Atonement for Sin in the Hebrew Bible
Were sacrifices only for unintentional sins in the Tanakh (or Old Testament)?
Rabbinic Jews and Christians agree the sacrificial system of the Tanakh (for Christians, the Old Testament) is currently obsolete. However, they differ on what replaced it.
Did blood sacrifice atone for unintentional sins only? Are prayer and repentance sufficient for God’s forgiveness? Or does atonement require the death of another in my place?
Rabbi Tovia Singer, as ever, is an interesting conversation partner. His article challenging the Christian view of atonement is a useful framework for our discussion.
Is sacrifice necessary for atonement?
A good place to start is Leviticus 17:10-11
For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I have therefore given it to you [to be placed] upon the altar, to atone for your souls. For it is the blood that atones for the soul. (translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
This verse states that atonement requires blood sacrifice. Rashi, the most authoritative commentator in Jewish tradition, interpreted this verse much like Christians do:
For the soul of the flesh: of every creature is dependent upon the blood, and therefore, I have given it to atone for the soul of man. [In this way,] one “soul” [namely, the blood of a sacrifice] shall come and atone for another soul.(translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
The destruction of the second temple in 70 CE created a dilemma for Rabbinic Judaism. If the Tanakh taught blood sacrifice was necessary for atonement, how will God forgive his people after the temple was destroyed?
Sacrifice only for unintentional sins?
Rabbi Singer summarises the Rabbinic Jewish position:
Contrary to the missionary claim that blood-sacrifice is the only method of atonement in the Bible, there are three methods of atonement clearly defined in the Jewish Scriptures: The sin sacrifice, repentance and charity (Rabbi Tovia Singer, Outreach Judaism responds to Jews for Jesus).
He rightly points out that the sin offering (Leviticus 4:1–35) was only for unintentional sins. However, Rabbi Singer does not mention the guilt offering (the asham) which atoned for intentional sins (Leviticus 5:19–26; Christian Bibles have slightly different numbering: Leviticus 6:1–7). Intentional and unintentional transgressions are also forgiven on Yom Kippur:
And he shall finish effecting atonement for the Holy, the Tent of Meeting, and the altar, and then he shall bring the live he goat.
And Aaron shall lean both of his hands [forcefully] upon the live he goat’s head and confess upon it all the willful transgressions of the children of Israel, all their rebellions, and all their unintentional sins, and he shall place them on the he goat’s head, and send it off to the desert with a timely man.
The he goat shall thus carry upon itself all their sins to a precipitous land, and he shall send off the he goat into the desert. (Leviticus 16:20–22, translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
The asham and Yom Kippur both include the need for repentance. But they also require the blood of sacrifice.
Does God prefer repentance and charity to sacrifice?
Rabbi Singer’s next argument is that God replaced sacrifice with repentance and charity:
Throughout the Jewish Scriptures, the prophets declared that repentance and charity are more pleasing to God for atonement than a blood sacrifice. They repeatedly warned the Jewish people not to rely on blood offerings. Other methods of atonement were more efficacious and would even replace animal sacrifices.
He quotes Psalm 51:16–19 to argue that other methods of atonement were more efficacious than sacrifice:
Save me from blood, O God, the God of my salvation; let my tongue sing praises of Your charity. O Lord, You shall open my lips, and my mouth will recite Your praise. For You do not wish a sacrifice, or I should give it; You do not desire a burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; O God, You will not despise a broken and crushed heart. (translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
David spoke poetically about the emptiness of religious ritual without true repentance. If we read the next two verses of Psalm 51, it’s clear he did not consider sacrifices unnecessary:
With Your will, do good to Zion; build the walls of Jerusalem. Then You will desire sacrifices of righteousness, a burnt offering and a whole offering; then they will offer up bulls on Your altar (Psalm 51:20–21, translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg).
Animal offerings replaced by prayer?
Rabbi Singer claims the prophet Hosea taught prayer would replace animal sacrifice. He bases this argument on Hosea 14:2–3. He claims that prayers are equivalent to the offering of bulls:
Return, O Israel, to the Lord your God, for you have stumbled in your iniquity. Take words with yourselves and return to the Lord. Say, “You shall forgive all iniquity and teach us [the] good [way], and let us render [for] bulls [the offering of] our lips. (translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
There’s a few reasons Hosea 14:3 is not announcing the replacement of animal sacrifice for prayer. But the main one is that we need to read Hosea in historical context — as a prophet to the Northern Kingdom before the exile.
When the North split from Judah, King Jeroboam set up shrines, festivals and a priesthood in competition with the true temple in Judah (1 Kings 12:25–33). When we get to Hosea’s time, and the reign of Jeroboam II, 2 Kings 14:24 says “And he did what was evil in the eyes of the Lord; he did not turn away from all the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat that he had caused Israel to sin.”
Hosea is calling for repentance from idolatry — not an end to the temple sacrificial system. If this was the Lord’s aim, why not command Judah to replace sacrifice with prayer? At the time of Hosea, the temple was still offering the blood of bulls and other animals (e.g. Leviticus 16:1–35; 17:11).
Ezekiel condemns vicarious atonement?
Rabbi Singer’s next argument claims Ezekiel 18 ruled out that Jesus could atone for our sins:
Throughout his famed 18th chapter, Ezekiel warned his people that this erroneous teaching, i.e. that a righteous man could die for another man’s sins was contrary to the will of God. The way for the sinful man to come right by God is to turn away from his rebellious ways and repent. Only the sacred path of the penitent is assured complete forgiveness.
Of course, Rabbi Singer is correct that repentance is necessary for forgiveness:
For I do not desire the death of him who dies, says the Lord God: so turn away and live!” (Ezekiel 18:32, translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
Does Ezekiel deny the possibility of sacrificial atonement? Of course not. Context, as always, is vital. Ezekiel is responding to a proverb popular among the exiles in Babylon:
“What do you mean that you use this parable over the land of Israel, saying, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? As truly as I live, says the Lord God, you shall no longer use this parable in Israel. Behold, all souls are Mine. Like the soul of the father, like the soul of the son they are Mine; the soul that sins, it shall die. (Ezekiel 18:2–4, translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
The exiles in Babylon complained they were suffering for the sins of earlier generations. There is some truth to this proverb but what was Ezekiel condemning?
First, he was responding to the people’s fatalistic assumption that no one could fix their situation. Second, he was denouncing blame shifters. Old Testament scholar Chris Wright paraphrases:
“Yes, you are suffering the final consequences of many generations of sin; but, no, you are not being wrongly punished as innocent victims of somebody else’s guilt, because far from being innocent, you yourselves are just as guilty of the same sins as your forbears.” (Christ Wright, The Message of Ezekiel)
Sacrificial system restored in Messianic age?
The last argument, from Rabbi Singer, is that Ezekiel prophesied that the Messiah would restore the sacrificial system. Therefore Jesus’ sacrifice was not the final atonement for sin. He bases this argument on a verse from Ezekiel:
And the prince shall make on that day for himself and for all the people of Israel a bull for a sin-offering.(Ezekiel 45:22, translated by Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)
Before examining this verse in more detail it’s worth pointing to the inconsistency of Rabbi Singer’s argument. Earlier, he suggested:
- sacrifice is the weakest form of atonement
- sacrifice has been replaced with prayer and repentance
Why then will God reinstate the sacrificial system? Wouldn’t that be a regressive step according to Rabbi Singer?
Rabbi Singer and Dispensationalism
Now there are two main Christian responses to this. Rev Randy Oliver points out that dispensationalists see the restoration of the sacrificial system as a memorial to Christ’s sacrifice.
However, Rev Oliver argues that both Rabbi Singer’s and the dispensationalists’ views have problems. The primary fulfilment of Ezekiel’s prophecy is found in the return of the land:
In any event, both Singer and Dispensationalists ignore the historical impetus of this passage. Ezekiel was preparing his hearers for their eventual return to the Land, and for the restoration of the pattern of covenant life in which worship and sacrifice were central. Ezekiel’s message in this portion of the book was “God gave us a reconstruction program that has the temple at its center. Full restoration will come only through compliance with this Zadokite vision”
Rabbi Singer fails to explain how forgiveness is possible after the destruction of the temple. The Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) shows that forgiveness is obtained only through blood sacrifice and repentance.
Christians find the answer in Isaiah 52:13–53:12. The sacrificial system is fulfilled by the death of the Messiah:
But he was wounded because of our sins, Crushed because of our iniquities. He bore the chastisement that made us whole, And by his bruises we were healed. (Isaiah 53:5, New Jewish Publication Society Tanakh, 1985)
