Of Blood Sacrifice and the Sacrifice of the Savior

For some 4,000 years the ritual sacrifice of a first-born, unblemished lamb played an essential part in the worship of the God of Heaven. This was an ordinance that dates from Adam, was practiced by Abraham, and was given renewed emphasis through the prophet Moses to the children of Israel, only recently released from slavery and oppression.

Also since the days of Adam, blood sacrifice as prescribed by revelation has been copied and horribly distorted by followers of many other religions not authorized by God. The disciples of these other religions, and also many less understanding subscribers to the religion of Jehovah, have acted as if they believed that the blood sacrifice itself did something, accomplished something, in some way mattered.

In truth, in the whole history of the earth there has been and will be only one blood sacrifice that matters at all, from an eternal perspective. That was the blood sacrifice of the Son of God, Jesus Christ, the sacrificial Lamb of the Father. His sacrifice was the only one that in and of itself possessed any virtue, for that sacrifice made possible the forgiveness of the sins of men and women throughout time. All other sacrifices conducted under divine authority derived all of their virtue from that one sacrifice of the Savior.

That was why the Lord was so strict about how those sacrifices were to be conducted, so that each one referred directly to the Savior’s sacrifice. All sacrifices not conducted in the manner prescribed by revelation from God and under His authority were solemn hoaxes, pointing away from the Savior, diverting attention away from the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and were diabolical at their root.

Consider the sacrifice offered by Cain. Rather than offer the blood sacrifice prescribed by God by revelation, tied to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that would heal sins from Adam down to the last child born on earth, Cain offered a sacrifice of fruit. Cain acted as if there were some virtue in the sacrifice itself, rather than recognizing that a sacrifice could only derive virtue from the only sacrifice that could generate virtue, the sinless sacrifice of Christ. The Lord rejected the sacrifice and reminded Cain that he could not please the Lord without obeying the Lord (Genesis 4:3-7). Obedience to God was not part of the plan of Cain, who thereafter descended from his mocking sacrifice to the bloody murder of his own brother.

The sacrifice prescribed by revelation from God was rich in symbolism, the death of the unspotted firstborn lamb directly representative of the death of the firstborn and sinless Son of God. The actual death of the sacrifice was a powerful, real, tangible reminder for the disciples of Jehovah of the reality, the literalness, of the sacrificial death of the Messiah. The ordinance was intended to be impressive to the minds of the worshipers—the physical death not only representing the physical death to come of the Messiah but also driving home the point that matters of spiritual life and death were at stake.

These blood sacrifices were only temporary, however. For the people who lived before the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, they were intended to bring more reality to the promise of an event that had not yet happened. After His sacrifice and resurrection the Savior proclaimed an end to the ordinances.

And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings. (3 Nephi 9:19)

Modeled after the image of the Savior’s sacrifice, they were fulfilled when His atonement was accomplished. To continue the blood sacrifices after that would suggest that the Savior’s sacrifice was not sufficient, that somehow the Savior’s suffering for our sins was incomplete, that the sacrifice of an animal in and of itself could provide forgiveness. Remember, there never was any virtue in the sacrifices other than as they pointed to the future sacrifice of the Christ. Continuing the ordinances after Christ’s death and resurrection would actually be a denial of faith in Christ and His atonement rather than the expression of faith in Him that they were prior to His redemption.

Do we living after the resurrection of Jesus Christ have no need to be reminded of His atonement? Of course we do. In place of the blood sacrifice of old, the resurrected Savior called for a new sacrifice:

And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost . . . (3 Nephi 9:20)

This sacrifice is also connected to the Savior’s sacrifice, for that is how we receive the forgiveness of sins that His redemption made possible. That is how we are brought within the circle of the atonement whereby Christ’s suffering takes the place of our suffering. Our sacrifice is to receive Him and qualify for His sacrifice in our place.

But the Lord still draws upon physical ordinances to remind us of spiritual realities. The night before the crucifixion Jesus instituted the ordinance of partaking of ceremonial bread and wine to remind us of the union of His sacrifice and ours. The bread points to the body of Christ, that He gave up in death and reclaimed in resurrection. The wine points to the blood that He shed in Gethsemane and on the cross.

The promise is pronounced in the words of the prayer that the Savior prescribed to be offered. As His disciples partake of tangible symbols of even more powerful spiritual intangibles, they do so in witness “that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them.” (Moroni 5:2) The saints of ancient days and modern times are united by powerful and appropriate ordinances in their focus on the central event of history, the sacrifice and atonement of Jesus Christ.