Judges 21:25
In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

* * *

Religious people often had the notion that rich people, powerful people and rulers have
been closer to God and had certain absolution of sins and immunity before God for their
actions.

We see the disciples wonder to the statement of the Lord:

Mark 10:23-27
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, "How hardly shall
they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!"
24 AND THE DISCIPLES WERE ASTONISHED AT THESE WORDS.
But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, "Children, how hard is it for them
that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel
to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom
of God."
26 AND THEY WERE ASTONISHED OUT OF MEASURE, SAVING AMONG THEMSELVES, WHO CAN THEN
BE SAVED [IF THE RICH AND RULERS CANNOT]?
27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, "With men it is impossible, but not with God:
for with God all things are possible."

But later, after Jesus suffered the cross of Calvary and was raised to Heaven above
Heavens, the apostle Peter had a different vision. He saw all kings of animals and
reptiles coming down from heaven and a white sheet. After the vision repeated three
times, he understood it must have had a spiritual meaning, rather than eating insects
that crawl in manure, unclean and unhygienic places. The true meaning was that
the Roman centurion Cornelius accepted faith in One God and in Jesus Christ the
Saviour and Messiah.

Acts 10:34
34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God
is no respecter of persons: 35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and
worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

This was a revolutionary statement in the time of the Roman "divine" emperors.
Peter abandoned the notion of the Chosen People of Israel and pagans (all the rest).

Apostle Paul confirmed this in Colossians 3:11
"Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision,
Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all."

Where then the notion of God's favouritism towards priests, rich and the rulers originated
from?

Now, everyone in the Biblical Israel called Jesus "Son of David". But what had king David
sad himself about the relationship between the sacrifice and sin?

Clearly he could redeem more sins that any Israelite, after he acqurired much spoils
in conquest, which he devoted to the Temple of God?

Psalm 51
16 You do not desire a sacrifice, or I would offer one.
You do not want a burnt offering.
17 The sacrifice you desire is a broken spirit.
You will not reject a broken and repentant heart, O God.

Isaiah later confirmed this:

Isaiah 1:11
“To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to Me?”
Says the LORD.
“I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams
And the fat of fed cattle.
I do not delight in the blood of bulls,
Or of lambs or goats."

"Multitude of your sacrifices" probably means that the rich could afford
more of them than the poor. So they could sin more, maybe get away with a
murder, like king David murdered Uriah the Hittite by the proxy of Joab and
the Amorites, to get hold of his pretty wife?

Now, prophet Natan saw through this, and so did God.

Abrahamic sacrifice meant sacrificing something dear to God, like Abraham was told
to offer his only son left, Isaac. This is one of the hardest moments to understand
in the entire Holy Scriptures, as God first promises offspring to Abram, then He
lets him have Ishmael through Hagar the Sarai's slavegirl from Egypt.

Then God says Abraham should listed to Sarah and send Hagar and their son to certain
death in the desert. This is also the second time Hagar and Ishmael were saved by
a supernatural intervention and the angel of the LORD.

The angel of the LORD said to Hagar:

Genesis 16:7-10
7 And the angel of the LORD found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness,
by the fountain in the way to Shur. 8 And he said, Hagar, Sarai's maid, whence
camest thou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my
mistress Sarai.
9 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and submit
thyself under her hands. 10 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will
multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude.

Now, this hard request to Hagar was not without a promise and a reward.

The second time Sarah requested that Hagar be driven away into desert and
death, the angel of the LORD reappeared, and repeated God's Promise to Hagar
and Ishmael:

Genesis 21
15 And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one
of the shrubs. 16 And she went, and sat her down over against him a good
way off, as it were a bowshot: for she said, Let me not see the death of the child.
And she sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept. 17 And God
heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven,
and said unto her, What aileth thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the
voice of the lad where he is. 18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand;
FOR I WILL MAKE HIM A GREAT NATION. 19 And God opened her eyes, and she saw a
well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink.
20 AND GOD WAS WITH THE LAD; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness,
and became an archer. 21 And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran:
and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt.
So, the account of Genesis in Torah clearly says that God was with Ishmael,
rather than Arabs resulted in offspring of Adam and animals (God forbid).
In fact, only Noah's descendants are described as surviving the Great Flood,
and they were descendants of Adam and Eve through Seth, Enoch and Metushalah
(Methusalem).

Why we go to such great lengths - to emphasise the importance of Abraham's sacrifice.

Abraham had one son left, Isaac who came through a Promise of God to otherwise
barren Sarah. Just like Hagar and Ishmael were saved twice by a supernatural intervention
of God - so was the birth of Isaac a result of God's Promise (Word), rather than
natural union of a man witha fertile woman (Sarah was past the period of normal
female fertility - Genesis 18:11).

Now, after driving Ishmael away, Abraham was told to sacrifice the only son left.
Now what?

Today it would be lunatic, or "hearing voices that one should murder son and offer
him as a burnt offering sacrifice". But Abraham was sure of what he was doing.
When he said to Isaac "The LORD shall provide the sacrifice", he did not deceive
the boy whom he intended to kill, but he uttered a statement of Faith in the Good God.

So it is spoken "On the mount of the LORD's Providence".

From anecdotal sources, it appears that the ram that was found after the angel of
the LORD had stopped Abraham's hand with knife - wasn't an ordinary ram.

That ram appears to have been a firstborn ram, and as Christ is the firstborn of
every creation (Colossians 1:15), it was the image of Messiah (Christ) being
sacrificed for Isaac.

This was the second supernatural intervention for Isaac, and the true meaning
of Abraham's sacrifice - the dearest, not the multitude of rams bought on the
market.

(Likewise, Abel offered to the LORD the dearest of his own flock.)

David had the notion that God doesn't want burnt offerings for a murder in the
first degree. He paid for his sin the hard way - he lost in total four sons
(His first child with Bat Sheba died stricken by the LORD, despite child having
not yet committed any sin.
Amnon his firstborn, who raped his sister, and Absolom who murdered him - by
a proxy. Absolom later rebelled after his father and slept with his concubines
in front of all Israel. Finally, Adoniyah was killed - again by proxy of Benaya,
the Joab's liutenant, and the order of his half-brother Solomon.)

This set in motion a chain of events that is too difficult to understand, and
impossible - I think - without the Holy Spirit and the Holy Bible study.

Unconverted humans will try to replace the supernatural salvation and Abrahamic
sacrifice with a ritual and transactional "favour to God". So many theft,
false accusations and murder, so many Hail Mary's.

When Jesus came to the Jerusalem Temple, the situation was such that the people
were even further away from the meaning of the animal sacrifice as a replacement
for Messiah (Christ) dying for sinners and transgressors (Isaiah 53:12).

This made the animal sacrifice something you go to Temple for with money, exchange
into the right currency, immediately buy and offer.

In fact, the disciples were surprised that Jesus said about the poor widow giving
more than the rich who could buy ten rams for offering.

The teaching of the Pharisees was that rich men are more worthy because of their
greater contribution to the faith and religious service, giving more money.
This was maybe correct with Joseph from Arimathea, who had the right attitude of
the heart.

But Herod and Herodias weren't changed for better by giving money to the Temple
- they eventually plotted and executed John the Baptist.