Was Moses right saying we need a blood atonement for our sins,before he was rejected from entering Israel4sin?

Question

"The life of the fllesh is in the blood, and I have given it upon the altar to make atonement for your sins." Leviticus 17vs11

Isaiah 52:13-53:12 explains how Messiah Jesus was as promised to first suffer "and lay down his life as an atonement for our sins." So He was allowed into Israel to fulfill this-but was Moses right to say we had to have a blood atonement for sins, in that in Genesis it tells he couldnt even enter israel and was burried outside of the land due to Moses' sin?

your welcome first answer-and the way I came to know him was his words from heaven to us Revelation 1:1&3:19&20 our blood atoning Messiah Jesus loves us and knocks on our heart door to come in and deliver from sin and be our friend-in answer to Moses requirement to have a blood atonement for sins-some other things were used too in regard to sin but didint atone for it-all true-but they had to have a blood atonement on Yom Kippur and Passover too

Answer 1

Moses did indeed sin against the Lord by getting angry at the Children of Israel and striking the Rock! his sin was covered by the blood of the sacrifice but he still suffered the consequences of his sin just like we do. If we rob a bank and then confess the crime to God He will forgive us but we still have to pay the price in a court of law. moses was unable to go into the land because he disobeyed God but his sins were covered by the blood and is in heaven today.

Answer 2

If one believed that a blood sacrifice was necessary before God would forgive you, then even one example where God forgave without a blood sacrifice would prove that this idea is UnBiblical. There are many such examples, but the most interesting is found in the Book of Leviticus. The reason this is so interesting is that it comes right in the middle of the discussion of sin sacrifices, which is found in the first chapters. In Leviticus 5:11-13, it states, "If, however, he cannot afford two doves or two young pigeons, he is to bring as an offering for his sin a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering." One can also see that one does not need a blood sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins in the Book of Jonah 3:10. There, the Bible simply states that God saw the works of the people of Ninevah. Specifically it says that the works God saw were that they stopped doing evil, and so God forgave them. There are plenty of other examples, and the idea that one needs a blood sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins is UNBIBLICAL.

Answer 3

No, Moses was not right, David Israel.

The whole idea of "blood sacrifices" is a primitive, savage, barbaric, vulgar form of the lowest kind of ignorance—truly a knuckle-dragger kind of stupidity befitting a caveman.

It's the 21st century. Time for humans to grow up and recognize "God" is not the savage brute as described by bible writers, passed down from ancient folk tales.

The idea of sacrifice is a childish and pathetic insult to "God".

Answer 4

David Israel,
You are a Christian. I do know that you seem to have some psychological disorders and therefore may not be capable of hearing dissent. Nonetheless, I must tell you david that I think this evil and deceptive form of missionizing you are perpetrating is degrading Christianity and the good, normal christians who practice it.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ApnC4dngKeRuGKyqQldbLd_zy6IX?qid=20060723102937AA4N2eb
. It is, by definition, impossible for it to be "jewish" to believe in jesus. "Jewish" is, by defintion, what jews have historically and contemporarily believe. Since in neither scenario do we find "believing in jesus", then we must clearly realize that belief in jesus is not something "jewish". You can call it "biblical" (and still be wrong), but certainly not "jewish".
. On the side, the subject of Isaiah 53 is promised a "long life" and "seed" (i.e. physical children). Clearly this isn't about jesus.
. And Isaiah 7 is clearly not messianic if you read the whole chapter. and "alma" doesn't mean virgin either. You'd know that if you spoke hebrew (I guess learning basic hebrew wasn't part of your "extensive jewish upbringing", huh?)
. On the side, Isaiah 9 can't be about jesus since, according to christianity, he's the "son" not the "father" (as the verse states). Nor did he have control of the government (to the contrary, the roman government killed him). And he certainly did not establish "endless peace".
=======================================================
Sources:
http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/jewishsociety/Why_Jews_Dont_Believe_In_Jesus.asp
http://jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/general_messiah-criteria02.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_messiah#Textual_requirements
=======================================================
oh, and lastly, I've decided that you truly epitomize everything I find intensely intellectually unsatisfying about christianity.

Answer 5

so you are asking why Jesus could enter without an antonement. he is the atonement isn't he. he is perfect and doesn't need to atone for anything.

his blood was for our sins. he was a spotless lamb that was sacrificed in place of use

Answer 6

Yes...and Jesus was that blood atonement.

Answer 7

Moses was a man that loved God despite what anyone else might say

Answer 8

No. Moses was a hot-head who was getting a little big in the britches from being granted all those cool powers from God.

He needed someone to lean over the table and smack his curly head and tell him to lighten up.

Answer 9

Interesting, I've have learned somethinf today, thanks