Frantz Philossaint Supporter

This is a very important question because there is a lot of confusion regarding different things in the bible that were done away with. Of course the bible is clear about this topic. We must first start with prayer because it is the Holy Spirit that will lead and guide us into all truth (John 16:13).

In the book of Genesis this is where we see the first gospel promise. In Genesis 3:15 which talks about "enmity" or hatred that God will place in His people. In Gen 3:21 it says that "...the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them." The question would be where did the Lord get the coats of skins from? In the story of Cain and Abel we clearly see where. In Gen 4:4 it says "And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering." So clearly our Abel understood that Jesus represented that lamb that he brought for a burnt sacrifice and Cain did not. The Lord has respect unto Abel, but not Cain. Why it that? Because we can only be saved through the blood of Jesus Christ.

In John 1:29 John aw Jesus and he said "...Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." So the lamb represented Jesus, so all this time in the old testament they had what was called the sanctuary, which was built by Moses. It started to show during the says of Adam because the burnt offerings are part of the sanctuary system which shows the "Plan of Redemption". In other words, this was a type or a shadow until the anti-type or Jesus came into the scene because it all pointed to Him. 

Now let's answer the question: When did it stop? In order to understand this we must understand prophecy. The bible says clearly in Amos 3:7, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets?' God does nothing until He tells you about it first. There are several examples of this in scripture. Here are just a few: the flood, Sodom and Gomorrha, the children of Israel 400 years, and even the promised Messiah etc...

So in the book of Daniel we have a prophecy in Daniel 9, which is the 70 week prophecy. Let's read Daniel 9:24 it says "Seventy weeks are determined upon they people..." In prophecy a day represents a year Numbers 14:34, Ezek 4:6. so when you do the math we have 490 years. Now I will not get into the starting point; verse 25 tells you when this prophecy began. 

In verse 27 it has the answer of when it stopped. During the 70 week prophecy Jesus, who is the Messiah, started His ministry in 27 A.D., which is also the starting point of the last week in the prophecy. As the verse says in the midst or middle of the last week, "He shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease," which was 31 A.D.

Jesus died in 31 A.D. and caused the burnt sacrifice to cease because it pointed to Jesus. This is also why in Matthew 27:51 the veil of the temple was rent in twain. The temple is where they performed the burnt offerings and because Jesus was the lamb and He died, we don't have to offer animals as burnt offerings. In Hebrews 10:4 it reads, "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." Please read verse 1 of the same chapter. Now were there people still doing it? Yes of course, but when you turn them to Jesus, He will be the one to take away your sin. 2 Cor 3:15-18

I really summarized this and gave an overview, but I hope this will encourage you to continue to study and show thyself approved unto God.

October 14 2018 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report

Grant Abbott Supporter Child of Father, Follower of Son, Student of Spirit

From God's perspective, sacrifices ended on the Passover day recorded in all the gospel books when Jesus Christ gave up his life upon the cross, (see Matthew 27:32-56; Mark 15:21-41; Luke 23:26-49; John 20:17-37). As the sinless Son of God, Jesus provided the one perfect sacrifice, shedding his blood and suffering death, to pay the penalty for all the sins of the world. This one act made it possible for every human being to receive the forgiveness of all their sins and to receive the gift of eternal life, should they choose to repent and accept Jesus as their personal saviour.

This once for all sacrifice by Jesus is clearly and beautifully described in the book of Hebrews, chapter 10. Here are some selected verses:

The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming - not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship (verse 1). 

But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins (verse 3). It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins (verse 4). 

But when Christ came into the world, he said "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. Then I said 'Here I am, I have come to do your will, my God (verses 5-7)."

He sets aside the first [covenant of law] to establish the second [covenant of grace] (verse 9).

And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all (verse 10).

But when this priest [Jesus] had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God (verse 12).

For by one sacrifice he [Jesus] has made perfect forever those who are being made holy (verse 14).

Now, from the perspective of the nation of Israel, they did not accept that Jesus Christ was the Messiah, the saviour of the world. They continued to offer sacrifices at the temple in Jerusalem until it was destroyed by the Roman army in AD 70. At that time the Jewish people were also scattered all over the Roman world and did not continue with their system of animal sacrifices because the temple was never rebuilt.

October 08 2018 • 1 response • Vote Up • Share • Report

Tim Maas Supporter Retired Quality Assurance Specialist with the U.S. Army

Although it is not recorded in the Bible, my understanding is that the Jewish practice of animal sacrifice done in accordance with the Law that God gave to Israel through Moses ceased with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (along with the rest of Jerusalem itself) by the Romans in AD 70, since God did not subsequently establish a new central location where those sacrifices could be performed, as He had done with the Tabernacle and the Temple (Deuteronomy 12:13-14).

(From a Christian standpoint, God would not have been expected to establish a new location in any case. Jesus' death had ended the need for such sacrifices (although those Jews who did not accept Christ continued to perform them), since the entire sacrificial system of the Old Testament had been intended as a foreshadowing of the full and final atonement achieved by Jesus through His death on the cross. (Hebrews 10:1-18).)

October 09 2018 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report

Myron Robertson Supporter Seeking God's heart

The Bible does not address this particular question. Instead it addresses when the sacrifices were no longer of any value. Christians generally focus on one of these two conditions and ignore the other. 

The one that most applies to your question is that once Jesus died on the cross the sacrifices no longer held any value to anyone. The Christians continued to go to the temple until they were kicked out (which did not happen in all cases) until such time as the temple was destroyed. The evidence (both historical and biblical) is that they continued to do the animal sacrifices until the destruction of the temple. For instance Paul was requested by James to help pay the expenses of some devotees who were ending their Nazerite vows during his final visit to Jerusalem (Acts 21:20-25). This vow required offering for ending this vow was a large bread offering, a ram, and yearling lambs, one male, one female. Paul agreed to paying this offering for himself and four other men who were ending their vows.

Yet Paul's writings make it clear throughout that all of the terms of the law were types and shadows which have their reality in Christ (or more properly translated, in the anointing of the Holy Spirit which is what the word christus means). Once we receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit these sacrifices no longer have any meaning (Col 2:17). 

There is a text in the Old Testament that says something like anyone who brings a sacrifice to the temple without having repented of his sin is guilty of the blood of that sacrifice. I do not recall the precise wording of this and have not been able to find it for a few years so I don't even remember the right keywords. However, God has called this text to my attention several times in the past when I was studying other matters, and there are other texts which say something very similar though less pointed and forceful. One of these is Ps 51:16, 17. Without the contrite heart the sacrifice of some animal is only bloodshed and God will treat it as such. A proper translation of Lev 17:11, 14 and Dt 12:23 makes it easier to understand why this is such a problem in God's eyes: "The SOUL is in the blood." It i not the life in the blood; the seat of the soul is in the blood and you steal something else's soul by bloodshed. This is a sin, and when you bring the sacrifice to "pay" for a sin in which you plan to continue, you add sin to sin, so that sacrifice is useless to you and actually makes you own considerably more restitution than you owed before bringing that sacrifice. It does not matter if you are "presenting" the blood of a lamb or the blood of Jesus. You take on the guilt for that blood. This applied in the Old Testament and it still applies today, even more so since it is Jesus blood we present to God today.

I realize this last discussion does not address when the sacrifices were to stop, but it is perhaps more important to understand when it is proper to bring a sacrifice at all, and especially when the blood we present to God is the blood of Jesus rather than that of some "dumb animal". Improperly presenting His blood is a much greater sin than presenting the blood of that "dumb animal" but scripture tells us the improper presentation of either one brings a blood (soul) guilt upon us.

October 09 2018 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report