In my last post I expressed how the notion of God demanding blood sacrifice, though central to the traditional Easter story, bothers me.
Why is it that the Jews evolved and grew to understand that God does not thirst for blood, while Christians still have yet to reach such an epiphany? Even in the Old Testament there were prophets like Micah and Jeremiah speaking out against the practice. But not so with Christians.
Now, if you go to church and ask someone if they believe in blood sacrifice, they'll probably look at you like you're from Mars. And then they'll tell you they that, of course, sacrifice is wrong. If you push the matter, they might tell you that Jesus ended the need for sacrifice.
However, what our churches fail to realize is that the whole Easter story, as it is generally told, is predicated on the idea that blood sacrifice was needed in the first place. You see, it wouldn't make sense for Jesus to be the end of sacrifice if there was never a need to sacrifice to begin with.
And that's what I believe, that God never demanded blood.
But, if God never desired blood sacrifice, then our understanding of Jesus needs some adjustment. If God doesn't ask for blood, then Jesus is no longer the perfect sacrifice that makes sacrifice unnecessary. So what do we make of Jesus and his death?
We'll continue to explore this issue over we move through Holy Week.
No comments:
Post a Comment