"O L-RD, Who are my power and my strength and my refuge in the day of trouble, to You nations will come from the ends of the earth and say, 'Only lies have our fathers handed down to us, emptiness in which there is nothing of any avail! Can a man make gods for himself, and they are no gods? 'Therefore, behold I let them know; at this time I will let them know My power and My might, and they shall know that My Name is the L-RD".
Jeremiah 16:19-21

by John Pringle

The New Testament proclamations that Jesus was God’s perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world and that Jesus fulfilled the law in this regard are simply blatant misrepresentations of the Old Testament teachings.

One of the key assertions of the New Testament (NT) writers was the concept of “original” sin. This doctrine claims that sin is hereditary and is passed to all humans through Adam.While the Old Testament (OT) indicates man has an inclination to sin, it is does not originate from one person (Adam). The NT verses which establish this doctrine leave no room for anyone to escape this hereditary sin from Adam.

Rom 5:12,17-19
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

This claim that all the offspring of one man (Adam) inherited “original” sin which contaminates all humanity is contradicted by the OT teachings which state that each will die for his own sin and that through repentance each will redeem himself.

Ezek 18:20-22,30
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.

Original sin is a NT invention which is used to set the stage for the need of a special savior, the man/god Jesus. This concept of original sin, taught by the NT, launches the mission of Jesus who is claimed to be the “sin” offering that pays the debt or atones for the sins of all humanity.

The NT writers portray Jesus as claiming he came to earth to fulfill the law (Matt 5:17). The NT goes further by claiming that only bloodshed can atone for sin. It claims that without the shedding of blood, there can be no forgiveness of sin.

Heb 9:22
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

This verse is an utterly false statement. In the OT there are different types of sins that require different types of sacrifices or atonement. Forgiveness does not always require bloodshed. Offerings of fine flour (Lev 5:11 ), money (Ex 30:15-16), jewelry (Num 31:50) and prayer ( Hos 14:1-4) can also atone for sin. In order for Jesus to meet the requirements and to fulfill the law for being a “perfect” atonement sacrifice for unintentional sin (which hereditary sin is), there are several conditions required for a proper unintentional sin offering which must be met:

1) The offering must be a “clean” animal, an animal approved by God for such a sacrifice (Lev 4). Humans are not on the list of animals which can be offered as sacrifice. Jesus was not qualified and failed to meet this requirement of the law.

2) The animal must be unblemished (Lev 22:22). Jesus was whipped, beaten, and circumcised. Circumcision was considered mutilation of the flesh according to the NT (Philip 3:2 and Gal 5:11-12). Jesus failed to meet this requirement of the law.

3) The offering must be made at the alter and the sacrifice would die of blood loss. The blood was then poured out at the alter and the sacrifice was burnt upon the alter. Jesus did not qualify and thus failed to meet these requirements of the law as he did not die of blood loss and did not die at the Temple and alter but on a hill.

4) Most importantly, the offering must be made/presided over by a Levitical priest. The full service priesthood was the exclusive domain of the Levites(Exo 29:9)(Exo 40:13-15).
No Levitical priest offered or ritualized Jesus as a sacrifice for sin. Jesus failed to meet this requirement of the law. (The NT writers attempted to get around this problem which will be discussed later in this essay.)

Jesus in no way fulfilled the requirements of the Mosaic law and his sacrifice does not qualify as a valid sin offering to God.
The NT twists the OT teaching of God by ignoring his law. Then the NT twists the OT teachings further by claiming Jesus was the Passover lamb sacrifice. The Gospel of John portrays Jesus as the Passover lamb and Paul states he was the Passover lamb.

1 Cor 5:7
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

John 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

But this claim is also a direct contradiction of the OT teachings. The Passover lamb was NOT a sin or even an atonement sacrifice. The blood which was shed by the lambs was used to “paint” the door frames of houses to identify people of Israel so that the firstborn males of the Israelites would be spared from the plague of death which God would deliver to the land of Egypt ( Exo 12).

The Passover lamb was also not a community sacrifice as each household was to sacrifice it’s own year old lamb. The lambs were also to be roasted and eaten. Jesus certainly did not fulfill this requirement of God’s law and as the Passover lamb was in actuality many lambs which were NOT atonement sacrifices, the claim that Jesus was the Passover lamb who took away the sins of the world is completely bogus and a sham.

The closest OT representation of what Jesus was supposed to accomplish can be found in Lev 16 where all the sins of all the people are atoned for by the use of a scapegoat. This is called The Day of Atonement. The instructions given in Lev 16 speak for themselves:
Lev 16:20-22
And when he(Aaron) hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat:
And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in 
all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:
And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.

The Lev 16:30-34 instructions conclude with:
For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the LORD.
It shall be a sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls, by a statute for ever.
And the priest, whom he shall anoint, and whom he shall consecrate to minister in the priest’s office in his father’s stead, shall make the atonement, and shall put on the linen clothes, even the holy garments:
And he shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the altar, and he shall make an atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.
And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins once a year. And he did as the LORD commanded Moses.

This Day of Atonement pays for the sins of all the community, is to be performed by Levitical priests, is to be done each year, and the scapegoat is not killed but released in the desert. Although this sacrifice most closely fits the description of the type of atonement Jesus was supposed to have accomplished for the sins of mankind, Jesus failed to meet these requirements as he was not a goat, was not released alive in the desert, and was not ritualized by a Levitical priest. In summary, Jesus failed in all respects to fulfill the law as proper sacrifice for the sins of anyone.

This analysis would be incomplete without taking a look at how the NT writers attempted to “fix” the problem of Jesus not being a Levitical priest as required by law to offer a sacrifice. As will be demonstrated, the NT writers claimed Jesus was from the tribe of Judah and was not a descendant of Aaron and consequently not a Levite.
The full service priesthood was solely the property of the Levites as stipulated in (Ex 29:9, Num 25:13, and Jer 33:18).
The NT writers, in order to get around this problem, performed some dishonest deconstruction of the OT teachings to accomplish their mission of turning Jesus into a priest so he could sacrifice himself.

The book of Hebrews is filled with these antics which deconstruct the Old Testament. Here is how it was done:

Heb 7:11
If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,)

First, the author of Hebrews attempts to discredit the Levitical priesthood. The first part of Heb 7:11 makes a false and misleading statement. The initial laws, including the commonly referred to Ten Commandments, were given to the people before the Levitical priesthood was established (Ex 20). The Levitical priesthood was actually established (Ex 40) after the Israelites had worshipped the golden calf and the Levites redeemed themselves by putting down the rebellion by killing their fellow Israelites (Ex 32). The people already had the law and did not receive it under the Levitical priesthood.

The author of Hebrews then introduces a “need” for a new priesthood in the continuation of Heb 7:11:

Heb 7:11 (cont).
what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

The false statements continue:

Heb 7:12
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

This is another false statement. The law doesn’t have to change because the priesthood changes. The commonly referred to Ten Commandments were the same under the people’s priesthood as they were under the Levitical priesthood. You’d think that if the Melchizedek priesthood actually superseded the Aaronic priesthood, Moses would have mentioned it.
There is no priesthood which ever superseded the Levitical priesthood as the author of Hebrews claims.
No such thing was ever done in the Old Testament.

The following verses continue the deconstruction of the OT teachings:

Heb 7:14-16
For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.
And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedek there ariseth another priest,
Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.

As noted earlier, here the NT writer admits Jesus is not a Levite but declares that Jesus is a “special” priest “like” Melchizedek and a bona fide full service priest based on his “indestructible life” and not on his ancestry. This is probably one of the most blatant examples of dishonest doctrine creation that the NT writers performed. God stated long after the era of the people’s priesthood that only Levites (Ex 29:9) would be full service priests.

Heb 7:17
For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek.

(This verse refers to Psa 110:4)

Melchizedek was a king in Genesis (Gen 14:18) who performed some priestly functions. He performed these functions long before the full service Levitical priesthood was established by God. After the golden calf incident, the Aaronic (Levitical) priesthood superseded all other forms and was never replaced by anything as it was promised to the Levites as a lasting covenant. (Ex 29:9, Num 25:13 and Jer 33:18).
In Heb 7:17 the author of Hebrews has attempted to make Ps 110:4 about Jesus when it is about David.

Ps 110:4
The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Heb 7:17 refers to Ps 110:4 which is about David, not Jesus. David was a priest like Melchizedek in that he performed some but not all priestly functions (2 Sam 6:17). While burnt and peace offerings existed prior to the Levitical priesthood, the full services of the Levitical priesthood did not. Instructions for sin offerings don’t appear as a ritual until Ex 29. Until the tabernacle was built, there was no full service priesthood.

The new doctrine of deception is further advanced in the following:

Heb 7:18-19
For there is a setting aside of the commandment [that only Levites could be full service priests] going before for its weakness and unprofitableness, (for the law perfected nothing,) and the introduction of a better hope by which we draw nigh to God.

God never set aside his following regulation that only Levites could be full service priests:

Ex 29:8-9
And thou shalt bring his sons, and put coats upon them.
And thou shalt gird them with girdles, Aaron and his sons, and put the bonnets on them: and the priest’s office shall be theirs for a perpetual statute: and thou shalt consecrate Aaron and his sons.

The Levites, by acting as God’s enforcers to quell the rebellion which occurred when the people worshipped the golden calf, ensured themselves of God’s promise that they, and only they, would be full service priests:

Ex 32:28-29
And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.
For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves today to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day.

The regulation regarding the priesthood, which the author of Hebrews declares is “weak and useless” is in fact God’s Law, and God’s law is not “weak and useless” but perfect and eternal as the following verses clearly show:

Ps 19:7
The law of the LORD is 
perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
Ps 119:160
Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments(laws) endureth 
for ever.*

*Also translated as eternal in Psa 119:160.

The author of Hebrews has invented a new doctrine, and in effect declares God’s prior law concerning the priesthood NULL and VOID. However, there is no “new” priesthood which replaced the Levitical priesthood.
This is a fabrication which twists a verse about David into one about Jesus and then claims it is also a new priesthood which replaced the “faulty” Levitical priesthood. No such replacement ever occurred since the Levitical priesthood superseded all other forms and was promised to them as an everlasting covenant.
Once the author of Hebrews has turned Jesus into a new priesthood of one member, the former requirement that only Levitical priests could make such offerings is bypassed.

The end result of all the scripture twisting and deconstruction of the OT teachings is finally manifested:

Heb 7:27
…for this he(Jesus) did once, when he offered up himself(as a sin sacrifice).

Problem solved! Jesus, who could not be a Levitical priest can now make a sin offering. A new priesthood is invented by claiming that Jesus is the subject of Ps 110:4 instead of David and that God’s promise which proclaimed that only Levites could be priests and make sin offerings was overturned.

The New Testament writers created a new priesthood for Jesus, ignored virtually all the requirements of a proper sin offering sacrifice, claimed Jesus was a singular Passover lamb which ignores the non-atonement nature of the Passover lambs (plural) sacrifice, ignored the promise by God that sin was not imputed by heredity from father to son, ignored the fact that Ps 110:4 is about David, and foisted a counterfeit sacrifice and priest upon the world and called him the Savior which all men MUST believe in to avoid the everlasting flames of hell.

Jews who follow God’s instructions by obeying his laws and repenting when they sin are consigned to the flames of hell because they do not believe that Jesus was everything that the NT writers claimed he was. The fate of Jews who faithfully honor and hold to the teachings of the OT is sealed by the NT writers.

John 3:18
He that believeth on him(Jesus) is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

The innocent (those who follow the law and repent according to the OT instructions) are condemned by the doctrine of “original” sin and their failure to believe Jesus is the Savior. The guilty (those who disregard God’s laws and instructions and instead worship a man/god) are acquitted by the “perfect” sacrifice of Jesus for the sins of all men.
Christians would do well to take to heart the OT teachings they so often ignore: He that justifieth(acquits) the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the LORD. (Prov 17:15)

Since the New Testament writers could not fool the Jews into believing these concocted claims, they turned their evangelizing efforts to the Greeks and other non-Jews who had no detailed knowledge of God’s laws as defined by the Old Testament. Non-Jews had little or no interest in looking up God’s laws in the Jewish scriptures to see if they matched the claims of the Christian writers.

The final irony is that over the centuries millions have swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker without ever looking at what the Old Testament actually says. Christian believers don’t even submit these New Testament claims, which they declare as God’s word to the world, to even basic scrutiny.
Candy coated salvation, concocted priesthoods, and improper sacrifices may please the senses but they do not stand up to the requirements as set down in the Old Testament.

Also in an ironic sense, the following Old Testament scripture seems prophetic when applied to Christians who have rejected God’s word and have accepted the New Testament counterfeit sacrifice and priest:

Isa 29:13
Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Want to share or print this? Choose how below:
  • Print
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us

{ 2 comments… read them below or add your own }

Larry B. August 26, 2012 at 4:34 pm

Is Melchizedek Noah’s son?  

  Quote this in your comment


Dave & Yvonne October 5, 2012 at 6:51 am

Larry – I believe he was Shem’s son, Noah had 3 sons that are mentioned and Melchizedek was not one of them!!

  Quote this in your comment


Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: