The Christian Downfall ---The Error Of Balaam

[revjohn]

Myself the rest of The Bible God wrote ,seems more to answer to the Blood as it is By The Blood of Christ, that we are save. Not" by the( crop of the Ground).That we all are condemed by. God Bless---airclean33

This is, quite simply, you projecting your belief onto scripture and not allowing scripture to speak for itself.

While scripture does bring up on several occasions that Cain's sacrifice was rejected and Abel's sacrifice was accepted it never, anywhere, tells us that the reason why this is so is a) because Cain's sacrifice was not offered in faith or b) that it was because Cain's sacrifice was not a blood sacrifice.

The whole breadth of scripture lifts up a number of sacrifices which the Lord finds pleasing and acceptable. Limiting our understanding of sacrifice to but one or even several similar passages is not engaging the whole text. For example if I filter everything through Psalm 51: 17 I find that the following: "The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise." And that leads me to believe that blood is not an acceptable sacrifice nor is the fat of the land.

That said, I think that Psalm 51: 17 is probably closer to helping us understand Cain and Abel far better than any text about blood sacrifice can.

Paul appears to reflect this understanding in Romans 12: 3 where he says, "For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of yourself more highly than you ought to think."

Indeed, when Isaiah speaks to Judah and Jerusalem the words that the Lord has given him to speak he brings the following accusation: "What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the Lord; I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fed beasts; I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of goats" (Isaiah 1: 13). Here God is rejecting blood sacrifices among other offerings so I suspect that his accepting Abel and rejecting Cain was less about what was offered and more about the heart behind the offering.

This also lifts up something of a problem. Is it not God who established the sacrificial system (which includes crops of the earth as acceptable)? How can he do that if he does not delight in the blood of bulls, lambs or goats?

In the end you are right. Nothing explicitly from God's mouth saying why one sacrifice was accepted and one was rejected. Which is actually beside the point because I never claimed that was what God said. I claimed that scripture points in another direction.

The claim that the Bible teaches that Cain had no faith or that his sacrifice was rejected because it was not blood is in error.

 

[airclean33]

Good morning Rev John. I believe your out of context in Psalm 51-17 --
____________________________________________________
if we read Psalm--17--19
Psa 51:17 The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
Psa 51:18 Do good to Zion in thy good pleasure; rebuild the walls of Jerusalem,

Psa 51:19 then wilt thou delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings; then bulls will be offered on thy altar.

I agree even today you must give your self over to GOD.Not your flesh which is against GOD. But your spirit which is of GOD. John6: 63
Jhn 6:63 It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
My Belief is Cain was of the flesh. Well Abel was of the Spirit. The flesh was made befor the spirit, that GOD put in it.Gen 2:7---
Gen 2:7 then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

 

[airclean33]

There is another thing that has not been adressed. That what GOD said to Cain.Why has your countenance fallen?
Looking up contenance I found this.

Countenance
Appearance.
And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings, he took Peter and John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray. And as he prayed, the fashion of his COUNTENANCE was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering. ( Luke 9:28-29 )
What was it Cain" didn't show?

 

[revjohn]

Good morning Rev John. I believe your out of context in Psalm 51-17

Believe what you want.

The issue is not between blood and bloodless sacrifices as God will accept or reject both if the heart of the one offering them up doesn't pass muster.

Separating the sacrifice from the heart of the person bringing it reduces the sacrificial system to magical thinking.

It makes what I sacrifice more powerful than how my heart is open to God or resistant to God.

It is why the Widow's mite pleases God more than all the Gold the rich can spare.

Even in the context of the Psalm which you are so confident I have missed shows that v17 is David acknowledging what God wants while v18 and 19 are David asking God to act in a specific fashion.

V17 is what David offers. VV18-19 are what David hopes God will bring about as a result of that sacrifice.

 

[revjohn]

There is another thing that has not been adressed. That what GOD said to Cain.Why has your countenance fallen?
Looking up contenance I found this. . . .What was it Cain" didn't show?

Cain's countenance is not said to fall until after his sacrifice is not looked upon favourably.

Also mentioned is the fact that Cain experienced anger about not having his sacrifice looked upon favourably.

One's countenance is also one's expression. Angry people show anger with their faces.

Cain is angry and God asks him why he is angry.

Genesis 4: 7 then has God ask the question, "If you do what is right will you not be accepted?"

The myth of previous instruction reduces the problem to what Cain offers and is a distraction that gets in the way of understanding. Why would Cain be angry if he knew that the sacrifice he brought didn't measure up to a standard already explained?

Where did the motivation to bring this sacrifice come from if not Cain's heart and where was the decision not to bring the best of the field forward birthed if not Cain's heart?

 

[blackbelt1961]

Indeed, when Isaiah speaks to Judah and Jerusalem the words that the Lord has given him to speak he brings the following accusation: "What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the Lord; I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fed beasts; I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of goats" (Isaiah 1: 13). Here God is rejecting blood sacrifices among other offerings so I suspect that his accepting Abel and rejecting Cain was less about what was offered and more about the heart behind the offering.

is in error.

which is what i was trying to say in my post earlier

Amen

 

[Waterfall]

Why would God, who is all powerful, need our sacrifices anyway? Doesn't he already know what is in our hearts?

When the Israelites killed the lambs and put the blood on their doors in Egypt, wasn't it more of a protest against the Egyptians worshipping lambs and other animals as gods? Exodus 8:25-26

Wasn't this more of a declaration that they would not worship the lamb as a god, as the Egyptians did, but only the one true God?

Did God know that Cain was capable of murder before he killed his brother?

What is the intent of a sacrifice?

 

[RitaTG]

It seems to me that in more current terms that the offering plate is no substitute for where our heart is...

 

[revjohn]

Why would God, who is all powerful, need our sacrifices anyway? Doesn't he already know what is in our hearts?

This presumes that the sacrifice is for God's benefit not ours. As you point out God already knows what is in our hearts maybe the value of a sacrifice is that it illustrates for us what is in our hearts.

When the Israelites killed the lambs and put the blood on their doors in Egypt, wasn't it more of a protest against the Egyptians worshipping lambs and other animals as gods? Exodus 8:25-26

Not likely.

Wasn't this more of a declaration that they would not worship the lamb as a god, as the Egyptians did, but only the one true God?

No. At least not according to the narrative it isn't.

Did God know that Cain was capable of murder before he killed his brother?

Aren't we all capable of murder?

At any rate God points out to Cain that sin is crouching at his door desiring to master him and that he (Cain) must master it.

Cain was not apparently up to the task (Are we any better).

What is the intent of a sacrifice?

Good question.

Answers probably vary depending on whom is asked.

For some it is magical ceremony binding God to some action. For others it is a sacrament, an outward visible sign of a inward act. For some it is a matter of routine and not something thought about. For others it is deliberate and declaritive.

 

[revjohn]

It seems to me that in more current terms that the offering plate is no substitute for where our heart is...

And yet, it often appears to be.

 

[Waterfall]

Revjohn, Then what was the abomination spoken of in Exodus? According to some Jewish texts, by sacrificing the lamb, an Egyptian deity, they were signifying a severence of their relationship with Egypt. Those who defied the Egyptians and placed the sacrificial blood on their door were passed over, and those who were too scared to go against them, were not.

 

[revjohn]

Then what was the abomination spoken of in Exodus? According to Jewish texts, by sacrificing a lamb, which was an Egyptian deity, they had crossed the line and severed their relationship with Israel.

Language can be a funny thing.

Are we talking about Exodus 8: 26 in the KJV where it says, "And Moses said, It is not meet so to do; for we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians to the Lord our God: lo, shall we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and will they not stone us?"

or in the NRSV where it says, "But Moses said, “It would not be right to do so; for the sacrifices that we offer to the Lord our God are offensive to the Egyptians. If we offer in the sight of the Egyptians sacrifices that are offensive to them, will they not stone us?"

or in the NIV where it says, "But Moses replied, “But Moses said, “That would not be right. The sacrifices we offer the Lord our God would be detestable to the Egyptians. And if we offer sacrifices that are detestable in their eyes, will they not stone us?"

or even in the NLT where it says, "But Moses replied, “That wouldn’t be right. The Egyptians detest the sacrifices that we offer to the Lord our God. Look, if we offer our sacrifices here where the Egyptians can see us, they will stone us."

First, few people sacrifice abominations. Abominations are detestable things and would be easily offered up. Desireable things appear to be more often employed as sacrificial items because giving them up represents a real struggle. Sacrificing an abomination is like a life-time abstainer resolving never to drink alcohol again. Which means that the KJV translation is wonky. The rest of the translations seem to agree that the Israelites are concerned about Egyptian reaction to their offering sacrifices.

It wouldn't be what was sacrificed. It would be to whom is it being sacrificed.

The Egyptian Pantheon of Gods was represented by Cattle yet the Egyptians ate beef. It was also represented by Pigs, yet the Egyptians ate Pork. So the fact that one or several Egyptian Gods (or Goddesses) were represented by Rams would not make sheep off limits for eating or sacrificing. The Egyptians didn't worship animals. They worshipped Gods who took animal forms.

 

[Waterfall]

And Jesus is the lamb of God?

 

[revjohn]

And Jesus is the lamb of God?

Yes, and the lamb that was slain, the one who sits upon the throne. Whose throne? God's throne.

Apart from that some Christians wouldn't think twice about eating lamb.

And those who do think twice about it are probably not having theological problems.

In Judaism the lamb has special significance Jesus being referred to as the lamb is a deliberate attempt on behalf of the Gospel writers to make that connection.

 

[Waterfall]

Except Judaism says that the sacrificial lamb for the passover had nothing to do with sin, it was more confrontational. Their day of atonement is Yom Kippur is it not?

 

[revjohn]

Except Judaism says that the sacrificial lamb for the passover had nothing to do with sin, it was more confrontational. Their day of atonement is Yom Kippur is it not?

While true it is the Christian interpretation of the image which is important to the Gospel writers.

Lambs were sacrificial animals.

The passover lamb is the the symbol by which the Angel of Death knew to pass over a house.

The wages of sin is death.

Jesus as the lamb of God is both an atonement and a message to death that it has no place where this blood covers.

 

[RitaTG]

And yet, it often appears to be.

It would seem that often the condition of the heart and the offering plate are all too similar.
That is part of what I get out of the story of Cain.....
Then there are the stories throughout scripture of trying to buy God's favour by huge impressive offerings...
Hmmmmm ....... lots to think about regarding that offering topic.....
That seems to seep into the story about Balaam too.......

 

[unsafe]

Prove it wrong -----

From Bible Questions and Answers ----

http://www.neverthirsty.org/pp/corner/read2/r00614.html

Bible Question:When and why was the blood sacrifice required by God?
Bible Answer:God requires a blood sacrifice in order to forgive a person's sins.


. . . without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. (NASB) Heb. 9:22

This is a strong statement. God cannot forgive a person's sins without the shedding of blood. The question is, "Who dies?"
1st Sacrifice.The first sacrifice occurred immediately after Adam and Eve sinned. Eve did not know what she was doing when she ate of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, according to 1Tim. 2:14, but Adam did. He willfully sinned. Eve did not believe God, she ate, and Adam sinned. As a result God killed two animals in order to give them clothes.


The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them. (NASB) Gen. 3:21

Was this a blood sacrifice by God? Some think so. But it is clear that Abel did offer a blood sacrifice in Genesis 4:4. The concept of a blood sacrifice was already understood.
The Perfect Sacrifice.A blood sacrifice was required because Adam had sinned. The forgiveness of his sin required blood to be shed. God could have killed Adam, but He used an animal. Unfortunately, the sacrifice of an animal does not give a person lasting forgiveness.

Only the 2nd Adam can do that -----



Prove it wrong ------
A Prophecy in Blood?
Adrian Rogers
http://www.jesus.org/is-jesus-god/old-testament-prophecies/a-prophecy-in-blood.html

When Adam and Eve sinned, God shed innocent blood in order to make them clothes from animal skins (Genesis 3:21). This is a picture of the covering of righteousness that we receive when the LordJesusChrist died for us.
In Genesis 4 we read that Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel. They instinctively wanted to worship God. Cain sacrificed the fruit of the ground. Abel had already learned that God demanded blood, so he brought a lamb. God accepted the blood of Abel's lamb, but He did not accept Cain's offering. Why? Because "without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin" (Hebrews 9:22).
And God told Abraham to sacrifice his long-awaited son Isaac (Genesis 22). Just before Abraham plunged the dagger into the quivering heart of his son, an angel stopped him. Abraham saw a ram caught in a thicket. Isaac was set free, but an innocent animal's blood was shed instead.

You see from the 1Adam to the 2nd Adam it was always about Sin and The Blood -----


THE WAY OF CAIN -----read here ----Prove it wrong

http://www.cobblestoneroadministry.org/TheWayofCain.html

Question:Why did God reject Cain's sacrifice in Genesis 4? Was a
sin offering required back then or was it Cain's attitude that made the
sacrifice unacceptable?Answer: Clearly, we will see from Scripture that it was Cain's failure
to do what was required-- a task which he failed to perform. God told
Cain, "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?" Therefore it
was clearly an act of disobedience on the part of Cain to do what was
right. Cain's attitude was also unacceptable for he followed his own
way rather than obeying God. Cain brought to God what he, himself,
thought was best. He had pride, rebellion and self-righteousness. He brought his own pride as an offering to God. He forgot that theground was cursed. He denied that he was a sinner by bringing a
bloodless sacrifice before a Holy and Righteous God.

 

[Waterfall]

Unsafe, maybe God had a cotton gin.

 

[unsafe]

I leave you all with this scripture ----Human Knowledge will never reveal Spiritual knowledge ----looking at scripture through worldly glasses will only give you a worldly view ----Spiritual Glasses ---God's Word reveals a Spiritual view and the Holy Spirit will give you Spiritual Knowledge -- Cain is a perfectly good example ---Knowing God's plan from the get go thinking Spiritually gives you the answer ----God's plan is all about His Son Jesus Christ and His Precious Blood that frees us all from SIN and Death by Faith---it is all about the righteous and the unrighteous ----it is all about right Worshiping and wrong Worshiping ----etc

Notice the Footnote at the end of the scripture ----


1 Corinthians 2:12-13New International Version (NIV)

12 What we have received is not the spirit(A)of the world,(B)but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us.13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom(C)but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.[a]

Footnotes:

1. 1 Corinthians 2:13Or Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual