ph2ter

It is fascinating that in the heart of the Hebrew Bible lies the sacriface of the firstborns. That comes to me almost as a revelation.
That extremely primitive ritual is inspiration which has driven the theological mind of the ancients and which finally resulted in a theology which as a center has a sacrifice of God's firstborn son.
In the beginning Jews certainly practiced the sacrifice of the firstborns as the Hebrew Bible clearly indicate.

"Despite its repeated attempts to portray child sacrifice as a foreign practice alien to "Israel" and her god YHWH, the Hebrew Bible contains a considerable volume of material directly associating YHWH with the sacrifice of children...the Hebrew Bible appears unintentionally to overturn its own insistence that child sacrifice is a foreign practice, for it offers, both implicitly and explicitly, a vivid portrayal of YHWH as a god of child sacrifice."
King Manasseh and child sacrifice: biblical distortions of historical realities by Francesca Stavrakopoulou

Abraham is commanded to sacrifice his son Isaac.
Exodus 22.29-30 is in the root of the whole Exodus story:
"You shall not delay the offering from your harvest and your vintage. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me. You shall do the same with your oxen and with your sheep. It shall be with its mother seven days; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me."

Child sacrifice was successively transformed into a circumcision rite. The eight day for the circumcision rite is in accordance with the eight day when the firstborns should be given to God. The Passover is also directly related to the law of the firstborn sacrifice as is explicitly stated in Exodus 13.15:
"When Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, the Lord killed every firstborn in Egypt, both man and animal. This is why I sacrifice to the Lord the first male offspring of every womb and redeem each of my firstborn sons."

The Hebrew Biblical term y'br - 'pass over' may originally describe the journey of sacrificed child from life to death. In Bible the opposite meaning is expressed - Israelites 'pass over' from Egypt to the Holly Land. In that imagery the whole Israel is a firstborn son who escapes from death in Egypt. Egypt serves there as a land beyond the sea, the mythical land of the underworld, because in the mythology that land lies behind the sea. How Israelites found themselves in Egypt shows the story of Joseph. He was also the firstborn of Rachel, the wife of Jacob. His brothers wanted to kill him, but somehow he ended in Egypt. Mythological logic says that he was really killed because he ended in the 'underworld' land which for the Israel lies behind the sea. He was sacrificed as a firstborn son. Joseph impersonates Israel or vice versa. Moses also. The story in the Bible follows the mythical story thence I doubt that anything of the sort really happened to the ancient Israelites. Probably, they have never been in Egypt.

In the myth, the sacrifice of the firstborn is applied to no one other than to the God's son himself. This sacrificed deity is the giver of fertility and is personified in corn. In the root of it is a vegetation myth. After birth, he dies and goes under the soil, into the underworld. After some time he appears again above the soil and brings greenery and finally gives fruit and wheat. This is why prominent role in the life of Joseph plays the harvest and grain.
"The biblical presentation of the firstborn sacrifice is closely tied to issues of potential or divinely-promised fertility. Most of the biblical laws of the firstborn sacrifice identify both the human and animal firstborn as 'the one who opens the womb'...".
"Child sacrifice existed within the royal cult in monarchic Judah. Not only was the offering consistently made to the appropriate divine 'king': El, Baal Hamon, Yahweh...In many cases, also, the offerer was himself a king: Ahaz, Manasseh, and probably Mesha. And this, in turn, would mean that the victims themselves were children of royal blood." "It might be supposed that the 'mlk' (the term connected with the child sacrifice in Bible) perhaps originated either as a Canaanite royal child sacrifice devoted to the main god of the locality or a sacrifice devoted to the deity considered in the locality as the king of the panteon"

The ultimate point of the law which prescribed the sacrifice of the firstborns among Israelites is achieved in Jesus Christ who is the firstborn and only-begotten of God himself. The Christians restored the original myth of the firstborn sacrifice.
"Some scholars associate the Nazirites with child sacrifice, suggesting that their dedication or consecration to the cult substituted for their sacrifice.. a further biblical afterlife of the firstborn sacrifice may be the consecration of the Nazirites to YAHWH...
The New Testament story of Jesus is en extensive illustration of a further afterlife of child sacrifice as has been well demonstrated by Levenson. Examples of biblical motifs of child sacrifice, which are employed as powerful imagery in the New Testament include repeated labeling of Jesus as the only begotten, beloved, or firstborn son; the portrayal of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb and his death as a Passover sacrifice; the royal descent of Jesus and his claim to the Davidic throne; his association with Abraham; and his miraculous birth to a previously childless woman. To this may also be added the story of Herod's killing of infants whilst the newborn Jesus is taken to Egypt for safety, which may almost be seen as a reversal of the biblical foundation myth of the firstborn sacrifice at the Passover."

Paul 'was right', after Jesus, the circumcision for Christians rightly has no more any value, because Jesus was sacrificed for all humanity and so annihilated the law of YHWH given in the beginning: "The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me".

semiopen

This is an interesting subject.

In addition, to the Akeida (Isaac's Binding) the story of Rachel and the Terfim is important. The terafim was probably an idol made of a sacrificed male child. When Rachel stole this from her father, it probably was the sacrificed body of one of her brothers.

This is the first reference I've seen relating this to circumcission. The ceremony most commonly mentioned in connection with child sacrifice is the pidyan haben.

http://www.cohen-levi.org/the_cohens..._procedure.htm

This is well known to be involved with sacrficies one way or another.

Pidyon_haben

This link discusses the differences between clean and unclean animals. Clean animals were sacrificed but unclean ones weren't. This is not so simple with humans though, who I don't think were considered animals, and certainly Numbers 31 seems to be talking about sacrificing one out of 500 of the 16000 or so Moabite girls.

There seems to be considerable Egyptian influence in Judaism, although certainly two to three million people were not wandering through the desert for forty years.

I like the Jesus sacrifice comment, this makes sense.

I haven't seen several of your ideas before but they don't seem too farfetched.

bacht

Yes, as a firstborn myself I was intrigued when I learned about this principle.

The LORD said to Moses,
"Consecrate to me all the first-born; whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and of beast, is mine."

Ex 13.1-2

The Torah specifies the Levites as stand-ins for the firstborn of Israel:

And the LORD said to Moses,
"Take the Levites instead of all the first-born among the people of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of their cattle; and the Levites shall be mine: I am the LORD."

Num 3.44-45

There are several stories that use the theme of the passed-over firstborn (or elevated younger son):

Cain and Abel
Ishmael (by Hagar) and Isaac (by Sarah)
Esau and Jacob
Reuben and Judah (father of later kings)
Joseph
David the youngest son

The world itself was destroyed in Noah's flood, and we now live in the second world

ph2ter

Interesting idea. The Egyptian word 'ter' signifies "a shape, type, transformation" and has for its determinative a mummy: it is used in the ritual, where the various transformations of the deceased in Hades are described.
Rachel sat on the stolen teraphim while saying to his father Laban that she cannot stand up because she is having a period. It is indication that teraphim was probably used as a object which helps women to become pregnant. Laban's thought would then probably be that if she sits on the teraphim, it is not possible that she has a period.
This would be in accordance with the fertility function of the firstborn sacrifices.

It is also interesting to note that the donkeys were achieved a special firstborn status:
"But every first offspring of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb, but if you do not redeem it, then you shall break its neck; and every firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem. " (Exodus 13.13)
They were declared sacred unless redeemed. According to rabbinic tradition, the donkey was killed by a hatchet blow from behind.

IamJoseph

Primitive or the most advanced? Human sacrifice was forbidden by the Hebrew laws only. You are posting incomplete statements.

The reverse is the case.

False. He was asked to *OFFER* only [the text] - as a test, because this was the practice with all the nations. Abraham was then commanded to stop and not sacrifice, and when the laws emerged via Moses - human sacrifice was forbidden for the first time in human history.

False again. This is accompanied by a mandated forbidence of all sacrifice anywhere outside one place, namely the Temple. This eliminated 99% of all sacrifices in one stroke, and is the best way of weening a people from this practice whch clung to humanity from their inception. You have given no relevance to the period being described.

The first born were saved from Pharoah and a festival observance was mandated as a commemoration. This is also seen in the mandated remembrance of consuming unleaven bread on this festival.

False. The circumsizion was a mark of a covenant [contract]. 4000 years ago, this was the equivalence of a legal contract today. It has nothing to do with the first born - which was under Moses 400 years later.

False. The first killing of the first borns was by the Pharoah. With Moses, the pharoah could have saved the egyptian first borns - a choice not given to the Hebrews. Instead the Pharoah attempted to repeat his genocide actions of the past: his decree was reversed, and this is hardly how you are describing it.




False. Here, passover refers to prevailing over the decree of Pharoah only and relates only to one night's occurence.

False. Joseph landed in Egypt as a slave via his brother's jealousy. Nothing to do with underworld [the text].

False. You seem to also confuse your scriptures here!

IamJoseph

False. It is only a remembrance facility that the Hebrew first borns were saved. The redeeming only asks a ritual of a priest taking and giving back the child ammediately - this is practiced since that day.





On the contrary. The Moabite women were regarded innocent and not to be harmed.

It is normal to undergo some influences after 400 years. There is no doubt that the Israelites did cross the desert and re-entered Canaan. A cencus in the desert gives this total, with sub-totals of groups, gender and ages. The 3 million is an approx figure, derived by the total of 800K males of fighting age, and the average family ratio. On what basis are you disputing the 40 year period - there is no scriptures more reliable and evidential than the Hebrew? :constern01:

IamJoseph

False. No sacrifices occured or is mentioned in the text. The terafim is not what you think - this was owned by Rachel's father, who practiced occultism, and she did not want him to harm her husband Jacob when they left his house.

ph2ter

Somehow you know how to read these texts?
I know that this issue is highly sensitive to believers, but Bible clearly testifies that the child sacrifice was a fact in ancient Israel.


"Also I swore to them in the wilderness that I would scatter them among the nations and disperse them among the lands, because they had not observed My ordinances, but had rejected My statutes and had profaned My sabbaths, and their eyes were on the idols of their fathers. I also gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not live; and I pronounced them unclean because of their gifts, in that they caused all their firstborn to pass through the fire so that I might make them desolate, in order that they might know that I am the Lord."' Ezekiel 20.23-27

"The significant part of this conjunction is that Jeremiah and Ezekiel both mention the sacrifice of the first-born in connection with their rejection of past revelation. True, Jeremiah claims that the scribes falsified it, and Ezekiel that Yhwh falsified it. But the two have in common the view that the falsified provisions included Yhwh's demand that the Israelites burn their children for him. Clearly, both relate to the Josianic reform program,
which involved the desecration of the Tophet in Jerusalem, whereas human sacrifice had formerly been referred to in the most positive terms <Mic 6:7, Isa 30:33, 2 Kgs 23:10), and even reputedly had been effective for Mesha (2 Kgs 3:26-27, Amos 2:1, reading shadday for.sid; this is already part of Amos's indictment, and the phra.se mlk ''dm is a pun in context). Conversely, opposition to child sacrifice is almost an obsession for Jeremiah (7:31-32, 19:5, 11-12, 32:32, 35), who refers to it with the charge of spilling "the blood of innocents" (Jer 2:34 [reading with G], 19:4; sec also 7:6,22:3, 17, 26:15), which, in the judicial form of "innocent blood," becomes crucial lo the bill of indictment leveled against Manasseh (2 Kgs 21:16, 24:4)." Ezekiel mentions human sacrifice as food for the gillulim again in 23:37, and. more explicitly, for male statues in 16:17, 20. Jeremiah never claims that the rite is non-Yahwistic.
To sum up to this point, Jeremiah claims that the pen of the deceit of the scribes has falsified the Torah. Ezekiel claims that Yhwh falsified the edicts and laws. Ezekiel links the falsification to the violation of the Sabbath, the use of icons, and performing child sacrifice to feed icons (or, conceivably, beings in the image of Yhwh). Jeremiah links it to child sacrifice and the Tophet, and the worship of the Host of Heaven (8:2). Conversely, Micah refers to child sacrifice as an atonemental offering...
Citation taken from From Gods to God: Dynamics of Iron Age Cosmologies by Baruch Halpern, Matthew J. Adams

IamJoseph

Most probably you do not understand what those verses mean. These are later prophetic writings applicable only to a certain incident. You have not factored in that although the Israelites had some failings, they did pass the test and were allowed to enter the land promised them. Are you saying the European Christians never had failings!? :wave:

semiopen

I gave a toned down Dvar Torah on this at Schul.

I don't really understand Judaism but I find it helpful to look at multiple texts simultaneously to get a proper misunderstanding.

There are several respected opinions of this. I think you are misstating Rashbam here, who claims she stole the Terafim to prevent Laban from finding them. Rashi's opinion is perhaps more popular and says she stole it to keep Lavan from idol worship. I believe that both are questionable, but that's not the issue here.

The terafim appearing in Samuel is pretty decent evidence that the Pentateuch was written after the time of David. This is because David had a terafim in his house.

Samuel 19:11

Hard to explain this specific type idol hanging around for 1000 years, especially in the household of a nice Jewish boy like David Hamelekh.

Teraphim

I've gone through this several times for your benefit.

If you're going to reply why not do so intelligently, this would have the advantage of improving your knowledge whether my views are correct or not.