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 clergy and apologists assert that the only way to atone (forgive) for one's sins is via the blood of a sacrificial offering, i.e., through the shedding of blood. If not, then those not atoned will not live in a heavenly condo in the sky, but will burn in the raging fires of hell. 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) man-god 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 (believe) this character as their lord and savior. In other words, Jesus died for their sins and of all to ever be born. While speaking of fiction, I personally like Harry Potter novels better than this crap. At least we know who wrote and when Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone ― J. K. Rowling.
Another way Christian apologists and missionaries present this “blood atonement” is that the "Old Testament" 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 2nd 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 god ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― had to provide another blood atonement to replace the animal sacrifices. Thus, god produced "his only begotten son," Jesus, to be killed. Did you ever wonder who actually limited god by claiming the creator of the universe and mankind could only have "one" son; why not a million and daughters too?
The common biblical reference cited in support of the claim that the shedding of blood is a necessary condition for the atonement of sin is the following portion of an Old Testament verse:
"…for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." (Leviticus 17:11 KJV)
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 mislead 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 one's sins. Christians, like all religiholics, pull out an 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 Leviticus 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 ― the Invisible Man in the Sky ― 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 according to the Hebrew bible.
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 temple - this is a necessary condition, a mandatory requirement.
The pertinent question here is: "Was the blood of Jesus sprinkled on the altar as specified in Leviticus ?" NO! But then again, since Christianity was severing itself from the Hebrew bible's umbilical cord, it was free to develop whatever it wished. In other words, kill Jesus ONCE and never again murder innocent little animals in magical rites over the ages. In other words, let one fictional character die in their biblical novel and SAVE COUNTLESS ANIMALS! Quite possibly this was the precursor to PETA.
"If Jesus had been killed 20 years ago, Catholic school children would be wearing little 'Electric Chairs' around their necks instead of crosses." - Lenny Bruce (1925-1966)
Citation of Hebrew scripture and sources in articles or analyses is not in any way an acceptance, approval or validation of the Jewish religion, its works or scriptures. The Hebrew bible, like the Christian New Testament, is fictitious; From a 6-day creation of the universe; a cunning, walking, talking snake; big fish tales; world flood and an "Invisible Man in the Sky" ― it is all fiction, a bold sham perpetrated on mankind.