Posted: Sep 27, 2017 6:43 am
rplatell wrote:
No, not very clearly at all. In fact several verses seem to directly contradict your assertion:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_ ... ifice.htmlWhat the Bible says about Human Sacrifice
I've never looked into the Skeptic's Annotated Bible before, but this selection makes me suspect it was probably made by a group of people who never read the Bible aside from out-of-context verses and didn't bother to look up what ancient words mean.
God commanded Abraham to kill his son Isaac as a sacrifice to him. And then blessed Abraham for his willingness to do so.
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and ... offer him there for a burnt offering.... And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. Genesis 22:2,10
Because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son ... I will bless thee. Genesis 22:16-17
Remember the part where he STOPPED the sacrifice as soon as it appeared that Abraham was going to go through with it? It was a test. He never intended Isaac to be sacrificed, and protected him once the test was over.
Actually, let's turn this around. If God in the Bible was cool with human sacrifice, why did He tell Abraham to stop? If it was fine, why bother, why not just give Abraham a new kid? Why would God stop the sacrifice if he didn't dislike the sacrifice in question?
God told the Israelites to sacrfice their firstborn sons to him.
Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine. Ex.13:2
Thou shalt set apart unto the LORD all that openeth the matrix, and every firstling that cometh of a beast which thou hast; the males shall be the LORD's. And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem. Ex.13:12
This has to be a joke. You do see the difference between "sanctify" and "sacrifice," right? Samuel was sanctified to God, did he get killed and burnt as an offering? It's a declaration that the child/animal is considered consecrated and sacrosanct, a declaration that they are "special" in their purpose, that's all there is to it. And redeeming doesn't mean sacrificing, it means sacrificing FOR. You would sacrifice a lamb when your donkey first gave birth, or kill the newborn donkey. When your firstborn child was born, you would sacrifice a lamb for him... and, as you can see, no alternative is mentioned. That was it; baby is born, you find some way to get a lamb to sacrifice. Human sacrifice isn't mentioned or alluded to in either of these passages.
And Jephthah sacrificed his daughter to God. (God apparently approved of Jephthah's sacrfice since he is listed as a hero of faith in Hebrews 11:32.)
Then the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah ... And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. ... And the LORD delivered them into his hands. And he smote them ... with a very great slaughter. ... And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances. ... I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back. ... And ... her father ... did with her according to his vow which he had vowed. Judges 11:29-39
Better than the last two, but the story was more about stupid promises than God's sacrificial requirements. God didn't demand his daughter, he foolishly promised God the first thing that came out the door, and his daughter paid the price for his stupidity. It's spoken of as a tragedy, and the next verse indicates that it was mourned for a long time afterwards not only by the idiot father, but by the nation as a whole. As for Hebrews, he spoke of Jephthah in a long string of names associated with faith in God; in all likelyhood, he was talking about his famous defeat of the Ammonites, rather than his famous blunder, just as he wouldn't be referring to that time David had a guy killed for being married to a hot woman if he had mentioned David. The sacrifice of his daughter was seen as a tragic mistake, but the guy was remembered most for leading Israel to victory by his faith in God.
Unlike the first two, this one does have merit. But remember, God didn't ask for the sacrifice, nor is any mention made of Him approving of it. It's not even spoken in Judges that Jephthah especially walked with the Lord, an epitaph attached to the death reports of the more righteous kings. Possibly, he wasn't given that epitaph specifically because he blatantly broke a major, explicit rule of Levitical sacrificial law.
Mentioning the first two demonstrates a genuine lack of understanding of the material in question, even if the last one actually had a point...