by the issuing of the Noahic covenant. “Then the Lord said in His heart, ‘I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done. While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, Cold and heat, Winter and summer, And day and night Shall not cease” (Gen. 8:21-22), and God gave the rainbow as a reminder of His promise. We currently enjoy the seasons and the crops and the cycle of the earth around the sun and life itself because Noah acted as priest for us.

Job

Another ancient book of the Bible, the book of Job, provides further confirmation of the principle of animal sacrifice. Job, the head of his family was again fulfilling the office of priest. “So it was, when the days of feasting had run their course, that Job would send and sanctify them, and he would rise early in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to the number of them all. For Job said, ‘It may be that my sons have sinned and cursed God in their hearts’. Thus Job did regularly.” (Job 1:5) As priest for his family he trusted in God and made offerings in which blood was shed. Consequently, he was held up by God as a perfect example of a godly man.

It appears to this writer that the idea of blood sacrifice together with the aspect of priesthood is more than just a human idea invented by our early ancestors. From the Scriptural record there must have been instruction or prompting by God to bring it into human consciousness. Clearly Adam had been given understanding that the wages of sin is death. Therefore the death of an animal as a substitute, either came about as a logical outcome from that, or as a direct revelation from God. Certainly, the principle expressed by the writer to the Hebrews is in the racial memory from time immemorial: “without shedding of blood there is no remission” (Heb 9:22).

Could God have dealt with humanity in grace without the priestly function of people like Noah and Job and their sacrificial offerings? Perhaps – He is sovereign and omniscient, and there may have been an alternative. All we know is, from the beginning, with Adam and Eve, Abel, Noah, Job, He chose that way, and since He is omniscient, it must be supported by the highest reasoning.

At the tower of Babel, when separate ethnic groups united in a common cause, that of rebellion against God, the destruction of humankind seemed inevitable. Babel was the beginning of Babylon, the mother of all false religions, and is used by Scripture to typify the world against God. While God’s intervention averted total disaster, the episode identified a need for something more permanent, more comprehensive, and on a much larger scale, that would enable the mercy of God to flow towards humanity. This need increased with the increase in the world’s population. There were identifiable nations in Asia, Africa and Europe. What was now required was not just individual priests but a kingdom of priests – a priestly nation.

Next Time - ABRAHAM