Responding to Jewish Criticisms of Necessity of Christ's Sacrifice

What are some good Catholic apologetic resources in relation to Jewish criticisms of the necessity of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice? Periodically I see Jewish posters here and elsewhere comment that Judaism begins with different premises from Christianity, therefore the atonement of Jesus Christ, for our sins, is not necessary, from their perspective. For example:


From that link, it is stated that blood sacrifice is not necessary for forgiveness of sins, since in the Bible God accepted various types of offerings/sacrifices for sins, including flour. Now, I do have to look further into the role of atonement for sins in Old Testament, however I was wondering what you all thought about it, as well as helpful resources you’ve found answering Jewish criticisms to the foundations of Christianity.

Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist by Dr. Brant Pitre.

Use as an apologetic resource is way down the list of reasons to read this book. I would read this first and foremost for myself and am personally inclined to let the Jews be Jews and say whatever they want. We are not supposed to proselytize Jews anyway.


The Lamb’s Supper: The Mass as Heaven on Earth by Dr. Scott Hahn.

Easily the most profound book I have ever read. It blew me away. My wife read it (she is a 20-year secular Carmelite) and it blew her away (and that’s not an easy thing to do).

This is ABSOLUTELY the book you are looking for. It explains Calvary and Eucharist in relation to Jewish teaching and their understanding of sacrifice (and also ties it in with Revelation, which is actually a VERY Jewish book).

And I’m glad I answered this question - while looking up the link, I discovered a study guide for this book that I had not been aware of. I just Kindled it.

Now my question, (Not to hijack the thread), is, how do you respond to the jewish argument that the Trinity is pagan?

Such an argument is based on a common logically fallacy called post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for: after this, therefore because of this). It is one example of group of fallacies called questionable cause.

The fallacy is that similarities (or correlation) between two things necessarily proves a consequence (that one thing caused the other). The fallacy can be simplified as follows:

*]A occurred, then B occurred.
*]Therefore, A caused B.
Similarities between the Trinity and deities of other religions does not demonstrate that one caused the other (or was derived from another), regardless of which came first.

Thanks for the responses. Amusingly, I already own those two books! I pretty much skimmed them, didn’t read them closely. Guess it’s time to actually read them now. :smiley:

I guess it’s very interesting to me that Jewish critics claim that Judaism and Christianity start with different foundational premises, which is one of the reasons why they would not accept Jesus as the Messiah, or specifically for this thread, Jesus as propitiatory sacrifice. Judaism having always accepted both blood and non-blood sacrifices for forgiveness of sins, rejection of original sin, etc seem like powerful arguments on the Jewish side, so I’m curious to Catholic responses directly to such claims.

Time to start reading, thanks again.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit