Many times people don't get into things because it wouldn't be worth the hassle. You're wrong because Jesus' death paid the debt for those times too.
There is zero evidence of this. Speaking of debt, when did Jesus pay the monetary debt that remains with certain sins, like stealing? A sacrifice doesn't pay that.
So, it would be nice, honest, for you to acknowledge your mistake as it is very evident and open that you made one previously. You made a blanket statement which was false.
You guys had a tabernacle in Shilo for years before ever building a temple. Frankly, you just gave up following God's command to sacrifice. It's one thing when you physically can't because you're not allowed in exile. But, that wasn't the case since 70 AD.
Frankly, once the temple was built, all sacrifices were required to be at the altar in Jerusalem. I'm glad you acknowledged that and defeated your own argument.
Spiritualize? Who's spiritualizing anything? We are Gentiles. We do not fall under your law. It simply doesn't apply to us. Your Law was created to separate you from the outer world while pointing to Christ.
You spiritualize it when it comes to Jesus fulfilling everything. Which he didn't. The laws point to God, not Messiah. A basic study and search proves this.
Frankly, I think open ended challenges like this are silly. Not only are you measuring the standard by the picture, your challenge is constructed in such a way that it could never be completed in any meaningful timescale. In short, you're saying I'm wrong because I haven't written a Talmudic sized rebuttal of all of Judaism.
No, you couldn't do it with a simple whitepaper. But, it's great that you acknowledge the difficulty, if not the impossibility of doing so.
Again, it cracks me up when people talk about Jesus fulfilling in himself the sacrifices without thinking of the specifics involved. Details matter.
That went right over your head. When the one, whom Joshua had to remove his shoes before, sheds his blood for the sins of his people, the picture pointing to that Sacrifice doesn't really manner.
There's zero evidence Joshua bowed to Jesus. Why make that up?
There's nothing to go over my head. Christianity makes up types again to spiritualize any requirements to fulfill the commandments. It cracks me up.
The sun was darkened, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split.
Zero evidence of this anywhere. Josephus doesn't mention it nor any Roman sources of the time. You need to do better.
And, you're worried about following a ritual. God commanded you to follow that ritual to point to Christ; when God offers the sacrifice, he chooses the ritual.
No, nothing points to Messiah, but to God. Christianity is man-centered. That's the problem.
God commanded even the rituals. They need to be obeyed.
Correct, a substitute was offered in Issac's place:
He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.”...Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. But the angel of the LORD called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. Genesis 22:2, 10-13
The ram was the plan all along. That's why Abraham said he'd return with Isaac.
What is a burnt offering?
If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he shall offer a male without blemish. He shall bring it to the entrance of the tent of meeting, that he may be accepted before the LORD. He shall lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. Leviticus 1:3-5
Burnt offering were offered in atonement for sin.
Yes, which shows offerings, sacrifices, were efficacious for atonement. So, Jesus wasn't required.
Likewise