BLOOD
Christians
are hung up in the concept of “blood.” During communion Christians symbolically
drink blood in memory of Jesus’ blood on the cross or, as Catholics believe, to
actually allow his blood into their body.
Christian
apologists and missionaries assert that the only way to obtain atonement for
one's sins is via the blood of a sacrificial offering, i.e., through the shedding
of blood. Consequently, since all
humanity is, according to them, infected with Adam and Eve's Original Sin,
only the blood of the perfect (i.e., sinless) Jesus can have the power of the
ransom that is required to overcome our sinful mortal nature. In other words, Christians claim the blood of
Jesus shed on the cross has paid for the sins of those who accept him as their
lord and savior. In other words, Jesus died for their sins.
Another
way Christian apologists and missionaries present this “blood atonement” is
that the "Old Testament" (the Christian version of the Hebrew Bible)
prescribes the shedding of blood as a necessary condition for the atonement of sins. They then
claim that without it, expiation of sins is impossible. Consequently, according to these Christians,
when the Second Temple was destroyed by the Romans around the year 70 C.E., Jews
were left without the required animal sacrificial system for atonement, and
thus G-d had provided a blood atonement to replace the animal sacrifices via
the death,. Thus, G-d produced "His only begotten son", Jesus, to die
on the cross.
The
common Biblical reference cited in support of the claim that the shedding of
blood is a necessary condition for the atonement of sins is the
following portion of a verse:
"…for
it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." Leviticus
The apparent message contained in this portion of
the verse is echoed on a number of occasions in the New Testament. Consequently, a superficial reading of the
verse in Leviticus, without looking at the entire passage and placing it in its
proper context, will almost certainly lead one to conclude that only by being
covered by the blood of Jesus on the cross can one have any hope of being
forgiven for his or her sins. Christians will pull out one isolated verse
to make their point, without any regard to the verse previous and after that
actually clarifies its proper meaning.
Since Christianity uses the Hebrew Bible for its
source, let us read what that passage actually means. Verses 10-14 are actually
the “Prohibition against eating blood and the commandment to cover it”. Verse
10 is very clear on that. The next verse explains; “For the soul of the flesh is in the blood and I have assigned it for you
upon the Altar to provide atonement for your souls.” This means, because
life is dependent upon the blood, God designated blood as the medium that goes upon the Altar for atonement.
The key words are “upon the Altar”. This is
logical because, if say, I cut my finger in my home, or if my unblemished cat
were to bleed, would that blood atone for any sin? Of course not! Only the
blood upon the Altar would be the atoning agent.
Verse 11 is part of a passage that deals with the
prohibition on the consumption of blood.
When this verse is considered in its entirety, it becomes evident that
specifically that the blood of the
sacrifice must be placed "… upon the altar to atone for your souls …" In essence, the only way
blood can bring atonement is if placed on the sacrificial altar in the
The life-giving force in animals is borne by the
blood, which is why blood is the appropriate agent of atonement, not because
God has any desire for blood per se, but because it represents man’s dedication
of his life to God’s service.
When the Jew places his hand on the animal to be
slain on the Altar, he feels the blood of life leave the animal, bringing him
closer to God. During the atonement prayers, the sinner sees the animal inside
of him, all of us dying.
The
pertinent question here is: "Was
the blood of Jesus sprinkled on the altar as specified in Leviticus
The New
Testament is totally silent about this requirement. There is no evidence offered in the New
Testament that the blood of Jesus was placed on the altar in the Temple, which
was still standing in Jerusalem at the time of his death. Therefore, since this necessary condition
was not satisfied, the claim that his death provided atonement for sins can
never be valid. This is beside the point that G-d abhorred human sacrifice.
Therefore, the death of Jesus cannot effect the
remission of sins.
Copyright © 2003, Hugh Fogelman. All
rights reserved