This entry will outline the effectiveness and imperfections in the Hebrew institution of sacrifice and attempt to demonstrate how the use of Jesus' death to reinvent and establish an alternative version of sacrifice and atonment has further damaged the potential for relationship between God and humanity rather than repair the flaws in the previous system. Did Jesus come to repair the attitudes of humanity and reconcile them with God or replace God's work with his own and end God's parenthood?
The process of sacrifice, described extensively in Leviticus (1-7), is believed by many to have been instituted by God, who taught Moses the torah (teaching, way or law) on Mount Sinai after the Hebrews’ exodus from Egypt. These holy laws are to be kept to allow Israel the opportunity to receive the blessings of God (Deut. 28:1-14), live in God’s presence (Exodus 13:21, 22; 26; 38:8-38) and avoid curses brought about by un-reconciled disobedience (Deut. 27:11-26, 28:15-68). Sacrifice brought with it atonement (Lev. 23:26-32; Num. 29:7-11), allowing God’s holy presence to continue to dwell amongst the people (Routledge, 2008) by compensating for previous sins or disobedience committed (Pawson, 2003). God’s forgiving past grievances with the presentation of a sacrifice aided the construction of a mutual love and respect shared between humanity and God. Israel would forever be united in a holy relationship and a holy covenant as a holy people.
 |
| Hebrew/Jewish High Priest Sacrificing an animal on the altar. |
However, after knowing and repeating the sacrifices continuously, after countless generations, God’s chosen people of Israel began to lose focus leading to God’s rejection (Jeremiah 12:7). Sacrifice became mere acts and lost meaning and importance in the people’s hearts. Respect and love for God were replaced by pomp and love for oneself (Luke 20:45-47). Jesus is said to live at a time when the leaders of worship were often seen to demonstrate their worthiness to the people rather than spend time flaunting faith before God in the temple (Matt. 23:13-28). The efficacious nature of, and flippant attitude towards, sacrifice that had evolved under the supervision of the complacent priests needed to be changed (Winter, 1995). Jesus’ crucifixion was intended to create a universal and everlasting sacrifice which could atone for all people’s sins (Rom. 5:1, 6:6). Although this concept is fairly clear it is the dynamics of the salvific sacrifice Jesus had made on humanity’s behalf which are much more difficult to explain. Over the course of centuries many differing ideas and explanations for the atonement given through Jesus have been posited to Christians. The adaptations were geared towards promoting a much more distant and wrathful God than the relational and integral God known to the Ancient Hebrews. God became a master or debtor to humanity rather than a loving Father.
 |
| Jesus teaching his faithful followers. |
God designed the original sacrificial institution to allow humanity the access to pardon, thanksgiving and atonement. Though Israel had forgotten the meaningfulness and power of the message carried within sacrifice they simply required correction, a re-ignition of the dwindling flame of faith within their hearts. Jesus had brought with him the idea of creating a sacrifice of the heart (Joel 2:13) by replacing Israel’s many sacrifices with his penultimate sacrificial crucifixion. The problem with this is twofold:
1. Each person should be responsible for their own sin and therefore be the active member in repairing their personal relationship with God. To attain atonement the offender must bring their own offering for their own wrongdoing, no one can absolve their guilt on their behalf. To do so would be immoral (Rees, 2003). This very personal element is removed by Jesus taking the opportunity for meeting with God during reconciliation and demonstrating responsibility for action before God from Israel. The intimacy of sacrifice is stolen away.
2. God’s laws are unchanging, eternal and resolute. Jesus also upholds the incorrigible nature of the Mosaic Law. The replacement of Levitical sacrifice eliminates the possibility of that crucial section of law being performed, making it redundant and unimportant. Jesus’ intentions were good: enrich the worship of heart and spirit within Israel and enthuse Israel with newly revitalised glorification of the Heavenly Father. However, what he actually did was undermine the divine laws of God, remove personal responsibility and reconciliation, and end God’s intimacy and fragile relationship with his people by corrupting the once simple, effective and cherished atonement.
No comments:
Post a Comment