sonmvayina:


Try

Even extant manuscripts like the dead sea scrolls confirmed the Jews before Jesus believed Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah.

sonmvayina:


Try

Timeline of how Jews went from Isaiah 53 is about an individual to being about nation of Israel.

See how the Jews U follow are distorting interpretation of their text.

You could see that the Targum as far back as 150 BC, 150 yrs b4 Christ already wrote that Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah.
As U can no ancient source pre 500AD believed Isaiah was about Israel.

sonmvayina:


Try

What do Jews think this suffering Messiah will do for them...

He will forgive their iniquity as written in Isaiah 53

sonmvayina:


Try

More from ancient rabbi on Isaiah 53

sonmvayina:


Try

More from early century rabbi who were honest with their text b4 bias against Christianity influenced Jewish interpretation of their Tanakh.

sonmvayina:


Try

Now I will flush your face with clear evidence that the Jews before coming of Jesus believed Psalm 53 was a messianic prophecy.
What changed after coming of Jesus is what U should ask yourself.

Qasim6:


I trust u to throw away Psalm 91 as a prophecy about Jesus. This a prophecy that foreshadow his name.

But you'll rather cling to Isaiah 53, that says the suffering servant will see his off spring, u just have to put a spin on it and change it to some spiritual children.

I don't even have a problem seeing it as a messianic prophecy but that will be retrospective application because Jews before coming of Jesus didn't see it as one.

Psalm 91 if it's about Jesus didn't negate Isaiah 53.
No messianic verse fully described the Messiah.
Jesus fulfilled over 300 messianic prophecies, none of them fully described his ministry. They all spoke in parts.

Honestly I don't get your point about Psalm 91.

Qasim6:


Do messianic prophecies come with messianic stamp?

In Matthew 4, we are told devil try to tempt Jesus by asking him to jump off the highest point of the temple, he said to him "If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:
“‘He will command his angels concerning YOU,  and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.

And Jesus replied "It is ALSO written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.

And we know for a fact that the verse used by the devil is Psalm 91, and Jesus did not deny that the psalm is about him, infact he affirmed it by replying with: it is ALSO written

Coincidentally, this psalm is all about someone that will be in danger of death and will pray to God and God will save him miraculously and this Psalm also foreshadow the name of Jesus.

And we are told Jesus was praying to God, He prostrated and ask God to take the cup of death away from him.

That Jesus quote a verse doesn't make it messianic.
Pls go and learn the criteria for messianic prophecy.

Jesus quote the shema, hear o Israel your Lord your God is one.

Does that make the shema a messianic prophetic verse.

Go and read 2nd temple messianic prophecies, those verses in the tanakh the pre Christian Jews believed to be about the coming Messiah.

Psalm 91 wasn't considered a messianic prophecy.

Qasim6:


You no go believe am khe?

They don package books by anonymous authors for you as scripture, u gats believe every inch of it..

Anonymous authors is in your head.
We know those who wrote the gospel.

There's a reason the gospel were initially called 'memoir of the apostles'

FYI memoir mean historical account written by an author who actually witnessed the event he wrote about

Qasim6:


I'm not sure I can trust the book of act as it was written by Luke who was Paul disciple. The book is better called acts of Paul sef rather than the acts of the apostle. Because its all Paul.
I believe it was only written to push the narrative that all is good between Paul and the Original apostles, Which I believe is not the case.

It is evidently Clear from writings of Paul that he was in constant conflict with some other people teaching the message of Jesus Christ.
He even refer to them as "Super apostles" in a derogatory manner.

Una don start this cherry pick story line.
Book of act is true when they told Paul to obey mosaic law but is now untrue when James and Peter agree with Paul or when Peter was told to eat unclean food.

Ok since U want to hide under the letters.

Paul himself admit what he received initially was from the apostles and that's also what he preach.

1 Corinthians 15
Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.


Peter also agreed with Paul that his teaching is true.

2 Peter 3

Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.

Qasim6:


And you believe this statement attributed to Jesus is historical?

Does this not look like a cult initiation?

Why should I doubt it?
Give me evidence why I should doubt it.
It's not just how U feel

Qasim6:


What I am saying is that Isaiah 53 can not be reconcile with Psalm 91 a confirmed known prophecy about Jesus, the prophecy even foreshadow his name.

You can not read Psalm 91 and believe it is the same person that was beaten, spat on, crowned with thorns, nailed to the cross and pierced with spear except if God don't keep to his promise, and we both know God always keep to his promise.

I don't consider psalm 91 a messianic psalm. It's a poetic psalm that's applicable to everybody.

Some Christians may have attributed it as such but it's not amongst the messianic passages as per 2nd temple Jews.
Pre Christian Jews do not see it as a messianic prophecy.

Besides no messianic prophecy defines the whole of the Messiah ministry.
So I don't get the point of your argument at all.

Qasim6:


What I am saying is that Isaiah 53 can not be reconcile with Psalm 91 a confirmed known prophecy about Jesus, the prophecy even foreshadow his name.

You can not read Psalm 91 and believe it is the same person that was beaten, spat on, crowned with thorns, nailed to the cross and pierced with spear except if God don't keep to his promise, and we both know God always keep to his promise.

Didn't Isaiah 53 confirmed God indeed saved Jesus?
because I don't get your point.

Qasim6:







Even if animal blood was used for atonement in the old testament. It is obvious God is against human sacrifice in the old testament. What changed?

Isaiah 53, the suffering servant.
That's what changed.

Forget about Jesus, those who wrote isaiah 53 didn't know any Jesus.

So let's dissect Isaiah 53 without Jesus bias. Let's analyse the chapter as if both don't know any one called Jesus Christ.

Now let me ask U, who is the protagonist in Isaiah 53.
Is he a man, a nation or a group of people.

What does Isaiah 53.12b mean

For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.

What exactly do U infer from this verse.

Other things U said already addressed, no need for repetition.

Qasim6:


U guys are just ransacking the old testament to justify your human sacrifice doctrine.

Is this part of Isaiah 53 not problematic?
Or are we just going to pretend it is not there?

"he will see his offspring and prolong his days"

Did Jesus have offspring we don't know about?

And how do you reconcile Psalm 91 a prophecy that was thrown at Jesus and he confirmed it is a prophecy about him, how do you reconcile that with this suffering servant of Isaiah 53 that is supposed to see his offspring?

Have not heard of spiritual offspring?

John 1.12

Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.

AntiChristian:
God doesn't need the blood! He just wants their obedience and piety! But Cain and Abel brought sacrifices but the one with piety was accepted!


What animal is slaughtered In the book of Ezekiel, Chapter 18, verse 21-22 which says: "But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live."

Ignorant illiterate. God said the same thing to Israelites.
He told them they will live if they obey his commandments.


Deut 30.16
For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

Yet he still insisted they offer animal blood for remission of sin.

Go and learn difference btw forgiveness, righteousness and repentance.

Now answer my question, why did God tell the Israelites to slaughter animals for atonement of sin

Qasim6:


No, I'm not saying the same thing as Paul.
It is obvious from Paul's writings that he is against the following of Jewish laws. Paul believed salvation and forgiveness of sin now revolves around the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ that the law is a curse. Which I believe is the reason Christains are Christain today and not Jew.

Paul is very correct. Jesus said the same thing.

He made it clear only his flesh and blood can guarantee eternal life.

John 6
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.

Jesus also said his death is needed for the redemption of mankind.

Mark 10.45
For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Furthermore, Jesus offered his blood as forgiveness for sin.
Mat 26.28
This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

As U can clearly see from Jesus own mouth, His message is the same as Paul.
The death and blood of Jesus is the pathway for eternal life.

Qasim6:

And it is very problematic when you compare Paul teachings with the saying attributed to Jesus in Matthew 5:19
"Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven"

The law is still very relevant today, it's not been done away with.
You are not a Christian if U don't follow the law.
The law is still alive today and active. And there's absolutely no way U will enter the kingdom of heaven by breaking the law because it shows your salvation isn't genuine.

The fulfilment of the Law is to follow Christ and U can't be a disciple of Christ by breaking the law because he himself fulfilled it.
When U genuinely follow Christ and living for him, U are fulfilling the law.

This was what Jesus Christ told the young rich man who only wanted to cherry pick how to attain salvation.
After that encounter Jesus turned to his disciples and told them the prerequisite to obtain salvation....

Matt 19
29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life.

The young rich wanted to keep the commandment but didn't like the idea of following Jesus.

Following the commandment isn't enough, following Jesus and surrendering all to him is the key to eternal life. That's how U keep the law in the new covenant brought by Christ.
This is what I was explaining your colleague. A president can change the constitution of a nation but cannot abolish the constitution. A nation must always have a constitution.

Qasim6:

Paul believed the law is no more biding and he was summoned to Jerusalem because of that teaching. He was told to do some rituals to prove to people he is not against following the law and he obliged like a hypocrite.

I think the council of Jerusalem is one of the most misunderstood passage in the bible.
And this is because people confuse Acts 15 and Acts 21.
Now I can't bring the whole chapters here but will advise U to read both and cure your own if ignorance.
Now I will summarise both chapters here starting with acts 15.

Acts 15
Paul was summoned to Jerusalem to explain the disagreement going on about circumcision amongst gentiles.

Paul went to Jerusalem and defended his stance that gentiles should not be circumcised.
Jewish Christians of Pharisee background countered and insisted gentiles should be circumcised.
The disciples of Jesus including Peter and James agreed with Paul and wrote a letter to the gentiles that no one should burden them with circumcision and any other mosaic law apart from eating food offered to idols, sexual immorality and strangled animals.

The council of Jerusalem clearly concluded and agreed with Paul that the gentiles do not need to be circumcised and so not need to follow the mosaic law.

Acts 21, James reiterated that gentile Christians are not bound to follow the mosaic law but Jewish Christians still need to follow the tradition and culture of their ancestors.
That was the bone of contention in acts 21 and not Paul's message which is targeted towards gentile Christians.

Qasim6:

Thanks to Paul, Some Christain now enjoy pork delicacies.

U guys will do anything to vilify Paul but will conveniently agree with other messages that validates Paul's teaching.

In acts 10, The Lord spoke to Peter on a vision

11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

So what will U say about above....

During Jesus ministry, he declared all food clean.

Mark 7

17 After Jesus had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. 18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

What do your hypocritical self as to say about above...

Truly there nothing that can be done for someone who's determined to end up in hell by fire and force.
They will ignore all evidence that dislocate there belief.

Qasim6:

Some Christain now believe circumcision that is everlasting covenant between God and Abraham as not really that important.

If circumcision is so important, why did Peter and James wrote to gentile Christians that they do not need to be circumcised.
Answer above first, then we go to Genesis 15 and 17 to dissect the origin of the everlasting covenant.

[quote author=Qasim6 post=131069355]

don't get it twisted. Let's assume after taking the shahada, then he just continue living without offering the 5 daily salat, he refuse to fast during the month of Ramadan, he has the wealth to perform hajj he refuse, he has the wealth enough to pay zakat he refuse to pay. He will still be punish. So it is a MANDATORY REQUIREMENT.

A mandatory requirement yet someone who did no work, obeyed no commandment made it to paradise.
Common man, U are way to smart and educated than this...

All of a sudden, Muslims want to redefine mandatory requirement just because a serious flaw in islamic theology is about to be exposed.

Mandatory means U MUST HAVE IT BEFORE U CAN BE GIVEN ACCESS. NO EXCUSE.
If U can be given access without it, it's definitely not mandatory no matter how important it is.

Now let me twist your logic and show U what mandatory requirements is...

If a Muslim obeys all commandments 100%, fulfils all islamic obligations righteously- no fault found. But on the last day, rejected Muhammed as a prophet of God.
Will be make heaven? He followed the law but lost his faith. Will Allah allow him into Paradise?

sonmvayina:


Isaiah was talking about Israel as the suffering servant, stop implying what is not there...there is no death and restoration..it is not a messianic prophesy. It is talking about a servant. Isaiah already told you who the servant is...
Believe whatever you will. There is no Jman there..
It is written in the past continuous tense. Not future tense...
I really advice you to go back to secondary school..seems comprehension is your weakness..

Can Israel forgive their own sins.
That's my question.

U said it's not a messianic prophecy. What if I show U that the 2nd temple Jews believed Isaiah 53 was about the Messiah.
If I bring the evidence here, will U accept?

sonmvayina:


I guess you are not following my point this far.
The sacrifice must be done by a priest in a particular place in the temple...but we know the temple has been destroyed several times..in the absence of the temple God requires us to confess and forsake that is the Hallmark of a sincere repentance.
When the temple is re established the sacrifice will commence..
See 2nd chronicles 7:14.

So if God can forgive sin without blood, why did he tell Israelites to sacrifice animals and use their blood for atonement.
That's My question.
If U don't know, say U don't know.

AntiChristian:


His book no enter Bible!

Explain ransom for me!

The ram Abraham killed was a ransom for what exactly?

Oxford dictionary

obtain the release of someone in captive by making a payment or price.

Ransom is from the word redemption which is payment that sets free.

The death of Jesus was that payment.

Ransom for the life of Isaac..
Abraham offered the ram as a burnt offering to God. I do hop U understand the theology behind burnt offering.

AntiChristian:


Nothing makes sense when you are dumbstruck! I no get time for your diversions!

What's the difference btw punishment and Law.

Thou shall not commit adultery- is it a law or punishment.

If you commit adultery, U should be whipped 50 times. Is that a law or punishment for breaking the law called penal code.

The 10 commandments given to Moses. Where are the punishments in the commandment.

Semi literacy is a very big disease.
What happens

AntiChristian:


Are you a psychiatrist to know they lied? If your mum and brothers say you are mad then we all will help them tie you to the nearest psychiatric hospital!

I'm in the medical field to know Jesus exhibited no trait of mental illness.
You can say he's lying or scamming, but definitely not mad.
Your family are not in any position to determine if U are mad or not. They are not trained nor in any position to do that..
If they are worried about your behaviour, they should get u checked by a competent medical practitioner.
That was how the family of Rashid Yekini killed him by assuming he was mad, tied him and forced him to drink concussions that later killed him.

AntiChristian:

Assuming it was only outsiders that made the claim we can say they may be mischievous! But Mary is Holy according to the Bible. If Mary was sinful Jesus would inherit sins from her. I even wonder how Mary didn't inherit sins from Adam and pass it onto Jesus.

So Mary spoke the truth about her son!

Then why did she and her other sons like James choose to follow a mad man?
U call someone mad, then decide to follow him.
Wetin we go call that one.
AntiChristian do u think it's good wisdom to follow a mad man?

AntiChristian:

This is your own version of lies. Affliction by spells is not madness! And then Allah used the incident to teach us how to cure such affliction by Allah! And the verses used to cure the affliction is still used till tomorrow!

Be like say craze they worry U
Someone is hallucinating and U say he's not mad.
Hallucination is a psychotic symptom!!!!


A hallucination is a false perception of objects or events involving your senses: sight, sound, smell, touch and taste. Hallucinations seem real, but they're not. Chemical reactions and/or abnormalities in your brain cause hallucinations

Above is what happened to Muhammed. His brain was sending wrong message to his senses.
Muhammed's brain was telling him he had sex when he didn't.
How are we sure his brain wasn't telling him he's receiving revelation when no angel appeared to him.
That's my question.
How do we verify that the revelation of Muhammed were not the product of hallucination.

AntiChristian:

The revelations would be trusted because it remains a miracle. The revelation is not the bibliography of Jesus nor the sermon of Paul to his churches somewhere!

Paul also received revelation from Jesus which is also a miracle.

Galatian 1
11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Why should I reject the revelation of Paul whose teaching agreed with Jesus and accept the revelation of someone whose teaching contradicted Jesus.
Muhammed came and said God has no son, yet Jesus called himself the Son of God.
Claiming miraculous revelation isn't enough, we need more evidence.

AntiChristian:


How does it agree?

You haven't seen my latest threads about 13 threads. This is just one out of it.

Paul really went south!

I went thru all of them.
Majority didn't even make sense, that's why people ignored U
The other one I took u on regarding commandments., U ran away after I exposed your ignorance on the difference btw commandment and punishment.

AntiChristian:


John the baptist was killed too who did he ransom? He died fulfilling his mission!

Did John the baptist say his life shall be a ransom for many.
Did John the baptist predict his death?
Do U know what ransom mean?
Na illiteracy dey worry U.

sonmvayina:


I am not God...
My point is that only animals was allowed..

Never a human being..

Human sacrifice is an abomination in the sight of God.

So if Jesus actually existed he was executed for his crimes..even if he were not, it is not the first time an innocent person will be executed...either way it is not an atonement..

Ok so we now acknowledge that God demands blood sacrifice for forgiveness of sin from the ancient Israelites.

So the question now is what changed. How come all U need to do now is ask God and he will forgive your sins.
Why did he change his mind?
When did he change his mind?
Why did God abandon the blood sacrifice and is now saying all U need have your sin forgiven is to raise up your hand and ask.
Why did he institute above right from the beginning.

I thought God doesn't change, why did he change mind concerning forgiveness of sin.

sonmvayina:


Go and read it in context..forget the verses. It was not Isaiah that added them...

U are a big joke.
Forget what verses....
It's now become cherry picking what suits your agenda
Why not allow the scripture to speak for itself....

I warned U to stay away but your stubborn self wouldn't listen.
See where U ended up...

Next time learn to mind your business.

sonmvayina:


Somebody with half a brain will know those passages are all written in past continuous tense..meaning it is something that happened in the past and still happening ...there is no future tense... Isaiah is referring to the entire Jewish people as God usually referred to them in the singular...
You selecting some passages and ignoring others those not change that...

Read everything in context ..

https://www.nairaland.com/6612275/isaiah-53-why-suffering-servant

U mean the nation of Israel is the one cut away from the land of the living.
U means Israel bore the iniquities of Israel.
HE bore OUR iniquities.
Who is the he? and who are the our?

You are a joke..

What do the writers of the Tanakh think of Isaiah 53?
Your opinion doesn't count. Don't teach me nonsense.
Someone that doesn't know guilt offering, didn't know the difference btw sin and guilt offering wants to teach me old testament.
U must be joking.

Tell me what the 2nd temple Jews who compiled the tanakh understand about Isaiah 53.
Did they believe it's about Israel or about a Man.

sonmvayina:


Hahahahhaa

Isaiah already told you 8 times prior to chapter 53.
See owner here.. Isaiah 45:4-5

For the sake of Jacob my servant,
of Israel my chosen,
I summon you by name
and bestow on you a title of honor,
though you do not acknowledge me.
5 I am the Lord, and there is no other;
apart from me there is no God.
I will strengthen you,
though you have not acknowledged me,

In 41:5-9 same thing.

So my friend, Jacob( who God renamed Israel) is God servant. At this time, they where in exile and suffering under the Babylonians...

I have a thread where I explained all these.

Isaiah 53
But He was pierced for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him,
and by His stripes we are healed

For He was cut off from the land of the living;e
He was stricken for the transgression of My people
cause he poured out his life unto death,

and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.

Explain how these verses of Isaiah 53 apply to Jacob.
Explain when Jacob became an intercessor for people's sin.

When did Jacob bore the sin of many...

sonmvayina:

Animal sacrifice were for unintentional sins. A sin you committed but did not know it was a sin. In this case only your body committed the sin, not your mind. So an animal sacrifice is allowed. The animal must be less than 1 year old without blemish either goat or ram. NEVER A HUMAN BEING. And you have to be there when the animal is slaughtered, you have to confess the sin and promise to forsake it. Animals are not the exclusive means to obtain mercy, flour is also acceptable.For intentional sin, it does not work, because both your mind/spirit and body is involved....
Do you understand now?

Ignorant man don't teach me nonsense....

Leviticus 6

The Lord said to Moses: 2 “If anyone sins and is unfaithful to the Lord by deceiving a neighbor about something entrusted to them or left in their care or about something stolen, or if they cheat their neighbor, 3 or if they find lost property and lie about it, or if they swear falsely about any such sin that people may commit— 4 when they sin in any of these ways and realize their guilt, they must return what they have stolen or taken by extortion, or what was entrusted to them, or the lost property they found, 5 or whatever it was they swore falsely about. They must make restitution in full, add a fifth of the value to it and give it all to the owner on the day they present their guilt offering. 6 And as a penalty they must bring to the priest, that is, to the Lord, their guilt offering, a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value. 7 In this way the priest will make atonement for them before the Lord, and they will be forgiven for any of the things they did that made them guilty.”

Above sin doesn't look unintentional to me. It's very much INTENTIONAL.
Obviously U don't understand the concept of guilt offering.

Now answer my question
Why did God tell the Israelites to sacrifice animal blood for forgiveness of sin be it intentional or unintentional.

AntiChristian:


I didn't say they were right before!
It is what it is.

U don't get it. They were wrong because Jesus wasn't mad.

In Muhammed's case, they were right.
Muhammed was afflicted with black magic and use to hallucinate.
A Jewish man cast a spell on him and it worked on him.
Aisha said Muhammed would think he had sex with his wives when he hadn't.
That's psychosis. He was a mad man until it's presumed Allah cured him.

Nobody lied when they said Muhammed was a mad man because he suffered from madness at a point in his life.

Now my question is the revelation given by Muhammed during the period he was under the spell of black magic...can it be trusted.
Muhammed gave revelations during the period he was also hallucinating. How can we be certain those revelations were not as a result of hallucination.

AntiChristian answer the question.

AbuTwins:


So Paul contradicted Jesus in that regards according to Jesus?

Jesus already said all food are clean.

AntiChristian:
Empty Christian bragging!

who did Jesus forgive with blood? He did told someone "you are forgiven" was it with blood?

Who can know everything about anyone? Even Jesus's parents didn't know everything about him! You can only know what he teaches! Who did Jesus told to surrender his/her life to him?

Why didn't he write his words himself if he wants us to believe it?


You can even say blood salvation is the greatest commandment!

Meshionu! No be only blood na water!

Ask and you shall be given!
We ask for forgiveness after repentance!

Even in the lord's prayer "And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespasses against us"

Trespasses are forgiven without blood!




Blood atonement is a ritual idolatry mixed into Christianity from Emperor Constantine and others! No one is saved by blood! We don't have ritualist here!

Finally, if trespass is forgiven without blood, why did God tell the Israelites to sacrifice animal blood for atonement of sin.
God gave them the commandment to follow. Shouldn't that be adequate for salvation according to U.
Why did God then have to instruct them to slaughter animals and use the blood for remission of sins.

Why didn't God tell them to just raise their hands in the air and seek forgiveness, why animal blood?

Remember we talking old testament now.