Without the Shedding of Blood there can be no Remission of Sin

My daily Bible reading today included 2 Samuel 21. The topic of the chapter is "The Gibeonites Avenged". Recall from the book of Joshua how the Gibeonites tricked the Israelites into making a treaty with them to avoid annihilation at the hands of the Army of the Living God. As a result of the treaty, the Israelites had sworn to spare the Gibeonites. Well King Saul, "in his zeal for Israel and Judah", broke the treaty and tried to wipe them out. Apparently, during the reign of David, this action resulted in three straight years of famine. This was established when David consulted the Lord as to the cause of the famine and "The LORD said, “It is on account of Saul and his blood-stained house; it is because he put the Gibeonites to death.”" (2 Samuel 21:1b)

Now, the remedy for this famine brought on by the attack on the Gibeonites is what inspired me to start this thread. David approaches the Gibeonites and asks them what they require to redress their grievance. They are not interested in silver or gold, they want blood. Specifically, they want the blood of Saul's line. Funny how this also works to remove David's chief remaining rival for claim to the throne.

The Gibeonites answered him, “We have no right to demand silver or gold from Saul or his family, nor do we have the right to put anyone in Israel to death.”

“What do you want me to do for you?” David asked.

They answered the king, “As for the man who destroyed us and plotted against us so that we have been decimated and have no place anywhere in Israel, let seven of his male descendants be given to us to be killed and their bodies exposed before the LORD at Gibeah of Saul—the LORD’s chosen one.”

So the king said, “I will give them to you.”

2 Samuel 21:4-6

Now the timing of this offering is the second thing that caught my eye and influenced me to bring this here.

He handed them over to the Gibeonites, who killed them and exposed their bodies on a hill before the LORD. All seven of them fell together; they were put to death during the first days of the harvest, just as the barley harvest was beginning.

Verse 9

That would make it what, the first couple weeks of September? The beginning of the Harvest. An offering to the Lord at the beginning of the Harvest to end a famine.

Now I have been told from the pulpit at the Baptist church I attend that there is no remission of sin without the shedding of blood. As a Christian, I believe the innocent blood of Christ fulfilled that requirement once for all, the just for the unjust.

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

1 John 1:9

But are there others out there in positions of power who don't accept the New Covenant in Christ's blood? Do they orchestrate events at specific times to satisfy a blood lust that periodically renews its demand to be sated? I have heard stories of 9/11 and 7/7 being just such events. Could this be true? Is this the Synagogue of Satan Christ spoke of in Revelation 2:9b-10a?

I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer.

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
Now I have been told from the pulpit at the Baptist church I attend that there is no remission of sin without the shedding of blood. As a Christian, I believe the innocent blood of Christ fulfilled that requirement once for all, the just for the unjust.

Why though? How does that work?

God doesn't like some things we do, calls them sins, and dislikes them so much he wants to kill us all. But, you can make it up to him if you satisfy his bloodlust.

What I want to know is how can people take texts that were translated, re-translated, and altered and run with them???

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


I can only suggest that you read the Book of Romans and the Book of Hebrews with an open mind. I am not inclined to go into Apologetics and eschatology with you and try to condense seven years of study into a paragraph here for you to pick apart.

reply to post by impaired


What I want to know is why you are commenting on this thread at all? Have you ever read the Bible? Or have you just taken what you have been told by other people and run with it?

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
“What do you want me to do for you?” David asked.

They answered the king, “As for the man who destroyed us and plotted against us so that we have been decimated and have no place anywhere in Israel, let seven of his male descendants be given to us to be killed and their bodies exposed before the LORD at Gibeah of Saul—the LORD’s chosen one.”

So the king said, “I will give them to you.”

Others taking the punishment for their fathers sins? An offering of blood to the Lord? ..

What happened to the commandment that says "Thou shall not kill"? Pardon me, I'm not trying to flame or even debate. Just trying to understand the lessons when they all seem to conflict. Doesn't smell "righteous" to me..

But are there others out there in positions of power who don't accept the New Covenant in Christ's blood? Do they orchestrate events at specific times to satisfy a blood lust that periodically renews its demand to be sated? I have heard stories of 9/11 and 7/7 being just such events. Could this be true? Is this the Synagogue of Satan Christ spoke of in Revelation 2:9b-10a?

I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer.

There may very well be people in positions of power who orchestrate such events. Whether they believe it to be some sort of blood-sacrifice, who knows?

Many don't make the distinction between the blood of Christ and the red stuff that spills from our veins. Demanding the lives of the progeny of a sinner may be seen as purging oneself of those things in our past which have led us to sin. Shedding the blood of an unclean spiritual body before the Lord so as to bring new life within oneself.

reply to post by Inquisitive1


If you read Deuteronomy, it gives very specific instructions about the justified taking of life. That is the Old Testament, the Covenant of Moses, the Mosaic Law. Not condoning what David did, I live on this side of the Cross.

reply to post by kalunom


I appreciate your thoughtful response. That would not be the Lord I serve. For me, blood sacrifices ended at the Cross. I am thankful to live under grace.

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
I am not inclined to go into Apologetics and eschatology with you and try to condense seven years of study into a paragraph here for you to pick apart.

Is that what it takes to answer two simple questions?

You made a claim in your OP. I have questions about it. Can you help me understand, please?

How does killing a living organism and spilling its blood absolve someone of their sins?
Why do you believe that it does?

reply to post by Icarus Rising
Maybe Jack-O-Lanterns were a substitute for the sculls of the ritually sacrificed.
Christianity would have ended such things but the tradition went on in symbols.
11 seems to be a symbol, today.
The old dollar sign is a snake on an eleven.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
How does killing a living organism and spilling its blood absolve someone of their sins?
Why do you believe that it does?

It takes away power from the one who accuses.
If his power could be completely eliminated, there would be no accusations to condemn the ones brought to judgment.
How that power is attacked is by pulling out the foundational argument of the accuser, that these people being disobedient, must suffer death, as was warned of in the Garden.
The accuser is that same one who had enticed those people.
He had his sentence read to him on that day by the angel of the garden.
His tactic is to prevent his own death by pointing out the injustice of his being dead permanently (crushed head), while the people suffer only temporarily (bruised heal).
Jesus being not disobedient but among the people, accepting his fate without complaint, points out the fallacy of the argument of the one against us.

Originally posted by impaired
What I want to know is how can people take texts that were translated, re-translated, and altered and run with them???

Because they believe God has preserved his message to the masses throughout history despite mans attempt to pervert it.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


Your questions are anything but simple. I believe thay can only be answered by Scripture.

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

Romans 5:12

Adam brought sin into the world through his disobedience in the Garden.

But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

Romans 5:15-17

Christ laid down his life willingly for us in order to free us from the sin of Adam. He was redeemed by the Father for this selfless act. The firstborn from the grave to eternal life, showing us all The Way. Praise God!

Ever see Constantine? Why doesn't the devil get to take Keanu Reeves to hell? Look into the concept of kinsmen redeemer.

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
How does killing a living organism and spilling its blood absolve someone of their sins?
Why do you believe that it does?

It takes away power from the one who accuses.
If his power could be completely eliminated, there would be no accusations to condemn the ones brought to judgment.
How that power is attacked is by pulling out the foundational argument of the accuser, that these people being disobedient, must suffer death, as was warned of in the Garden.
The accuser is that same one who had enticed those people.
He had his sentence read to him on that day by the angel of the garden.
His tactic is to prevent his own death by pointing out the injustice of his being dead permanently (crushed head), while the people suffer only temporarily (bruised heal).
Jesus being not disobedient but among the people, accepting his fate without complaint, points out the fallacy of the argument of the one against us.

edit on 8-7-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

How does spilling blood "take away power from the one who accuses"? Who or what is that? And why is there a third party involved with your sins and the expected blood payment for them?

The biblical god claims that the odor of blood is pleasing to him. Why does he require death and blood as payment? Why should we honor such an immoral request?

I won't quote Bible verses.

This I will tell you. Yahusha (jesus to most all believers) said that El Shaddi (God almighty) has made a New Covenant with any who would believe that Yahusha was sent from Him and claim Him as Adon of Adon's (Lord).
We are not judged by Law, but by Faith and receive righteousness through Grace.
The Testament of Old informs us of how Yah dealt with His Chosen then in that Covenant.
He Yahusha didn't come and destroy the Torah but expanded it to a thought process behind the Torah.
In those times they the Promised people of Yah had to have a blood Sacrifice for remission of sin's once a year and keep the Torah.
In this the age of Yahusha and the New Covenant He became the living Sacrifice once and for all. No more blood to be shed. He came to fulfill the Torah by giving us a better understanding of it, not to rid the Torah from Yah's chosen.
Who are those chosen?
They are the one's who believe on Him and keep the Torah.
We are not to War.
We are not to even think of another in want.
We are to provide assistance to those in need if we are so blessed to do so.
We are to obey what our Adon has commanded of us and not man.
We are to throw off Evil which is everything that goes against Yah and His Will for His People.
We are to keep His Sabbath Holy.
So, who amongst Christianity keep the Seventh Day Holy?
Only a Few.
And if you believe Him to be the Adon and El Shaddi as the Law giver then there are not many in the World of Christianity keeping that Law of Sabbath for they Worship Yah on the 1st day of the week which is the Worship of the LORD English but means (BAAL) in Hebrew. Whom we are not to Honor. But we do for Baal demands a Blood Sacrifice and these who call themselves believers are all to ready to send boys and girls to slaughter in Wars of Aggression. Stating that we go to War for Freedom of others when in actuallity it is for teh Blood Sacrifice from the true God they worship Baal.
Why would a Nation demand from God the blessings and not want them for any other of Yah's creation? (Nations)
How can American so called Christians claim Yahusha as their own when He belongs to all?
Do you feel as I, that Yah is now sick and tired of man and His Evil ways and that He now is using what was once a total blessing for Man (Earth) as the Weapon of destruction?
Earth and the Universe are now our Enemy and in this we will all be losers.
To late for repentance, for all true faith has been diluted to falsehoods and as falsehoods they produce nothing of truth.
So don't think the Old Testament as a way of being, but a way shown to destruction.
We have a New Covenant Folk's.

Rev. Ray from the "Church of What's Happening Now"

p.s. What's happening Now? The calm before the True Storm. Just a slight taste of things to come.

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
Christ laid down his life willingly for us in order to free us from the sin of Adam. He was redeemed by the Father for this selfless act. The firstborn from the grave to eternal life, showing us all The Way. Praise God!

Thanks. But I'm not sure my question was answered.
How does spilling blood absolve sins?
How does accepting the human sacrifice (if we can call it a sacrifice) of Jesus free me from paying the penalty of Adam's sin?
What's the mechanism involved here?

reply to post by Icarus Rising

Deuteronomy 5:17 Thou shalt not kill.

Got that bit..

Deuteronomy 5:21 Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.

I get that, too..

Deuteronomy 7:1- 7:2 : When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girga#es, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them

I'm afraid I don't understand...
In my eyes the contradictions simply seem to continue.. I'll leave it alone now, though. Carry on.

reply to post by RevRay

Who are those chosen?
They are the one's who believe on Him and keep the Torah.

Can't agree with that last part. That's what the Judiazers would have you believe, that you have to add to the work of Christ on the Cross. His work is finished. Nothing else is required. It is impossible to keep the Law. That was the purpose of the Law, to show that heaven can not be achieved through the works of man. Christ is our Sabbath. Him and Him alone.

And you, who were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, having canceled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands; this he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in it [not him; it, the cross].

Therefore, let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath. These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. (Colossians 2:13-17)

That should make it clear. This is why the claims of the Seventh Day Adventists, the Seventh Day Baptists, and other groups, that Christians changed the sabbath, are absurd, ridiculous. They claim that the Pope changed the sabbath by a papal edict from Saturday to Sunday, and that around the third or fourth century Christians began to celebrate Sunday rather than Saturday, out of obedience to this papal edict. But nothing could be further from the truth. History does not corroborate that in any degree. The Sabbath has always been Saturday and it always will be. It is the seventh day of the week. Sunday has always been the first day of the week. It has never been a sabbath, and it is pure legalism to call it a sabbath or to treat it as one. It is not a day of rest or restricted activity and it is not designed as such. It is the first day of the week; to Christians, the Lord's day.

The shadow-sabbath ended at the cross, as Paul has made clear. The next day was the day of resurrection, the day when the Lord Jesus came from the tomb. On that day a new day began -- the Lord's day. Christians immediately began to observe the Lord's day on the first day of the week. They ceased observing the Sabbath because it was ended by the fulfillment of its reality in the cross, and they began to observe the first day of the week. This is what you find reflected in the book of Acts. Justin Martyr, who writes from the 2nd century, says,

But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, when he changed the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ, our Savior, on the same day, rose from the dead.

source