The bible is held to be a series of divine revelations from God beginning with
the Torah, the Prophets and ending with the Gospels of Jesus. There is do doubt
that for almost 2000 years the epistles of Paul have been the primary source in
the bible for the doctrines of Christianity. Interpretations of his letters have
produced the most heated debates in history that sometimes led to wars. The
problem is that there is such a big difference between the teachings of Paul and
the other parts of the bible. This fact has led some like Thomas Jefferson to
say that Paul, " was the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus."
This is all despite the fact that Paul himself never claimed his letters to be
divine revelation. Yet traditional Christianity basis itself on Paul.
This composition will examine the concept of salvation that traditional
Christianity espouses in the light of the Old Testament and the Gospels of Jesus
Christ. Christianity has maintained a doctrine that basically says the only way
man can get to heaven is by believing that another man had to be murdered in his
place for his sins. Is it reasonable to uphold such a brutal theory of
salvation? We will carefully examine the evidence for this doctrine of ‘blood
atonement.’
To do this it is necessary to make an examination of the bible. The bible is
composed of two testaments: The Old Testament (OT) and the New
Testament (NT). The OT is often called the “Tanach” It consists of the
Torah, books of the Prophets, and history. The New Testament contains 4 Gospels
and the Letters of Paul and other books. The New Testament claims to be
an outgrowth of the Old one. Below is an outline of what the body of the
composition looks like.
I. The Theory of salvation according to Christianity
II. Old Testament views
A. The temple sacrifices
1. specific Purpose of sacrifices in the Torah
2. The overall biblical view on the sacrifice
B. Righteousness
1.. evidence of righteousness
C. Theological Problems
1. God's
omnipotence verse God's mercy
2. Jesus
sacrifice and common sense.
3. Was Jesus
accursed?
III. Comparison of Old with New Testament teachings.
A. Jesus words in the Gospels
1. sacrifice
2.
righteousness
3. salvation
B. Paul's teachings
1.
righteousness
2. sacrifice
The Doctrine of Christian Salvation
Most Christians will agree that the above is an accurate portrayal of what
Christianity teaches. However many non-Christians will be quickly repulsed by
such ideas and they produce more questions then they do answer. We will look at
all these momentarily. But one question that immediately comes to mind is this:
If Jesus is the only way to heaven then what happened to the people who lived
before Jesus was born? Did all the Prophets of the bible go hell? (Not to
mention the people who never heard of him who live in the present day!)
Christianity
has historically given two answers to the former question. One answer that has
been around since ancient times is that Jesus atoned for the people who came
before him when he made his trip into hell. The Gospels mention that Jesus was
tempted by the devil and that he followed Satan into hell. His entry into hell,
according to Christians who uphold this theory, made it possible for the all the
people who lived before Jesus time to go to heaven. However this theory is not
based on the Old Testament and therefore has nothing to stand on.
The second answer is that Jesus atonement was a fulfillment of the temple
sacrifices in the Jewish Scriptures (old testament) 1. People who lived before Jesus could only go to heaven by
making blood atonement. That meant going on frequent trips to the temple in
Jerusalem and sacrificing poor animals. The blood shed in the name of God would
make up for the sins of people. It is this theory that we will examine here in
detail.
Nature of Sacrifices
If the temple sacrifices were only for unintentional sins, then how was it
possible to make atonement for intentional sins? The answer to that question
given in the Jewish Scriptures is simple: Pray to God sincerely and ask for
forgiveness:
upon
whom My name is called, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek My face, and
turn from their evil ways; then will I hear from heaven, and I will forgive
their sin, and I will heal their land" (2 Chronicles 7:14).
What about the gentile nations who did not have access to the Jerusalem temple?
The biblical prophets were not ethno-centric. They believed that the gentiles
had just as much a right to the kingdom of heaven as the Israelites did.
Prophets like Daniel and Jonah traveled many miles to spread the teachings of
God All Mighty:
So
the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth,
from the greatest of them even to the least of them. 6 For word came
unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe
from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. 7 And he
caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the
king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste
any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: 8 But let man and
beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn
every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. 9
Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger,
that we perish not? 10 (Jonah 3:5)
Wherefore,
O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by
righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor; if it may be a
lengthening of thy tranquillity.
(Daniel 4:27)
A second problem with the blood atonement theory is that it assumes God demands
man to shed blood in order to be forgiven. As shown above, the first problem
with this theory is that the sacrifices only covered unintentional sins. Another
problem is that God neither demands or wants man to shed blood. A clear reading
of the Jewish scriptures shows that God looked down upon the sacrifice system.
For
thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt
offering. 17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and
a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. 18 Do good in thy
good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem. 19 Then
shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering
and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.
(Psalms 51:16)
For
I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God, rather than
burnt offerings. .(Hosea 6:6)
More verses like this are listed in the appendix. Not only did God dislike the
sacrifices but He never ordered the sacrifice system to be put into place
either! We learn this from the Prophet Jeremiah.
[22]
For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I
did not speak to your fathers or command them concerning burnt offerings and
sacrifices. [23] But this command I gave them, `Obey my voice, and
I will be your God, and you shall be my people; and walk in all the way that I
command you, that it may be well with you. (Jeremiah 7)
An intelligent person will see at this point a startling contradiction.
On the one hand, in the Torah God orders the Israelites to build the temple for
the sacrifices, yet on the other hand, God tells the Prophet Jeremiah that He
never intended them. A full explanation for this would be off topic. 5
As clearly shown above, the temple sacrifices are not a sound basis for the
blood atonement theory. I ask everyone to think carefully here. First we
established that the sacrifice system only covered unintentional sins. Second,
God looked down upon the sacrifice system. Also we showed how it was possible
for to pray for God in sincere repentance. Jesus could not have died for our
sins because the sins covered through the theory only covered unintentional
sins. Why would God sacrifice his “only son” when other methods already
existed to atone for sin (sincere repentance)? Also why would God sacrifice
Jesus when He hated the very idea of it? Does God change his mind? The belief
that Jesus death was a sacrifice based on the temple system is nonsense and has
no basis in the Old Testament what so ever.
Are all men sinners?
It is possible to ignore the biblical theory and go back to the premises of
Christian belief in salvation. The premises is of course that we are all men are
sinners. We are all hopelessly entrapped in sin and nothing we can do by our own
means can change that. None of us can be righteous in the eyes of God. That is
why Christians believe we need a savior to die for us all.
There is no basis for that idea in the Old Testament. The Old Testament never
teaches that all men are sinners. What it does teach is that although man
has an inclination towards sin, it is possible to change the inclination towards
the opposite direction. In other words, it is possible for us to reconcile
ourselves with God.
And
God said to Cain, "Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance
fallen? [7] Surely, if you improve yourself, you will be forgiven. But if you do
not improve yourself, sin rests at the door. Its desire is toward you, yet you
can conquer it." (Genesis 4:6)
The notion that all people are sinners contradicts what the Jewish scripture
teach. There are many references in the scriptures that tell people to act with
goodness. Also there are people who are called righteous. One example, in
Genesis, the Hebrew word “tamim” is attached to the Prophet Noah. The word
means righteousness in these verses:
"These
are the generations of Noah; Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations,
and Noah walked with God." If Noah can be TAMIM", so
can I, and so can any of his decedents (everyone). (Genesis 6:9)
"With
the merciful You will show Yourself merciful, and with the upright( tamim ) man
You will show Yourself upright" (2nd Samuel 22:26.)
Theological problems
Christianity’s theory of salvation also raises some serious theological
problems. The belief that Christ’s sacrifice is the only way to remove our
sins contradicts belief in an all loving, forgiving and even an omnipotent god.
The simple truth is that the Christian concept of God is incapable of forgiving
and showing mercy on His creation. I’m not saying this to be rude but to get
the reader to think. According to Christian belief, God demands the shedding of
blood for our sins. But why does God demand the shedding of blood?
Everyone is familiar with the age-old problem of evil. Woody Allen once put it
humorously like this; “If God is unable to get rid of evil from the world the
he is not omnipotent. If he can but does not want to then he is sadistic!” In
the same sense you can ask, If the Christian God is all loving and forgiving but
is unable to forgive man for his sins then He is not Omnipotent. If the
Christian God is capable of forgiving man for his sins but doesn’t want to
then the He is sadistic.
The truth is that if one believes in the Christian theory of salvation he has to
throw out the belief in an all loving and forgiving God, or else throw out the
concept of an Omnipotent God. How can God be forgiving if he demands death
in exchange for clearing your sins? How can God be Omnipotent if He is incapable
of forgiving for your sins without bloodshed? This vampire god has no place in
the Jewish bible.
There is another theological difficulty to with the belief Jesus died to save
us. When we want to be good in the eyes of God we do things that can help people
in some way. It is against common sense to harm our selves out of consideration
for other people. Of course giving your life to save another is one of the best
deeds a person can do. However is the story of Jesus sacrifice the proper way to
conduct ourselves? Here is an analogy:
…consider
a homeless destitute who cannot afford to construct a house. If some mason takes
pity and works vigorously for a few days, free of charge, to make the poor man a
house, then, indeed, such a builder is deserving of praise for having helped the
homeless person. Instead, if the mason was to wound his own head out of sympathy
for the destitute, then this accomplishes nothing for the homeless person.
Unfortunately, there are very few people in this world who adopt reasonable
means to achieve the end of doing good to others and taking mercy on them.3
Fundamental to the Christian doctrine is the belief that Jesus was accursed. He
was cursed by the sins of humanity while he was on the cross. If he was not
considered accursed then the whole doctrine of Christian salvation falls.4
To say that Jesus was accursed means that he abandoned his worship of God
Almighty and became a target of His wrath. Such a belief is tantamount to making
Jesus a friend of Satan. That is a great insult to God’s beloved
prophets.
Jesus and the Jewish scriptures
We pointed out how the Jewish scriptures provide sufficient
evidence that God had a negative attitude towards the temple sacrifices. This is
contrary to the Christian theory that God demands such sacrifices as way to
repay Him our sin debt in blood. What did Jesus teach about this?
"But go ye
and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not
come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." {Matthew 9:13}
“And if you
had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would
not have condemned the guiltless.” (Mathew 12:7)
We also pointed out how the Jewish scriptures clearly teach
that men have an inclination towards sin but are able to become righteous. This
is contrary to the Christian theory that all men are unrighteous. <Let
us ask Jesus again his opinion on the matter.
"But go ye
and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not
come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." {Matthew 9:13}
When Jesus heard
it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but
they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to
repentance." {Mark 2:17}
In his own words, Jesus said he did not come for the
“righteous.” He also says that the righteous people are whole and “have no
need of the physician.” Why would Jesus have to tell the ancient Hebrews that
there exist righteous people? It is almost as if Jesus is addressing the Church
of 21st century America directly, because they believe all men are
doomed to a state of sin.
Finally, we may ask, what did Jesus teach about how human
beings can enter God’s heavenly abode? Did Jesus ever say, “You must believe
that I died (or will die) for your sins”? To the contrary:
25.On one
occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he
asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 26. "What
is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" 27.
He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all
your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' ; and, 'Love your
neighbor as yourself.' " 28. "You have answered
correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."
Luke 10
So here we have, the only place in the bible, Jesus being asked the question,
“what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus answered,” Love the Lord
your God with all your heart and with all your soul.. and love thy neighbor as
yourself.” Jesus did not give the answer that today’s Christians give.
He did not say anything here about having to commit suicide for humanity.
Was Jesus being deceptive in his answer? No, he was repeating what the prophets
of Israel taught all along. Is there anything we can find in his sayings that
state Christianity’s theory? If any can be found they would contradict what we
showed he already said and thus Christian theory is still problematic.
Paul's problem
Paul has been the source of controversy since the time of the Reformation. Many
famous people have commented that Paul’s words did not line up with the
teachings of Jesus Christ. Thomas Jefferson left out the Epistles in his own
translation of the bible. We will not attempt here to make theories on why Paul
taught what he taught. Nor will all the uncanny things found in his letters be
examined. The only thing that will be done here is show the passages from Paul
relevant for this Composition.
It is from Paul that Christianity takes it’s standing point that all men are
unrighteous and can never be anything more:
As it is written: "There
is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is
none who seeks after God. They have all gone out of the way; they have together
become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one."
(Romans 3:10-12)
We already discussed how the Jewish scriptures
teach the existence of righteous men. But wait a second! Isn’t Paul here
quoting those scriptures? Let us see the full context of the verse Paul quotes.
"The
fool has said in his heart, "there is no God". They are corrupt, they
have done abominable works, there is none (of the atheistic fools) who does
good. The Lord looks down from heaven upon the (corrupt) children of men to see
if there are any who understand, who seek God. They have all turned aside,
they have together become corrupt; there is non who does good, no,
not one. Have all the workers of iniquity no
knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call on the Lord?
There they ( the evil people) are in great fear, for God is with the
generation of the RIGHTEOUS. ( Psalm 14:1-5)
Paul took the scripture out of context. The Psalmist was not saying that all men
are unrighteous. He was only referring to atheists. The Psalmist also says that
the righteous people are with God. How can a "divine scripture"
take part of another scripture out of context?
It is also from the Epistles where we get the
other parts of the Christian theory that God demands the shedding of blood for
sins.
Indeed, under the law almost everything is
purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness
of sins. (Hebrews 9:22)
Compare all what we have learned with these teachings from the Epistles. We
first learned the Christian theory of salvation has no basis in Jewish
Scripture. Then we learned it has no basis in the words of Jesus Christ. They
only have basis in a person whose claim to apostleship is questionable. To
keep belief in the Christian theory means that one must believe in the divine
origins of Paul’s epistles despite their problems with both the Jewish
Scriptures and the Gospels.
2. There is one exception to this. Exodus 30 says people
can make atonement by offering money in some cases:
Exodus
30:15-16 The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less, than
the half shekel, when you give the Lord’s offering to make atonement for
yourselves. 16 And you shall take the atonement money from the people
of Israel, and shall appoint it for the service of the tent of meeting; that it
may bring the people of Israel to remembrance before the LORD, so as to make
atonement for yourselves.
Leviticus 4:2, 13, 22, 27; 5:5, 15 (cf. Numbers 15:30).
[9] I will accept no bull
from your house, nor he-goat from your folds. [10] For every beast of the forest
is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. [11] I know all the birds of the air,
and all that moves in the field is mine. [12] "If I were hungry, I would
not tell you; for the world and all that is in it is mine. [13] Do I eat the
flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? [14] Offer to God a sacrifice of
thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the Most High; [15] and call upon me in the
day of trouble;
I will deliver you, and you shall glorify me." Psalm 50
[21] "I hate, I
despise your feasts, and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. [22] Even
though you offer me your burnt offerings and cereal offerings, I will not accept
them, and the peace offerings of your fatted beasts I will not look upon. [23]
Take away from me the noise of your songs;
to the melody of your harps I will not listen.
[24] But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an
ever-flowing stream. Amos 5
[12] Were I to write for him my laws by ten
thousands, they would be regarded as a strange thing.
[13] They love sacrifice; they sacrifice flesh
and eat it; but the LORD has no delight in them.
Now he will remember their iniquity, and punish
their sins;they shall return to Egypt. Hosea 8