The Passion

[artificial_person]

Interesting fact: The full-fledged theory of Substitionary Atonement, as it is widely accepted today, wasn't proposed until the 11th century. It was the idea of St. Anselm of Canterbury.

An older theory (that is present in Scripture) states that God does simply forgive our sins. The problem is that because of sin, we are held captive by Death. In this view, Jesus uses his death as a way to enter into Hades and set free those held by Death. His blood is the price paid to make the entrance. It cost him his blood to enter Hell and set the captives free. The shedding of his blood was not a payment to God, but a means to an end.

In this understanding, Jesus resurrection represents his victory over Death. It is known as the Christus Victor theory. When one realises that their have been several interpretations of what Jesus' death means, IMO, it makes the story much more richer and meaningful. Something amazing was taking place in Jesus' life and death, and people have been trying to understand what it was for thousands of years. So why do we so often feel the need to make it easily explained, or force one interpretation? I'm fine with uncertainty.

a_p

[Head Mutant]

"I do not believe Jesus was paying any kind of blood-debt." "I do not believe God ever required animal sacrifices in order to forgive, and therefore see no reason to believe Jesus was such a sacrifice."

I don't have time right now to reference you to all the passages, but in order to make these statements you have to ignore or dismiss a heck of a lot of the Bible. God certainly did require animal sacrifices -- Exodus through Deuteronomy make this abundantly clear. He required them because He said so. No, this wasn't an absolute prerequisite, but it was intended to make the concept of innocent sacrifice as the essential way to eliminate the punishment of sins, so that the people would understand the enormity of the sacrifice that Jesus made as he took the sins of the world upon him. And before declaring God as barbaric for demanding that the people sacrifice animals, realize that most religions of that day that used sacrifice usually put a person on the alter -- and God forbade that.

I don't disagree entirely with you, I'd just urge you to really look into the truth of what the Bible presents, not what interpretations have come and gone through the years. Always go to the source. Too often we lightly decide whether to take something as literal or as figurative on our own reckoning without trying to find out if that was truly the way it was meant (not to mention the common trap of taking verses far out of context). Paul and other epistle writers weren't vague on the hows and whys of Christ's sacrifice, resurrection and our salvation through the faith of this power -- they were pretty solid on it from the beginning.

I'd just point to these passages as to the literal (and only) saving power of Christ's suffering, blood, sacrifice, death and resurrection. Notice how many times the concept of blood as a redemptive, purifying power is used, and in how many different references and contexts -- quite extensive if it is a mere metaphor:

Matthew 26:26-28 (The Last Supper / Communion)
Acts 20:28 (God bought us with His own blood)
Romans 3:22-25 (Jesus was a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood)
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (Jesus' death and resurrection for our sins)
Galatians 3:13-14 (Jesus took the "curse" of our sins upon himself while he hung on the cross)
Ephesians 2:13-18 (the sacrifice on the cross was essential to reconcile us back to God, through the blood of Christ)
Colossians 1:19-20 (pretty much the same thing as above)
Hebrews 7:26-28 (Jesus' one sacrifice covered the need for all sacrifices, as it covered the sins of all)
Hebrews 9:11-28 (Explains in details the sacrificial nature of Jesus' blood, connecting to the old testament animal sacrifices, the purification and cleansing power of innocent blood)
1 John 1:7 (Jesus' blood has the power to purify us)

Understand that I'm not writing this to attack you or try to proclaim my own understanding as the perfect one. I write this because I feel strongly that the scriptures are not vague on this point, and I'd urge you as a brother to reexamine why you believe as you do -- not because I say you're right or wrong, but because we must all test, examine, reexamine, and question these beliefs and facts in order to see if they come through the limited fire of our examination or fall apart completely.

"Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage -- with great patience and careful instruction. For a time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear." (2 Tim 4:2-3)

[artificial_person]

Thank you Justin! I really do appreciate your concern, and realise that you are being honest and sincere, not preachy. I am quite familiar with the verses you have quoted. I realise that the animal sacrifices of Judaism were much better than the human sacrifices of other religions. I still see them as a human attempt to be reconciled with God.

In making the statements I have made, I neither ignore nor dismiss what the Bible says. I understand it in the context and culture of the time it was written. The Jewish people truly believed God had asked for animal sacrifices, and Jesus' death, being close to Passover, was easily fitted into that system.

Though I understand that Yahweh (the Jewish people's attempt to name and understand the Divine) may ask for such in Scripture, I do not interpret these statements as literal words from the mouth of God. Jesus proclaimed forgiveness free from sacrifice (as did some of the prophets of the Hebrew Bible). To interpret his death as the final, cleansing sacrifice, was to proclaim God's forgiveness without need of the Temple. It was to subvert Temple authority and end it's monopoly on access to God.

That said, I do believe Jesus took our sins upon himself. I do see them canceled out by his cross, his blood, and his love. But I see this as a powerfully true metaphor of God's radical grace, an event in human history that points to a deeper spiritual truth. Words can never capture ultimate truth- they can only point towards it.

I believed as you do for a long time, but the more I have searched, prayed, and opened myself to God, these are the conclusions I find myself coming to. I must trust that the Spirit will lead me into truth. Jesus taught and embodied a way of life, and it is his way that I strive to live by. For me, that is enough.

Once again, in all sincerity, I thank you. And also know that I am not closed-minded to what you are saying, it simply is not what I feel God is revealing to me. I am always open to new and deeper understanding.

a_p

"Above all, love one another deeply, for love covers a multitude of sins." - 1 Peter 4:8

[Head Mutant]

It's cool, man. As with any subject, if you ever feel you've arrived at a final, definite mastery, then you're deluding yourself. It always amazes me how much more I have to learn about everything, but, y'know, I'll have this God thing figured out in two weeks tops.

[artificial_person]

Thanks, J-Man. And by the way, I've decided that my new reply when asked what I thought about The Passion will be, "Eh, I thought the book was better."

And you're definitely right- there's no way we're going to get it all figured out in one lifetime- and I don't believe in a God who expects us to. As long as we try our best, and truly love one another- well, I think that's all that really counts.

Peace,
a_p

[bladestarr]

*reads the 6 PAGES of comments on the Passion for the first time at 2 AM*

Uhhhhhh-huh-huh-huh.... Golgotha...... rubber poop monster... funny....uhhhhhh-huh-huh-huh. ;D

[Head Mutant]

promontoryartists.org/lookingcloser/movie%20reviews/H-P/passionofthechrist-letter.htm

I thought this was an excellent letter to Christians by a Christian concerning the film, and sums up a lot of my feelings about some people's rabid efforts to turn a confusing and violent film into a blunt evangelistic tool.

[Hucklebubba]

What gets me is people who ask others if they "liked" the movie. What a weird question. How are you supposed to respond to that? "Why, yes, I'd call it the feel-good movie of the summer!"

As long as I'm already venting bouge, I may as well mention that, although I'm happy Passion has made such an impact, I sort of wish it wasn't being turned into such a huge merchandising cow.

Looking at the shelves of the Christian bookstore where I work leads me to believe that a fair number of Christian authors saw Passion's early grossing figures, called up their publishers, and said something along the lines of "All aboard the gravy train!" Woo woo!!"

Be on the lookout for Passion of the Christ lunch boxes and bomber jackets, as well as Gethsemane and Golgotha adventure sets.

[artificial_person]

Thanks J. I love Jeffrey Overstreet's reviews, and hadn't thought to look to see if he had reviewed The Passion yet. I agree whole-heartedly with his comments.

a_p

[PoolMan]

Hucklebubba said:

What a weird question. How are you supposed to respond to that? "Why, yes, I'd call it the feel-good movie of the summer!"

That is weird. It's only March!