Human Sacrifice
In addressing the theological question of Yeshua's (Jesus') sacrifice, it's imperative to recognize that the concept of human sacrifice is fundamentally opposed by G-d, as consistently evidenced throughout the Torah and the prophets. G-d's explicit disdain for human sacrifice and the individual responsibility for sin, as delineated in the Torah, raise significant questions about the reconcilability of a Messiah who dies for others' sins and is offered as a holy sacrifice.
You shall not worship the L-rd your G-d in that way, for every abominable thing that the L-rd hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods. Deuteronomy 12:31
They built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech, though I did not command them, nor did it enter into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin. Jeremiah 32:35
And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your whorings so small a matter that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them? Ezekiel 16:20-21
Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin. Deuteronomy 24:16
Truly no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life, for the ransom of their life is costly and can never suffice... Psalm 49:7-8
So then, how can we possibly reconcile the blatantly contradicting ideology of a Messiah who ransoms his life for another, is put to death for the sins of others, and is sacrificed as a holy offering to G-d?
And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God. Ephesians 5:2
For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. Mark 10:45
but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8
Some question whether the flawlessness of animal sacrifices was insufficient, necessitating a sinless human offering akin to pagan practices, which is anathema to the teachings of the Torah.
Atonement Theories
Before we begin to unravel the complexities of assumptions made with sacrifices, atonement, and ransoms, let's first unpack the various atonement theories as they evolved over time.
Recapitulation Theory
The earliest theory concludes that Christ succeeds where Adam failed, undoing the wrong that Adam did and, because of his union with humanity, leads humanity on to eternal life, including moral perfection.
Moral Influence Theory
This theory is more in alignment with Jewish beliefs (particularly Moed Katan 28a) which states that the death of the righteous causes repentance and that is what leads to atonement. The Moral Influence Theory states that Yeshua's life and death were intended to morally reform the church and inspire positive moral change. His example and the motivation derived from his martyrdom are seen as guiding forces for ethical transformation, with the Spirit aiding in fostering internal moral change.
Ransom Theory
This theory suggests Yeshua's death was a ransom paid, perhaps to Satan, Death, or God, for humanity's accumulated debt of sin. However, this concept conflicts with the Jewish understanding of God's relationship with Satan, where Satan operates under divine authority, not as an independent entity that God must appease.
Christus Victor Theory
Evolving from Ransom theory; according to this view, Yeshua's death was a victory over evil, sin, and the devil, liberating humanity from their dominion. While emphasizing victory, this theory overlooks scriptural emphasis on individual responsibility and the need for direct repentance and forgiveness from God.
Anselm Theory
Another branch of the Ransom theory was proposed by Anselm of Canterbury in the 12th century. He concludes that Jesus died to satisfy the need for justice of G-d. G-d is a G-d of justice, and the law demands death for sin, so G-d punished one man for all of humanity. This theory is similar to the Ransom theory, but rather than G-d owing a debt to Satan, it is the people who owe a debt of pain and death to G-d.
Penal Substitutionary Atonement Theory
This theory is a development of the Reformation (Calvin and Luther), based on the Anselm theory. In Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA), Jesus is punished (penal) in the place of sinners (substitution) in order to satisfy G-d's wrath/demand for justice. Because Jesus died, G-d doesn't insist on pouring out his wrath on sinners. Anselm's Theory and PSA differ in the means of atonement. Anselm believes that the G-d essentially had a ledger of debt and just needed the debt to be paid off. PSA believes that G-d needed to release His wrath and was satisfied with doing so on Jesus in the place of mankind.
Governmental Theory
One of the more modern theories built upon PSA. This modern theory argues that Yeshua's death was a symbolic demonstration of G-d's justice, serving as a deterrent against sin. However, it implies that the primary purpose of Yeshua's death was the display of divine justice rather than individual atonement, which contradicts the scriptural emphasis on personal repentance.
Overview of Atonement Theories
All these theories, except for the Moral Influence Theory, challenge the Torah's tenets. If Yeshua and the apostles proclaimed a perfect virgin human sacrifice as G-d's desire, it would directly contradict Torah, portraying G-d in a manner akin to the idols (such as Molech) that He abhors. This teaching of human sacrifice violates numerous commands which would make anyone teaching this a 'false teacher' in accordance with Torah. For more information on false prophets and testing false teachings, read our article on False Prophets and False Foundations.
Proponenents of Human/Child Sacrifice
We at Altarnate Media are strict monotheists and not trinitarian, but a common argument for the messianic human sacrifice is that Jesus wasn't actually a man; he was a deity. So, in reality, G-d didn't want a human sacrifice; He wanted (or needed) to sacrifice Himself so we could be in union again. Let's examine the logic:
Fully G-d
Arguing that Yeshua was not truly human is similar to the belief of the docestists who believed that G-d could not incarnate in flesh. Instead G-d only took on the "appearance" of a human but it was more like a really good mirage. If Yeshua did not experience human attributes like pain, hunger, or temptation, it invalidates the concept of his sacrifice under most atonement theories. It also means he didn't die, because death is a symptom of creation - not Creator.
Fully Man, Fully G-d
The Orthodox Trinitarian concept that Yeshua was simultaneously fully divine and fully human introduces a profound theological conundrum, particularly when considering the nature of sacrifice and the immortality of G-d. This dual nature posits that while Yeshua was divine, it was his human aspect – the flesh and blood – that was capable of death.
In 1 Timothy 6:16, it is unequivocally stated, "G-d alone is immortal," which underscores the intrinsic nature of G-d as an eternal, undying entity. Thus, maintaining a viewpoint that upholds Yeshua's divine status while also asserting his mortality leads to a paradoxical situation. The theological interpretation that Yeshua's human side succumbed to death, while his divine aspect remained active (as suggested in 1 Peter 3:19 where it is said he went to 'preach to the souls of old'), essentially bifurcates his nature into two distinct components – mortal and immortal. However, this division is problematic from an Orthodox Jewish perspective, as it implies a human sacrifice, an act explicitly forbidden by Torah.
Furthermore, the premise of a divine-human sacrifice raises significant issues in the context of various atonement theories. Beyond the Moral Influence Theory, which posits that Yeshua’s life and death served as moral exemplars rather than a literal substitutionary sacrifice, other theories struggle to reconcile this inherent theological contradiction.
To consider Yeshua’s death as a literal sacrifice for atonement, as some theories suggest, would contradict the Torah’s strong prohibition against human sacrifice. Such an act is antithetical to the monotheistic understanding of G-d as depicted in scripture, where G-d is consistently portrayed as abhorring human sacrifices, commonly practiced in pagan rituals.
In essence, the Orthodox Trinitarian view grapples with maintaining the balance between Yeshua’s divinity and humanity, particularly in the context of his death. This theological challenge not only raises questions about the nature of the Divine but also about how such a sacrifice aligns with the fundamental teachings of the Torah and the overarching narrative of theology.
Covenant Breaking Death
The argument that G-d had to undergo death to reconcile humanity with Himself, a concept stemming from replacement theology, raises profound theological and scriptural concerns. This ideology posits that due to Israel's transgressions or failure to uphold the covenant, a union with G-d was no longer feasible, necessitating a legal dissolution of this bond. Such a perspective hinges on three principal arguments – death, divorce, and fulfillment – each presenting its own theological challenges.
Death as a Covenant-Breaker
The notion that G-d's death would free Israel from its covenantal vows, allowing for a new union, inherently implies that G-d could cease to exist, which is a contradiction of His eternal nature. The destruction of a "garment of flesh" does not equate to the death of G-d, who, as stated in John 4:24, is spirit. The covenant between Israel and G-d is a spiritual one, transcending the physical realm. Hence, the concept of physical death nullifying a spiritual covenant is fundamentally flawed.
If we say that death ends the covenant, then how is there hope of a resurrection of the dead? If you die and are no longer in the covenant, then how do you get resurrected into life (one of the terms of the covenant, which you just died in)?
Physical death does not affect our spiritual covenant with G-d. Spiritual death does. This is why the importance of "returning" spiritually (repentance) is essential.
Divorce as a Covenant-Breaker:
It is also claimed that G-d divorced Israel (Jeremiah 3:8-9). Since Israel committed adultery with other gods, then the husband had to die so that Israel could be free to remarry Him (after resurrection). The claim that G-d divorced Israel, thereby ending the covenant but necessitating His death for a new union, conflicts with the Torah's teachings on divorce:
When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife, and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the L-RD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the L-RD your G-d gives you as an inheritance. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (NASB)
In order for a marriage contract to be valid, both parties must consent. If you claim that Israel was divorced and sent out, then to claim G-d can't take Israel back implies Israel married another god (if Israel was forbidden to Him). However, you must reconcile which "real god" Israel signed a new marriage covenant with. This perspective is problematic as it implies the existence of another legitimate divine entity with whom Israel could form a covenant, which contradicts monotheism. The covenant with Israel, as repeatedly emphasized in the scriptures, is based on unending mercy and love (Lamentations 3:22-23), not legal technicalities.
We To illustrate, consider our human experience: we find it difficult to imagine a scenario without competing with other men for the attention of women. After marriage, it is indeed possible for a wife to remarry another man if divorced. However, envision a world where the husband is the only male and, after a divorce, his ex-wife merely fantasizes about fictional characters from books or movies as her new partners. In such a case, these imaginary relationships do not constitute a real marriage. Thus, the husband is still free to remarry her, as her "marriages" to fictional beings have no actual binding effect.
Hosea is a great portrayal of G-d to Israel. G-d would not demand Hosea do something that G-d Himself was incapable of (heaven forbid). Instead, this is a physical example of G-d's love for us!
When the L-rd first spoke through Hosea, the L-rd said to Hosea, “Go, take to yourself a wife of whoredom and have children of whoredom, for the land commits great whoredom by forsaking the L-rd.”(Hosea 1:2 ESV)
This is a promise found in the marriage contract itself and lived out by example through Hosea.
and return to the Lord your God, you and your children, and obey his voice in all that I command you today, with all your heart and with all your soul, then the Lord your God will restore your fortunes and have mercy on you, and he will gather you again from all the peoples where the Lord your God has scattered you.(Deuteronomy 30:2-3 ESV)
Just as G-d repeats numerous times through the prophets:
From the days of your fathers you have turned aside from my statutes and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you, says the Lord of hosts. But you say, ‘How shall we return?’...Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. And thereby put me to the test, says the Lord of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need.(Malachi 3:7,10 ESV)
Therefore tell the people: This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘Return to me,’ declares the Lord Almighty, ‘and I will return to you,’ says the Lord Almighty.(Zechairah 1:3 ESV)
but if you return to me and obey my commands, then even if your exiled people are at the farthest horizon, I will gather them from there and bring them to the place I have chosen as a dwelling for my Name.’(Nehemiah 1:9 ESV)
Even though Israel's "divorce" was a metaphor and not an actual divorce, we can still conclude that there is no need for "death" to have Israel return to G-d.
Fulfillment as a Covenant-Breaker:
The assertion that Yeshua's death was necessary to fulfill all the laws and prophets of the covenant, thereby annulling it, misconstrues the nature of covenants and Biblical fulfillment.
In terms of fulfilling the law, Yeshua Himself stated in Matthew 5:17 that the law is not abolished. Biblical fulfillment is not the cessation of the law but its embodiment and correct interpretation. There are laws for Levites, priests, women, Gentiles, converts, farmers, bankers, widows, orphans, and married men. Jesus was a man from the tribe of Judah; he was a student of Torah and a carpenter. He couldn't fulfill the laws for women, widows, Gentiles, converts, etc. We also don't see where Jesus circumcised his son on the 8th day. The Torah is not (and was never) a checklist to be completed but a living guide for a continual healthy relationship with G-d, a way to draw closer.
A great example of this word is in Romans 1:29, where it uses the same word and states, "They have fulfilled every kind of wicked deed, evilness, and depravity." Under the Biblical understanding of fulfillment, this makes sense. They embodied a life of evil and wickedness. But with this modern definition of fulfillment (as it pertains to Christ), we would have to conclude that because a group of people fulfilled all wickedness, those methods of wickedness no longer apply.
If fulfillment was the same conclusion as abolishment, whereby they cease to function, then we once again run into the issue of a false prophet (See False Prophets and False Foundations).
The interpretation that the death of Yeshua was the final fulfillment of the prophecies concerning the Messiah of Joseph ("the suffering servant") and, therefore, signified the completion of all prophetic requirements, presents significant theological discrepancies when scrutinized under traditional Jewish understanding. This perspective seems to suggest that once all prophecies are fulfilled, the covenant would cease to apply, an interpretation that is not supported by the broader context of Biblical eschatology.
There are two Messianic roles: the Messiah of Joseph, associated with suffering and serving as a precursor to redemption, and the Messiah of David, symbolizing a triumphant, ruling Messiah who fulfills the ultimate prophecies of peace and restoration. The death of Yeshua, interpreted as fulfilling the role of the Messiah of Joseph, does not encompass the extensive messianic prophecies yet to be realized, particularly those pertaining to the Messiah of David. At Alternate Media, we view Yeshua as having fulfilled the Messiah of Joseph's role but will return to fulfill the Messiah of David's role (which is currently unfulfilled). These unfulfilled prophecies include, but are not limited to: Universal peace (Isaiah 2:4), Israel's borders extending beyond what we've seen, the ingathering of all the exiled, and the rebuilding of the third temple (Ezekiel 40-48) with continuation of the sacrifices and offerings in accordance with Torah laws.
By asserting that Yeshua's death fulfilled all necessary prophecies, there is an inadvertent overlooking of these critical Messianic expectations, which are fundamental to the Jewish hope and belief in a future redemption. The fulfillment of the Messiah of Joseph's role does not negate or complete the broader Messianic prophecy, which encompasses a more comprehensive restoration and renewal under the Messiah of David.
Prophecies are not merely events to be checked off a list but are part of a continuous divine plan unfolding throughout history. The completion of one aspect of prophecy does not render the covenant null or obsolete. Instead, the covenant remains eternal, with the fulfillment of each prophecy leading to further development in the relationship between G-d and humanity.
The concept that both laws and prophecies in scriptures operate on a conditional basis, following an "if this, then that" structure, is a key aspect of understanding how theology and eschatology are formulated. This perspective is particularly evident in the Torah, where commandments and laws often have specified conditions and consequences. Similarly, prophecies are understood as contingent upon certain criteria being met, leading to the unfolding of prophesied events.
Death to Break Covenants Conclusion
In the context of theology, these arguments present significant challenges. The nature of the covenant between G-d and Israel is eternal and unbreakable, rooted in a relationship that transcends legalistic constraints and physical conditions. The notion that G-d’s death could somehow dissolve or transform this covenant does not align with the Jewish understanding of G-d’s everlasting commitment to His people and the enduring relevance of the Torah.
Furthermore, the idea of G-d (or an innocent man) needing to die to establish a new covenant or relationship with humanity suggests a misunderstanding of the nature of divine forgiveness and mercy. In Judaism, atonement and reconciliation with G-d are achieved through repentance, prayer, and righteous deeds, not through the death or sacrifice of G-d Himself. The necessity of G-d's death for covenantal reconciliation present numerous challenges when viewed from an Orthodox Jewish perspective. They conflict with the core principles of monotheism, the eternal nature of the divine covenant, and the scriptural portrayal of G-d's unchanging and merciful nature.
The Purpose of the Cross
Throughout Yeshua's ministry, a central theme was the call to repentance – urging individuals to return to the ways of G-d. This concept of repentance, or "teshuvah"(lit. "turn back" in Hebrew), is deeply rooted in Biblical thought and is predicated on the idea of returning to a pre-existing path of righteousness as outlined in the Torah. Yeshua’s teachings, therefore, weren’t introducing a novel doctrine but rather a re-emphasis on returning to a specific path, an old path that gained a new name of "The Way".
Repentance is about realigning oneself with G-d’s commandments and teachings. It’s a process of self-examination, acknowledgment of wrongdoing, and a commitment to change. Yeshua’s call for repentance was a call to return to this path, but to which path is that?
Historical Context
To understand Yeshua's teachings within the context of his time, it’s essential to consider the various Jewish sects that existed from 100 BCE to 50 CE. These groups, with their unique interpretations and practices, provide a backdrop to assess how Yeshua’s message paralleled or diverged from the varying "paths" or schools of thoughts.
During Yeshua's era, the landscape of Israel was indeed marked by a significant diversification in religious thought and practice. This period saw the emergence of various sects within Judaism, each interpreting the Torah and Jewish law in its own way. The proliferation of these sects led to a complex religious environment, often characterized by differing interpretations of G-d's laws and varying degrees of observance.
The multitude of interpretations and practices often led to immense tensions and conflicts, both within the Jewish community and in its interactions with the ruling Roman authorities. The differing views on issues such as the Temple priesthood, ritual purity, adherence to the Sabbath, and the expectation of a Messiah contributed to a less unified approach to religious observance. Each group is important to analyze, and in doing so, we can "find the path" that Yeshua is calling people to return to.
Sadducees
Comprising primarily the priestly and aristocratic classes, the Sadducees accepted only the Written Torah and rejected beliefs not explicitly mentioned therein, such as the resurrection.
The Boethusians, a sect closely related to and possibly even considered a subsect of the Sadducees, were founded by Boethus. They shared many beliefs with the Sadducees but were particularly known for their unique calendar calculations and significant high-priestly connections. The Boethusians, like the Sadducees, were characterized by their adherence to the Written Torah to the exclusion of Oral Torah and Rabbinic traditions.
Yeshua and his disciples exhibited beliefs that aligned with Pharisaic Judaism, particularly in acknowledging the authority of the prophets, as well as belief in angels, spirits, and the resurrection of the dead. Regarding Boethusians, Yeshua was opposed to upholding a different calendar and used the traditional calendar of the Pharisees as evident in the Gospels where he celebrates with the rest of Israel during the holy days. Additional evidence is found in various New Testament scriptures such as John 11:25-26, Matthew 18:10, and Matthew 25:41. Yeshua’s teachings and practices, therefore, diverged significantly from the Sadducean and Boethusian doctrines, aligning more closely with the Pharisaic tradition, which embraced both the Written and Oral Torah.
Samaritans
The Samaritans’ distinct religious identity was characterized by their own version of the Torah and the centrality of Mount Gerizim (as the Holy Site, over Jerusalem), contrasted with the broader Jewish practices and beliefs of the period. Additionally, they did not recognize the prophetic or rabbinic texts integral to Rabbinic Judaism.
Yeshua's adherence to Jewish scriptural traditions, including his observance of pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem and his acceptance of teachings found in the prophetic and rabbinic texts, highlights his alignment with mainstream Jewish thought of his time. This contrasts the Samaritan practices and beliefs, further delineating the theological boundaries between these two groups.
Essenes
An ascetic group, the Essenes emphasized purity and communal living. They are presumed to be the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls who awaited a messianic figure. Their way of life was deeply spiritual and focused on achieving a high level of ritual purity. Ritual purity held a central place in Essene practice. Their commitment to purity often superseded social interactions, leading them to avoid contact with those they considered ritually impure, including Gentiles. From the Qumran scrolls, it is assumed that the Essene group viewed the contemporary Jewish priesthood as invalid.
Yeshua, however, interacted with the "unclean" people in Jewish society (Luke 5:12-16). Engaging with those who are deemed ritually impure contrasts sharply with the Essenes' separatist and purity-focused practices. Additionally, despite any perceived political corruption, Yeshua and his followers acknowledged the validity of the Temple priesthood and its sacrificial system, evidenced by their participation in Temple rituals, such as the bringing of sacrifices (Acts 21:26).
Zealots
A political movement more than a religious sect, the Zealots sought to expel Roman rule from Judea. They were characterized by their fervent zeal for Jewish sovereignty and their readiness to use armed resistance to achieve their goals. The Zealots' approach was rooted in a deep commitment to Jewish independence and a refusal to accept foreign domination.
Unlike the Zealots, who actively sought the overthrow of Roman authority, Yeshua did not advocate for political rebellion or violent resistance. His teachings focused more on spiritual and moral reform rather than political insurgency. An example of this is his famous teaching to "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to G-d the things that are G-d's" (Mark 12:17), which suggests a distinction between civic obligations and spiritual devotion.
Pharisees
The Pharisees, a prominent Jewish sect during the Second Temple period, were distinguished by their adherence to both the Written Torah and the Oral Torah, which they regarded as authoritative. Their approach to Judaism was characterized by a balance between mercy and judgment with interpretations for leniencies and stringencies.
Within Pharisaic Judaism, there were two primary schools of thought: the school of Shammai and the school of Hillel. Shammai was known for his stringent interpretation of the Torah, emphasizing the letter of the law, and was more conservative in his approach to interactions with Gentiles. Conversely, Hillel was renowned for his more lenient and compassionate interpretations, focusing on the spirit of the law. He advocated for the teaching of Torah to all, emphasizing the potential for anyone to embrace its teachings and reform their lives.
Yeshua's practices and teachings align with Pharisaic Judaism, particularly the school of Hillel. His regular attendance at the synagogue, a Pharisaic institution, and his recognition as a rabbi, a role predominantly associated with the Pharisees, indicate his connection to this group. Even John the Baptist calls him a Pharisee in John 1:26, when John tells the Pharisees, "One from among you [Pharisees] stands..." referring to Yeshua. Additionally, Yeshua’s teachings on the resurrection, angels, spirits, and the prophets align with Pharisaic beliefs as would be assumed.
Yeshua's emphasis on the spirit of the law, particularly in teachings that underscored love and compassion, resonates with Hillel’s approach. This is evident in his interpretation of the law, which often went beyond literal compliance to embrace a more profound, ethical understanding.
The Decline of Hillel
During Yeshua’s time, the school of Hillel was experiencing a decline in influence, with the school of Shammai gaining prominence. The school of Hillel often faced lots of opposition, and seemingly, they became less and less outspoken, succumbing to Shammai as the authority.
Despite this, the teachings of Hillel continued to resonate with certain Pharisees; one presumed Hillelite is Nicodemus, who sought Yeshua’s teachings, albeit discreetly and with the cover of night.
Yeshua’s practices and teachings strongly align with Pharisaic Judaism, particularly the school of Hillel. His approach to Jewish law and tradition, his belief in core Pharisaic doctrines, and his emphasis on the ethical and compassionate interpretation of the Torah are indicative of his connection to the Pharisaic tradition. This perspective provides a nuanced understanding of Yeshua's place within the diverse religious landscape of Second Temple Judaism.
For more details and information regarding the varying sects of 2nd Temple Judaism, check out "The Sects Talk"
What Resurrection Achieved
Animosity towards fellow man increased greatly as Judaism became deeply fragmented, with various groups advocating distinct interpretations of scripture, religious authority, and practice. This fragmentation was further complicated by external influences like Hellenization, which blended Greek culture and philosophy with Jewish traditions, creating a challenging environment for religious consensus.
The differing Jewish sects, each with its unique theological and philosophical stance, often found themselves in disagreement over what constituted authentic scripture and who held religious authority. These disputes were not solely theological; they were often intertwined with geopolitical aspirations and cultural influences.
The ascendancy of the school of Shammai, known for its stringent interpretations of Jewish law, marked a shift away from the more inclusive and compassionate approach of Hillel. This transition threatened the preservation of Hillel's teachings, which emphasized love and empathy as fundamental Jewish values.
In this context of religious contention and uncertainty, the death and resurrection of Yeshua presented a profound event. From a theological perspective, if Yeshua were resurrected by G-d, it would validate the teachings he espoused and challenge the positions of groups like the Sadducees and Boethusians, who denied the resurrection of the dead and other core Jewish beliefs upheld by the Pharisees. The resurrection would serve as a divine endorsement of Yeshua’s righteousness and his adherence to the law.
The period of Hillel and Shammai was a crucial juncture in Jewish history, characterized by ideological conflict and the search for a true understanding of the Torah. The resurrection of Yeshua, in this historical and theological context, would represent a significant intervention, challenging all other established beliefs and causing Israel to realign with Jewish thought with a renewed emphasis on the ethical and moral dimensions of the Torah. Not only was Yeshua prophesied to come during this time by Daniel, but if Yeshua had arrived earlier or later, it would not have caused the same chain reaction that continues even today.
For the Sadducees, Essenes, Shammai Pharisees, and Samaritans, it posed a challenge to their interpretations of the Torah and the hierarchy of laws. It necessitated a reconsideration of their beliefs in light of what could be seen as a divinely sanctioned miracle, affirming the teachings and authority of Yeshua. They would have to claim that righteousness is found in Christ (his life and teachings) and that the hierarchy of law he preached is correct. It forces all of Israel to examine their beliefs and repent.
Shortly after, the Second Temple was destroyed in 70 CE, which was a cataclysmic event that dramatically altered the Jewish religious landscape. Post-resurrection and destruction, many sects disappeared, dramatically diminished in influence, or repented and turned to Pharisaic Judaism. This upheaval paved the way for the rise of Rabbinic Judaism and the emergence of "The Way," a sect that followed Yeshua’s teachings. Coincidentally, if not prophetically, all of the sects of Judaism except for the one which Yeshua is aligned disappeared fairly quickly after 70AD. Orthodox Judaism today is the direct descendant of Hillel's school of Pharisaism.
The Purpose of Sacrifice
The act of sacrificing an animal in the times of the Temple was seen as elevating the physical (the animal) for a spiritual purpose (atonement and drawing closer to G-d). The physical act of sacrifice is viewed as an external expression of an inner spiritual process. After repentance, which is an internal transformation and return to G-d, the sacrifice symbolizes the submission and dedication of one's lower, animalistic tendencies towards divine service (offering the 'animal' up to G-d). It's not just the offering of the animal, but the offering of one's self. True atonement comes through self-nullification by emptying oneself and becoming a servant, just as Paul urges us to do ourselves (Philippians 2:7). This means letting go of ego and self-centeredness to align one's will with G-d's will. The physical sacrifice is a tangible expression of this concept – just as the animal is given up and transformed, so too is the individual expected to give up selfish desires and negative traits in pursuit of spiritual growth.
The sacrifices themselves did nothing. It was the intentions behind the sacrifice. When Israel performed sacrifices without intention, G-d says to them:
To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats. (Isaiah 1:11 ESV)
This is further emphasized by Paul in Hebrews 10:4-10, where he urges people to turn to G-d and do His will, not intent-less sacrifices. Having the proper spirit behind the laws is what gives the law their value. The law, without proper intent, is like giving to charity for the sole purpose of showing people how great you are. As Yeshua says:
“Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward." (Matthew 6:2 ESV)
Sacrifices are also seen as a means to connect more deeply with G-d. Any action taken for the sake of heaven (the proper intent), including sacrifices, builds and strengthens one's relationship with the Divine. The focus is on creating a closeness to G-d, with the sacrifice being a conduit for this spiritual connection.
Yeshua's Sacrifice
The Torah gives us explicit commands about what can and cannot be physically sacrificed and how all sacrifices must take place. Typically, Yeshua is viewed as the perfect lamb sacrifice, but this cannot be a reference to the physical - only spiritual. Lamb sacrifices had to be done by the physical Levitical priesthood, on the physical altar, in the physical temple, and the lamb had to be physically blemish-free. To state the obvious, Yeshua was not an actual lamb. Yeshua was also heavily beaten before being 'slaughtered' and it wasn't a kosher slaughter. Yeshua was also outside of Jerusalem and it was Rome who drove the nails and put him on the cross, not a priest. There are many factors that would invalidate Yeshua as a physical sacrifice.
However, as a spiritual sacrifice, Yeshua has a case. Yeshua, fills the role of a conduit for spiritual connection. Through Yeshua, millions have been drawn closer to G-d. Yeshua walked in the path of righteousness and epitomized the ideal of living a life solely dedicated to G-d. His existence was not merely a sequence of days but a continuous act of sacrifice, relinquishing earthly desires and ambitions to fulfill the will of the Divine.
The teachings of Yeshua are tools for deepening one’s spiritual connection with God; internalizing the teachings accomplishes the purpose of a sacrifice in the spiritual realm. Yeshua, as a righteous teacher, embodied these principles, setting an example for others to follow. His life became a living sacrifice, demonstrating how to live in accordance with G-d's commandments and foster unity (and return) back to the proper way of living.
While a "sacrifice" was made on the cross, Yeshua's entire life was a living sacrifice. As the Psalmist says,
"The sacrifices of G-d are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O G-d, you will not despise" (Psalm 51:17)
This encapsulates Yeshua's journey – his heart was wholly given to G-d, breaking before the altar of Divine service, abstaining from personal gain and wordly comfort. This sacrifice of self, where every breath and action was a testament to his love for G-d and G-d's creation, transcends the conventional understanding of sacrifice.
The culmination of Yeshua's sacrifice came with his death on the cross. This act, often misunderstood, was not a mere tragic end but a profound expression of love – a love so vast that it extended even to those who reviled him. In this ultimate sacrifice, Yeshua embodied lived out his own words:
"Greater love has no one than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends" (John 15:13)
But in Yeshua's case, this love was not limited to friends; it encompassed even his fiercest opponents. Yeshua's death on the cross was a plea, a call for repentance and a return to true path in Judaism, which he championed – a Judaism that emphasizes love, mercy, and humility before G-d. His sacrifice was a cry out for all, even those who hated him, to turn towards the path of righteousness. It was a demonstration of unconditional love, hoping that even in his death, hearts would be turned and lives transformed.
In the tradition of the Messiah of Joseph, who suffers because of the sins of the world, Yeshua's suffering was not for naught but was imbued with redemptive power. His life and death were a testament to the fact that love and sacrifice can bring about spiritual awakening and repentance, drawing people closer to G-d and His Torah.
Yeshua's legacy, therefore, is not one of a distant deity demanding subservience but of a righteous Pharisee who walked in love, embodying the principles of the Torah and inviting others to do the same through his example of ultimate sacrifice. He stands as a beacon of selfless love and devotion, calling us to repent and be "saved." As a side note, the hebrew word for salvation stems from the root word "yesh" which means 'to have/exist'. The idea of salvation in a spiritual sense is to draw closer to G-d, which through Yeshua we are saved, being saved, and will be saved (1 Corinthians 1:18, 2 Timothy 1:9, Romans 5:9-10).
Repentance
Repentance is the prerequisite to atonement. Without repentance, there can be no atonement. All the sacrifices for sin in the Torah require repentance first (including Yom Kippur). After setting things in motion, Jesus ascended to the heavens. The disciples preached of his death and resurrection as a means to cause repentance, in addition to the teachings of Jesus, which drew people back to the proper sect of Rabbinic Judaism. In early Christianity, there was only one key difference between "Christian" and "Rabbinic Judaism": belief in who the Messiah was. They worshipped side by side, attended synagogues together, and were part of the community as a whole. Even the house of Shammai eventually faded in favor of Hillelite Judaism, paving the way for more Gentile acceptance in the congregations. As the Talmud records:
Ultimately, a Divine Voice emerged and proclaimed: Both these and those are the words of the living God. However, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel.Eruvin 13b:10
The way back is paved and proven through the death and resurrection of Jesus. For those who know it, they are blessed. Those who believe and walk this path without knowing of Jesus's demonstration of truth are also blessed, for they operate entirely out of faith in G-d through the Torah. For those who know, we have a responsibility to seek, understand, know, and walk in the path he walked as knowledge increases responsibility.
Christ had to be willing to live a perfect life, the most righteous life, and live to the highest standards without deviating. It was a massive accomplishment to achieve, and he is deserving of every ounce of respect for his achievement. In addition, he had to be willing to suffer and die to cause people to reflect on their lives and repent. Then he would be raised up three days later to demonstrate that G-d Himself considered him righteous. It was the highest act of love that Christ could do for the world. A world that hated him and despised him, and though he lived perfectly righteous, he had to willingly be brutally beaten and murdered to bring his lost brothers back to G-d.
The spirit is a vessel of desire, and to be "holy" means to be "set apart". One who has changed their desires to be set apart like Christ was, has the spirit of Christ in them, and the Holy Spirit in them. That kind of story causes an internal change of desire/spirit; that kind of story demands a physical response to the Gospel rather than just a verbal or mental declaration. Once one reflects on their life and sees their life in comparison to the righteousness and love of Christ, they are compelled to change their desires to be set apart like Christ.
When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified G-d, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also G-d has granted repentance that leads to life.” Acts 11:18
Conclusion
The majority of popular atonement theories propose different understandings of Yeshua's death, yet many struggle to align with the core principles of the Torah, which vehemently rejects human sacrifice and upholds individual accountability. In light of these challenges, it becomes clear that understanding Yeshua's death as a literal sacrifice for atonement is fraught with theological difficulties. Such an interpretation contradicts the Torah's strong stance against human sacrifice.
Instead, the rabbinic understanding of the 2nd temple period can offer a richer and more coherent theological perspective on Yeshua's life and teachings. Viewing Yeshua as one who called for repentance to the proper "way" of Torah, provides a framework that is more congruent with the thought of his day and the Torah itself. In this view, Yeshua's life becomes a model of righteousness and self-sacrifice, inspiring spiritual growth and a deeper connection with G-d, rather than a literal sacrificial offering for sin.
Comments