Paul's Post Crucifixion Temple Sacrifices
Paul & New Covenant Sacrifices - Home
Introduction
Sponsorship of Four Nazirite Vows
Nazirite Vows Involved Sacrifices
Ritually Purified In The Temple
Paul's Nazirite Vow Acts 18:18
How Do Theologians Explain This?
Deceiver or "All Things To All Men"?
Paul Kept The Written Torah
The Law Is Spiritual Not Physical
Sacrifices After The Crucifixion
Animal Blood Never Paid For Sin
Why Didn't God Shut The Temple ?
No Sacrifices But No Controversy ?
Sacrifices In the Future
Immersion: Rivers of Living Water
Why No Sacrifices Today?
Conclusion
Partner Sites
      Judianity
      Galatians, Paul & Legalism
      Gentiles & Circumcision Acts 15
      The Tithe Debate

Post Crucifixion Temple Sacrifices - Introduction

"Paul's Post Crucifixion Temple Sacrifices" - Background & Contents

Neither Christianity Nor Judaism Seems To Have All The Answers

Undeniably Christianity has "Jewish" foundations, but it's almost as if it was embarrassed about it. Many Christian theologians believe that Paul's epistle to the Galatians shows that the New Covenant and specifically Christ's sacrifice has "done away" with the religion of the Old Testament & the written Torah, because the law is now only spiritual and no longer physical.

To Jews the idea that the written Torah-law has been replaced ("replacement theology") is unthinkable. They argue that the Old Testament clearly shows:

Malechi 3:6 "For I am the LORD, I do not change... NKJV

Interestingly though, the New Testament says something very similar...

Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. NKJV

Even the last thing written in the Old (some would say redundant) Testament is:

Malechi 4:4 "Remember the Law of Moses, My servant, Which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, With the statutes and judgments. NKJV

Does it really makes sense to suggest that God changed His mind only four verses later?

We would suggest not, particularly given that only five chapters later Jesus said:

Matthew 5:17-19 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfil. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. NKJV

If the written Torah-law really was going to be "done away", why did Christ so curse anyone who teaches others to break the commandments in the written Torah-law? Are we to believe that the apostle Paul, put himself under this curse? Interestingly even the apostle Paul said he believed everything written in the Torah and the prophets.

Why don't Christians believe as the Jews do that the written Torah-law is a great blessing? Although the Bible sometimes refers to the first five books as "the law of Moses", the written Torah-law is (and we would argue remains) The Law of God. The ten commandments and the statutes and judgments recorded in Exodus were just given to Israel through Moses by God.

Something similar can be said of Judaism. Arguably for two millennia it has to some extent been in state of denial about Christianity.

Isaiah 53:4-6 Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. NKJV

In the same way that Christianity cannot convincingly explain away the written Torah-law, Judaism cannot convincingly explain away Isaiah 53. The sacrifice of humanity's Creator, (John 1:1-14, Colossians 1:12-17) the Lamb of God (John 1:29) can.

Arguably There's Enormous Consistency Between Both Parts of The Bible

We are of the view that, there is enormous consistency between the religions of the so called Old & New Testaments; and that arguably as long as they try to ignore each other's beliefs, neither traditional "Judaism" nor traditional "Christianity" will have all the answers.

Why No Real New Testament Controversy If The Written Torah-law Was "Done Away"?

The greatest controversy for the New Testament church was when the written Torah command to circumcise Gentile proselytes prior to their observance of Passover in Exodus 12:48 was countermanded by Cornelius' baptism without circumcision in Acts 10. This (some would say) comparatively minor doctrinal shift undoubtedly created massive controversy for the first century Church and led to the writing of Galatians, large parts of Romans and the Jerusalem council of Acts 15:.

Yet if this one small change to the written Torah (which Acts 10 shows was clearly led by God Himself) created such enormous controversy, why is there nothing like the same degree of contention and debate about the so called "doing away" with other parts of the written Torah-law?

Is it reasonable to expect that for example, the levitical sacrifices, Nazirite vows, Holy Days, Saturday Sabbaths, etc. were "done away" and the same New Testament church that was nearly torn apart by the gentile non-circumcision controversy simply said: "No problemo" ?

Did the "eat the meat in the sheet" vision really mean that Peter could go downstairs and make himself a ham sandwich without it having created any significant recorded controversy in the largely Jewish New Testament / New Covenant Church ?

Were God's commanded Holy Days in Leviticus 23 "done away" by the briefest of comments in Galatians 4:10 even though Paul stated categorically that he believed everything written in the law and the prophets?

How can it be possible for the Saturday Sabbath commandment to be "done away", but for the others to remain valid? Was it an oversight on God's part to include commandment number four in the first place?

This website is one of three exploring this theme. Here we look at some arguments which suggest that until the temple was destroyed in AD70, first century Christians legitimately continued to offer animal sacrifices under the levitical system and that animal sacrifices will be reinstated at the return of Christ.

The other two websites in this series are:

Like The Bereans, Don't Believe This Website, Believe the Bible

Because these questions are such important subjects, as a matter of principle, please question everything that we're going to cover. In fact don't believe us (or anyone else for that matter) believe the Bible. Decide for yourself, how our arguments stack up or fail to stack up, like the Bereans did:

Acts 17:10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. NKJV

Return to the Home Page
© www.pauls-post-crucifixion-temple-sacrifices.info March 2006.

So does Galatians really mean the Mosaic law (the written Torah) is " done away" especially if, in the predominantly Jewish New Testament church, no fuss was recorded about it, yet in Acts only one small and predictable change about the circumcision of gentile proselytes caused massive turmoil.