The reason why animal sacrifices have stopped is because of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the Romans in the first century. In 70 AD, Titus and the Roman army put Jerusalem to the sword and to the torch, fulfilling the prophecy of Jesus, who said “The days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down” (Luke 21:6).
Mark 3:1-12
In Judaism, the korban (קָרְבָּן, qorbān), also spelled qorban or corban, is any of a variety of sacrificial offerings described and commanded in the Torah. The plural form is korbanot, korbanoth, or korbanos.
The term korban primarily refers to sacrificial offerings given from humans to God for the purpose of doing homage, winning favor, or securing pardon.[1] The object sacrificed was usually an animal that was ritually slaughtered and then transferred from the human to the divine realm by being burned on an altar.[2][3][4] Other sacrifices include grain offerings made of flour and oil, not meat.[5]
After the destruction of the Second Temple, sacrifices were prohibited because there was no longer a Temple, the only place allowed by halakha for sacrifices. Offering of sacrifices was briefly reinstated during the Jewish–Roman wars of the second century CE.[6][7]
When sacrifices were offered in ancient times, they were offered as a fulfillment of Biblical commandments. According to Orthodox Judaism, the coming of the messiah will not remove the requirement to keep the 613 commandments, and when the Temple is rebuilt, sacrifices will be offered again.[8]
While some korbanot were offered as part of the atonement process for sin, this role was strictly limited, and in Judaism atonement can be achieved through means such as repentance even without sacrifices.[9]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why have the Jews stopped animal sacrifice?
Rebecca asks, “When was the last animal sacrifice made, and why did those who reject Jesus as the Son of God stop sacrificing animals?”
For the Christian, we know that animal sacrifices ended at the moment of Jesus’ death, when the temple curtain was torn in two. That moment signified the final, once-for-all sacrifice of the innocent lamb, Jesus Christ, that replaced the need for animal sacrifices at the temple.
In the Old Testament, only a priest could offer sacrifices and they could only be carried out at the temple in Jerusalem. But the apostle Peter encourages us that through Jesus, all believers are “a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:5).
The question here, however, speaks of Jews who have not accepted Jesus as their Savior, and so they continue to seek redemption through animal sacrifices as they continue to wait for who they believe will be the Messiah.
The reason why animal sacrifices have stopped is because of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the Romans in the first century. In 70 AD, Titus and the Roman army put Jerusalem to the sword and to the torch, fulfilling the prophecy of Jesus, who said “The days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down” (Luke 21:6).
The Law of Moses commanded that animal sacrifice take place only on the altar of God, near the holy place in the designated house of the Lord. That was the tabernacle, then the temple, but there is no physical house of the Lord today.
Some Jews have begun preparing for animal sacrifice when the temple is restored. Some have even started practicing live animal sacrifices, dressed in priestly garments, to be ready for that day.
With our Great Commission in mind, I pray we can reach Jewish people with the truth of the gospel and show them that their temporary sacrifices are no longer needed, for the Lamb of God has already come!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacrifices were offered in varying locations. Before building the Temple in Jerusalem, when the Israelites were in the desert, sacrifices were only to be offered in the Tabernacle.[35] After the invasion of Canaan, sacrifices were also permitted at bamot in any location until the nation's enemies had been defeated and the people lived securely, after which sacrifices were supposed to be centralized again.[36] However, in practice the bamot were still used even in the secure monarchic period, and the Bible sometimes criticizes Israelite kings for allowing this.[37] Sacrifices outside the main sanctuary are recorded at Beit Shemesh,[38] Mizpah,[39] Ramah,[40] Gilgal,[41] and Bethlehem,[42] among other locations.
After the entry to Canaan, the main sacrificial centre was initially at Shiloh. Under Saul the main center of sacrifice was Nob,[43] though private offerings continued to be made at Shiloh.[44] David created a new sacrificial center in Jerusalem at the threshing floor of Araunaḥ,[45] adjacent to Jerusalem, to which he moved the Ark.[46][47] According to the Hebrew Bible, after the building of Solomon's Temple, sacrifices were only to be carried out there.[48] After Solomon's Temple was destroyed, sacrifices were resumed when the Second Temple was built, until the Second Temple was also destroyed in 70 CE.[49]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cognitive dissonance is a psychological theory that describes the mental discomfort that occurs when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, or when their actions contradict their beliefs.1
Here's a breakdown:
-
The Core Concept: When we experience a mismatch between our actions and our beliefs, or between two conflicting beliefs, it creates an internal tension.2 This tension is uncomfortable, and our minds naturally try to reduce it.
-
How We Reduce Dissonance:
- Changing our behavior: We might alter our actions to align with our beliefs.3 For example, if you believe smoking is harmful but continue to smoke, you might try to quit.
- Changing our beliefs: We might adjust our beliefs to justify our actions.4 For example, a smoker might downplay the health risks or convince themselves that their smoking habit is not that harmful.5
- Adding new cognitions: We might introduce new beliefs to reconcile the inconsistency.6 For example, a smoker might believe that the stress relief from smoking outweighs the health risks.7
- Trivializing the inconsistency: We might minimize the importance of the conflicting beliefs or actions.8 For example, a smoker might say, "Everyone indulges in some vices."
Examples of Cognitive Dissonance:
- Smoking: As mentioned, smokers who know the health risks but continue to smoke experience dissonance.9
- Cheating: A student who believes cheating is wrong but cheats on an exam experiences dissonance.10
- Making a difficult decision: After making a choice, we often experience dissonance by focusing on the negative aspects of the chosen option and the positive aspects of the rejected options.11
Key Points:
- Cognitive dissonance is a common human experience.12
- It can motivate us to change our behavior or beliefs.13
- It can also lead to self-justification and denial.14
I hope this explanation is helpful! Let me know if you'd like more examples or have further questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two related but contradictory cognitions, or thoughts. The psychologist Leon Festinger came up with the concept in 1957.
In his book “A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance,” Festinger proposed that two ideas can be consonant or dissonant. Consonant ideas logically flow from one another. Dissonant ideas oppose one another.
For example, a person who wishes to protect others and believes that the COVID-19 pandemic is real might wear a mask in public. This is consonance.
If that same person believes the COVID-19 pandemic is real but refuses to wear a mask, their values and behaviors would contradict each other. This is dissonance.
The dissonance between two contradictory ideas, or between an idea and a behavior, creates discomfort. Festinger argued that cognitive dissonance is more intense when a person holds many dissonant views and those views are important to them.
------------------------------------------------------------
These defense mechanisms fall into three categories:
- Avoiding: This involves avoiding or ignoring the dissonance. People may avoid people or situations that remind them of it, discourage people from talking about it, or distract themselves with consuming tasks.
- Delegitimizing: This involves undermining evidence of the dissonance. A person may do this by discrediting the person, group, or situation that highlighted the dissonance. For example, they might say it is untrustworthy or biased.
- Limiting impact: This involves limiting the discomfort of cognitive dissonance by belittling its importance. A person may do this by claiming the behavior is rare or a one-off event, or by providing rational arguments to convince themselves or others that the behavior is OK.
The Aesop fable "The Fox and the Grapes" perfectly illustrates the concept of cognitive dissonance.
-
Cognitive Dissonance: This psychological term describes the mental discomfort experienced when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values.
-
The Fox's Dilemma: The fox desperately wants to eat the grapes hanging high on the vine. However, despite numerous attempts, he cannot reach them. This creates a conflict within the fox:
- Desire: He strongly desires the grapes.
- Failure: He is unable to obtain them.
-
Resolving the Dissonance: To alleviate this internal conflict, the fox resorts to a defense mechanism:
- Rationalization: He concludes that the grapes are probably sour anyway, making them undesirable.
By changing his belief about the grapes (from delicious to sour), the fox reduces the dissonance between his desire and his failure. He avoids the unpleasant feeling of frustration by convincing himself that the unattainable object wasn't actually worth having in the first place.
In essence, the fox's "sour grapes" declaration is a way to cope with his disappointment and maintain a sense of self-worth.
This fable serves as a cautionary tale, reminding us to be honest with ourselves about our desires and failures, rather than resorting to self-deception.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Here are 10 excuses for failing to meet a goal, ranging from common to more creative:
- Lack of Time: "I just didn't have enough time in the day to dedicate to this." (Classic and often true, but can be a bit of a cop-out)
- Lack of Resources: "I didn't have the budget/tools/materials I needed to succeed." (Can be valid, but sometimes resources can be found creatively)
- Unexpected Circumstances: "Life threw me some curveballs – [insert unexpected event, e.g., illness, family emergency]." (Often genuine, but can be overused)
- Lack of Support: "I didn't have the encouragement or guidance I needed from others." (Can be true, but also highlights a reliance on external validation)
- Burnout: "I was completely overwhelmed and burnt out by other commitments." (A valid reason, but can sometimes be a sign of poor planning)
- Lack of Motivation: "I just couldn't seem to find the motivation to keep going." (Honest, but can be a sign of a poorly defined goal or lack of intrinsic motivation)
- Procrastination: "I kept putting it off and then it was too late." (A common and relatable struggle, but ultimately self-inflicted)
- Fear of Failure: "I was afraid of failing, so I subconsciously sabotaged myself." (A valid psychological barrier, but can be addressed with self-reflection)
- Lack of Clarity: "I wasn't entirely sure what success looked like for this goal." (A valid point, as unclear goals are harder to achieve)
- "The Universe Was Against Me": (A humorous and somewhat self-deprecating excuse, acknowledging that sometimes things just don't go as planned)
Humans make excuses for a variety of psychological reasons, often stemming from a desire to protect ourselves:
-
Protecting Self-Esteem:
- Avoiding Blame: Excuses allow us to shift blame away from ourselves, preserving our sense of competence and worth.
- Maintaining a Positive Self-Image: When we fail, blaming external factors helps us maintain the belief that we are capable and successful individuals.
-
Reducing Anxiety and Discomfort:
- Avoiding Guilt and Shame: Excuses can help us avoid the uncomfortable feelings of guilt and shame that arise from failure or wrongdoing.
- Coping with Disappointment: When we don't achieve our goals, excuses can help us cope with the disappointment and frustration.
-
Maintaining Control:
- Illusion of Control: Even if the excuse is not entirely valid, it can create the illusion that we have some control over the situation and that the outcome was not entirely our fault.
-
Social Factors:
- Seeking Sympathy: Excuses can sometimes be used to elicit sympathy from others.
- Avoiding Judgment: By providing an explanation, we may hope to avoid criticism or judgment from others.
The phrase "To thine own self be true" is a famous line from Shakespeare's play Hamlet, spoken by the character Polonius to his son Laertes. It's a piece of advice that has resonated with people for centuries, but its meaning is subject to interpretation.
Here's a breakdown of some key interpretations:
- Be Authentic: This is perhaps the most common interpretation. It suggests living in accordance with your own values, beliefs, and desires. Don't pretend to be someone you're not, and don't compromise your integrity to please others.
- Be Honest with Yourself: This interpretation emphasizes self-awareness and introspection. It encourages you to acknowledge your strengths and weaknesses, your true motivations, and your deepest desires.
- Live with Integrity: This interpretation focuses on acting in accordance with your own moral compass. It suggests that true to yourself means living a life of honesty, integrity, and ethical behavior.
However, there are also some potential drawbacks to a strict interpretation of "To thine own self be true":
- Selfishness: If taken too literally, it could be interpreted as a license for selfish behavior, disregarding the needs and feelings of others.
- Lack of Growth: It could discourage personal growth and self-improvement if it's interpreted as an excuse to avoid self-reflection and the possibility of changing for the better.
- Difficulty in Relationships: Uncompromisingly adhering to your own self, without any consideration for others, can lead to conflict and isolation in relationships.
Ultimately, "To thine own self be true" is a complex piece of advice. It's a call to authenticity and self-awareness, but it should not be interpreted as an excuse for selfishness or a rejection of personal growth. Finding a balance between honoring your own values and being considerate of others is key to living a fulfilling and meaningful life.
------------------------------------------------------
The song "Excuses" by The Kingsmen is a humorous and satirical take on common reasons people give for avoiding church attendance.
Here's a breakdown of some of the excuses mentioned:
- Weather-related: "In the summer it's too hot, in the winter it's too cold," "In the springtime when the weather's just right, to find someplace else to go."
- Physical discomfort: "Those church benches; they're too hard," "And that choir sings way too loud."
- Social anxiety: "Well, you know how nervous you get, sitting in a great big crowd."
- Competing priorities: "Well, I've got a headache Sunday morning, a backache Sunday night," "Well, one of the children has a cold, pneumonia do you suppose?"
- General disinterest: "The sermon's too long, maybe too short," "I just don't know what beauty or what glory I'll see."
The song playfully suggests that the devil is the one providing these excuses, highlighting the idea that avoiding church can be a spiritual struggle.
-------------------------------------------------------------------"Phone Call From God" by Jerry Jordan is a humorous song that depicts a comical phone conversation between the narrator and God.
Here's a breakdown of the key elements:
- Unexpected Call: The song begins with the narrator receiving an unexpected phone call. He's initially confused and disbelieving that it's actually God on the other end of the line.
- God's Concerns: God calls to express concerns about the narrator's behavior, particularly his attendance at church and his tithing habits.
- The Narrator's Justifications: The narrator attempts to explain and justify his actions, offering various excuses for not attending church regularly and for not tithing as much as he should. He mentions things like being busy, having other commitments, and even a humorous incident involving his thumb getting caught in a door.
- God's Gentle Guidance: Despite the narrator's excuses, God remains patient and understanding. He gently reminds the narrator of his responsibilities as a believer and encourages him to improve his spiritual life.
- The Narrator's Resolution: The phone call ultimately prompts the narrator to re-evaluate his priorities and make a commitment to improve his relationship with God. He promises to attend church more regularly, tithe more faithfully, and stop gossiping about his neighbors.
Key Themes:
- Humorous Take on Religion: The song uses humor to explore themes of faith, responsibility, and the relationship between humans and God.
- Self-Reflection: The phone call serves as a catalyst for the narrator to reflect on his own shortcomings and make positive changes in his life.
- Importance of Faith: While presented humorously, the song ultimately emphasizes the importance of faith and a strong relationship with God.
No comments:
Post a Comment