While it might seem gross and barbaric, all Christians confess that salvation is through the blood of Jesus (Eph. 1:7). But what does that really mean? Does God demand death? Is the blood a symbol of something else? Does it speak of a price paid? Or a gift given? And what is this price? This gift?
As Easter approaches—when we celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus—we must reflect again on the blood of Jesus.
The Shedding of Blood
The two go to texts to understand the significance of blood are Hebrews 9:22b and Leviticus 17:11. These say that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Heb. 9:22) and that “the life of a creature is in the blood, and I [God] have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” (Lev. 17:11).
The framework for putting these verses together is something like this:
- The penalty for sin is death; death is symbolized in the giving of blood;
- When blood is offered (either one’s own blood or a substitute) then forgiveness is granted.
- The result is that sins are forgiven through the offering a substitute of death to God, symbolized in the offering of blood.
- Therefore, we are forgiven our sins because Jesus received the death penalty (his shed blood) as a substitute for us.
The main idea is that sacrifice is substituting one kind of death for another death.
But are things really this straightforward?
Blood and Life
Many look at Lev. 17:11 as offering blood as a symbol of life, rather than the symbol of death. The text even says as much, “the life of a creature is in the blood.” If the life is in the blood, then any offering of blood is actually an offering or releasing of life through sacrifice. In this view blood is offered as a defense against death, or to act as a ritual cleanser to wipe away the effects of sin. In this view God—who is the God of life—is offering life through the sacrificial system as a mean of overcome the death entering in through sin.
In this view—instead of substituting one death for another death—the idea of sacrifice is to exchange death for life.
The death caused by sin is counteracted by life (temporarily, through the imperfect animal sacrifices).
Ritual Detergent
Blood not only counteracts the effects of sin (which is death), but it also cleanses from the effects of sin.
Jacob Milgrom, and others, have argued that the best understanding of the ritual context in Leviticus is that “atonement” refers to a process of cleansing—cleaning the tabernacle and temple of the sin-induced pollutant of death. The entire sacrificial system was a means for maintaining the “cleanness” of Israel, and therefore to keep it holy as God is holy. Unlike the “unclean” Gentiles, God cleanses Israel and draws near to her in and through the temple.
Even the Day of Atonement, the linchpin of many substitutionary atonement theories, is specifically for cleansing. Here is the summary statement for the Day of Atonement: “For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you to cleanse you, so that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord” (Lev. 16:30).
Sacrificial blood, therefore, has to do with cleansing in some fashion. It is the means by which God keeps his people clean from the effects of sin and death—and enables God to dwell with his people.
New Testament Cleansing
And this view that blood cleanses or purifies is also prominent in the New Testament.
Let’s look again at Her. 9:22b. The part we looked at says this, “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.”
But the entire verse connects blood to cleansing: “The law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Heb. 9:22).
“How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!” (Heb. 9:14)
“Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins.” (Hebrews 10:2)
“…and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin…If we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:7, 9)
What We Get Wrong About the Blood
Certainly the “blood” of Jesus is a powerful symbol of a still more powerful reality. But how we understand this reality is extremely important for our understanding of salvation, and for our understanding of who God is.
But we must attend to the entire counsel of Scripture as we seek to understand what Christ’s blood has done for us. In reality, sacrifices—and the blood of the sacrifices—didn’t do just one thing, they did at least four things.
Atoning Sacrifice
Of course, all this talk about blood requires some sort of understanding of just what “atonement” means in the first place. And this would mean looking at the pivotal statement by Paul in Romans 3:25 where he says referring to Jesus, “whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith.”
Just what “sacrifice of atonement” [or hilasterion in Greek] means if pivotal for understanding the death of Jesus, the significance of his blood, and what it means for our salvation.
The next post will cover the three options for understanding this sacrifice of atonement as either a propitiation (appeasement of God’s wrath), an expiation (cleansing from sin), or as mercy-seat (the place for receiving God’s presence).
(For a free mini-course expanding your understanding of why Jesus died, see The Forgotten Reasons for Jesus’ Death — it’s a distilled version of my lectures at Northern Seminary on the atonement.)
One reply on “What We Get Wrong About the Blood of Jesus”
I can’t wrap my mind around the fact that the “blood of Jesus” can atone for anything since “human blood sacrifice” is an abomination according to the Torah and the Prophets. I can understand the concept of his providing atonement as an expression of the “death of the righteous” which makes a lot of sense (like when the High Priest died and atoned for the accidental murderers in the cities of refuge). His being likened to an “asham” is fine, but I see that as a metaphor for his voluntary sacrifice and being a “guilt or trespass” sacrifice or intentional or unintentional sins and not a violation against the prohibition of “human blood sacrifice.” If you could explain how this is NOT a “human blood sacrifice”, I’d appreciate your insights. Thank you and God bless.