Jesus’ Vicarious Death is Neither Necessary Nor Foundational for Salvation (Forgiveness of Sin).
Jesus’ Vicarious Death is Neither Necessary Nor Foundational for Salvation (Forgiveness of Sin).
Accept The Pauline Verses of the Bible that Jesus’ Vicarious Death is Neither Necessary Nor Foundational For Salvation. Yet [Bible Hebrews 9:22 ]is to be rescinded.
[Based on Authentic Scriptural Evidence & Please check its narrations for better clarity]
Jews believed in a concept of forgiveness called “Mehilah” which meant mercifulcancellation of sins without any need of indemnification or clearance of debts:
“Mehilah is a technical, legal term that applies when the lender of money forgoes or waives all or part of the debt another person owes him. When applied to the consequence of sin, mehilah is the remission or cancellation of the punishment and any of the legal consequences of the sinful act.” (Forgiving the Unforgivable?)
Jews never had the concept of vicarious atonement for their sins, on the contrary, they had a lot of confidence and belief in their “Teshuva” – sincere repentance. They believed that sincere “Teshuva” is never denied by God:
“Rabbi Johanan explained:Were it not written in the text, it would be impossible for us to say such a thing; this verse teaches us that the Holy One, blessed be He, drew his tallit (prayer shawl) round Him like the prayer leader of a congregation and showed Moses the order of prayer. He said to him:“Whenever Israel sin, let them carry out this service before Me (i.e., read these passages containing the thirteen attributes of God’s mercy), and I will forgive them. And Rabbi Judah added that the verse, “Behold I make a covenant” (34:10) recorded just a few verses later, indicates that the revelation of these thirteen attributes actually formed a covenant that guaranteed that the people would never be turned away without forgiveness. This formula is the central theme of the penitential Selihot prayers recited during the High Holy Day season, culminating with Yom Kippur. (Forgiving the Unforgivable?)
From the forgoing, quite naturally, Jews never felt any real need for somebody to be hanged for their sins, contrariwise, they reclined to oft – repentance:
“Essentially, God is a forgiving God who desires the repentance of sinners. Three times a day during the daily prayers, Jews recite the blessings: Bring us back, our Father, to Your Torah and bring us near, our King, to Your service. Cause us to return to You in perfect repentance. Blessed are You, God, Who desires repentance. Forgive us, our Father, for we have sinned. Pardon us, our King, for we have transgressed. For You pardon and forgive. Blessed are You, God, the gracious One Who pardons abundantly.This theme is repeated again and again throughout the liturgy. The rabbis even saw divine kindness and mercy reflected in God’s Name itself. The Tetragrammaton, YHWH, isused as God’s Name when He manifests His middat ha-rahamim (love, kindness and forgiveness), whereas Elohim is used to designate His attribute of justice.” (Forgiving the Unforgivable?)
They derived these teachings from their sacred scriptures. Consider the following biblical verses which stress on the concept of repentance and sub-sequent anticipation of forgiveness:
“Return to the LORD your God, people of Israel. Your sin has made you stumble and fall. Return to the LORD, and let this prayer be your offering to him: “Forgive all our sins and accept our prayer, and we will praise you as we have promised. Assyria can never save us. We will never again say to our idols that they are our God. O LORD, you show mercy to those who have no one else to turn to.” (Hosea 14:2)
Note assiduously that according to so called biblical prophet Hosea and his community, the prayer – (“this prayer”) – of repentance and guilt was the“offering” to God for forgiveness of sins; the “offering” was not the alleged, vicarious sacrifice of Messiah (peace be upon him).
Jews had no belief that they would be denied forgiveness if they did not believe in Jesus’ (peace be upon him) alleged death, rather, they believed that if they misuse God’s oft forgiving capacity by repeatedly sinning then their repentances would be repealed and they would not be forgiven:
“Nevertheless, despite God’s desire for repentance, His essential capacity for mercy and His identification as a God of forgiveness, He Himself may withhold forgiveness at times. This is so when a penitent has not truly repented or if he uses the future possibility of penitence as an excuse to justify his illicit behavior, as the Mishnah, Yoma 85b, indicates, If one says, “I shall sin and repent, sin and repent,” no opportunity will be given to him to repent.23 [If one says], “I shall sin and the Day of Atonement will procure atonement for me,” the Day of Atonement procures for him no atonement.” (Forgiving the Unforgivable?)
While Jews derived their concepts of “Mehilah” – cancellation of debts and“Teshuva” – sincere repentance from Bible, as we would shortly see more of it in this paper, Saul who changed his Jewish name to Gentile Paul – contravened Jewish Scriptures to derive Gentile concepts of forgiveness through offering of flesh and blood of innocent.
Paul preached that sins would not be forgiven unless blood and flesh of Jesus (peace be upon him) is offered to God:
“And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.” (Heb 9:22)
Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: (Gal 1:3-4)
In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; (Eph 1:7)
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. (Tit 2:13-14)
And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. (1 Co 15:14)
And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. (Col 1:20)
(King James Version, e-Sword)
In the above passages, Paul assumes that the only way sin of mankind can be forgiven and subsequent salvation can be attained, is through the blood shed of Jesus (peace be upon him).
Nevertheless, Paul by writing the above passages and Christian apologists by appealing to the above verses reject the teachings of multiple Old Testament (OT) Prophets and New Testament (NT) Prophet – Jesus (peace be upon him) himself. As we are going to see, Paul failed to realize that their (OT prophet’s) deity was less an exacting accountant and more a merciful God.
Pre – Pauline Teachings on Repentance and Forgiveness
For instance, consider the sayings of OT prophet Joel:
“But even now,” says the LORD, “repent sincerely, and return to me with fasting and weeping and mourning. Let your broken heart show your sorrow; tearing your clothes is not enough.” Come back to the LORD your God. He is kind and full of mercy; he is patient and keeps his promise; he isalways ready to forgive and not punish. Perhaps the LORD your God will change his mind and bless you with abundant crops. Then you can offer him corn and wine. (Joel 2: 12-14)
Notice that unlike Paul who nails the forgiveness of sins on the cross, Jewish prophet Joel emphatically states that God is too kind, forgiving and considerate to accept sincere repentance and blot out sins! Joel’s God invites sinners to Himself so that He may forgive their sins! God of the OT does not need any cross to forgive sins, His mere virtue of kindness is enough amalgamated with the fasting, weeping and mourning of sinners.
Observe that God does not instruct Joel’s community to return with belief in the alleged, would-be crucifixion of Christ (peace be upon him) but with (i) fasting (ii) weeping (iii) and mourning!
In fact we do find God forgiving sins by blessing Joel’s community with abundance of crops production:
“…Have pity on your people, LORD. Do not let other nation despise us and mock us by saying, “Where is your God?’” Then the LORD showed concern for his land; he had mercy on his people. He answered them: “Now I am going to give you corn and wine and olive-oil, and you will be satisfied. Other nations will not despise you. I will remove the locust army that came from the north and will drive some of them in to the desert.” (Joel 2: 17-20)
Observe that God of the OT did not forgive Joel’s community because they believed that one day Messiah (peace be upon him) would be allegedly crucified, but they were forgiven solely on God’s mercy when they pleaded to him for “pity”.
Another noticeable point is that locusts has always been one of the means through which the God of OT has wrecked His wrath on the wrong doers,
“You will sow plenty of seed, but reap only a small harvest, because the locusts will eat your crops.” (Deuteronomy 28:38)
“All your trees and crops will be devoured by insects.” (Deuteronomy 28:42)
“I will give you back what you lost in the years when swarms of locusts ate your crops. It was I who sent this army against you.” (Joel 2:25)
Nevertheless, God drove locusts away as a sign of His mercy and forgiveness on Joel’s community:
“I will give you back what you lost in the years when swarms of locusts ate your crops. It was I who sent this army against you.” (Joel 2:25)
However, Paul’s influence makes Trinitarian apologists like Sam Shamoun claim that Christ’s (peace be upon him) vicarious death was the only way their sins can be absolved:
“In the first place, the very same Gospels, which these dawagandists pervert in order make them say something contrary to the intended meaning of the inspired authors, are the very same writings which go out of their way to affirm that Jesus’ vicarious death is both necessary and foundational for salvation.” (Was Jesus’ sacrificial death necessary for the forgiveness of sins?)
However, contrary to what Paul teaches and Shamoun’s claim, God of the OT had entirely different concepts for the forgiveness of sins and subsequent salvation.
For OT Prophets (and their community) Christ’s (peace be upon him) vicarious death was not at all required, let alone, “foundational for salvation”, since their sins were always welcomed to be forgiven as we saw above how Joel’s community was forgiven!
If Jesus’ vicarious death is (really) both necessary and foundational for salvation then how was Joel’s community forgiven without it? Seems it was not so “foundational” for them.
Consider another offer of forgiveness. This time the community of OT Prophet Ezekiel (peace be upon him) was to be forgiven without Jesus’ (peace be upon him) alleged sacrifice:
“Now, mortal man, I am making you a watchman for the nation of Israel. You must pass on to them the warnings I give you. If I announce that an evil man is going to die but you do not warn him to change his ways so that he can save his life, then he will die, still a sinner, and I will hold you responsible for his death. If you do warn an evil man and he does not stop sinning, he will die, still a sinner, but your life will be spared.”
Individual Responsibility
The LORD spoke to me. “Mortal man.” he said, “repeat to the Israelites what they are saying: We are burdened with our sins and the wrongs we have done. We are wasting away. How can we live? Tell them that as surely as I, the Sovereign LORD, am the living God, I do not enjoy seeing a sinner die. I would rather see him stop sinning and live. Israel, stop the evil you are doing. Why do you want to die?
“I may warn an evil man that he is going to die, but if he stops sinning and does what is right and good – for example, if he returns the security he took for a loan or gives back what he stole – if he stops sinning andfollows the laws that give life, he will not die, but live. I will forgive the sins he has committed, and he will live because he has done what is right and good. And your people say that what I do isn’t right! No, it’s their way that isn’t right. When a righteous man stops doing god and starts doing evil, he will die for it. When an evil man gives up sinning and does what is right and good, he has saved his life. But Israel, you say that what I do isn’t right. I am going to judge you by what you do.” (Ezekiel 33: 7-11, 14-20)
The verses teach the following:
(1)No matter how big the sins and wrongs be, “Life can be saved” or in other words, forgiveness/salvation can be achieved by (2) turning away from sins, doing good deeds and (3) following the “Law that give life”, (in other words “law” is not a “curse” as Paul erroneously assumes (c.f. Galatians 3: 13) but a blessing) and then (4) God “will forgive the sins they have committed”.
If God is/was willing to forgive even heavy burden of sins by virtue of His attribute, sinner’s repentance, acts of good deeds and obedience to Law – then was it required for Ezekiel’s community to believe in any vicarious atonement which wasallegedly going to take place thousands of years later? Or, was it required for any person to later “volunteer” himself for crucifixion for sins of others?
It is not surprising that rather than any mention of vicarious atonement, Bible compilers gave the sub-heading to these passages as “Individual Responsibility”– not Christ’s (peace be upon him) responsibility to bear the burden of others!
Another important observation is the stress on refraining from evil andencouragement to do good deeds since (5) God will “judge by what you do” – not what Christ (peace be upon him) did (or would do) for them. This also questions Paul’s self made doctrine of mere faith on cross (c.f. Romans 3: 20, 28).
Also please observe the stress that sinners should follow the LAW since it gives LIFE. No wonder we found Jesus (peace be upon him) in the New Testament obedient to the Law:
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Mat 5:17-19, King James Version, E-Sword)
Even after the assertions of God through biblical Prophet Ezekiel (peace be upon him) and Jesus (peace be upon him), we find Paul contravening the sacred Lawsthereby contradicting Jesus (peace be upon him) also:
But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. (Gal 3:11)
The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the LAW. (1Co 15:56)
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (Rom 3:28)
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. (Rom 3:20)
For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Heb 7:19)
(King James, e-Sword Version)
Observe that for Paul, “Law” is not just impotent but that sin gathers its viability from God’s sacred Laws! When a person (Paul) believes that Law provides viability to sins (!) then he would certainly like to do away and water down its benefits and coin a new doctrine of forgiveness through cross – even though God asserts that Law provides “life” (2.).
Another notable facet, as mentioned earlier, that God will judge mortals according to their deeds, however, Paul again infringes God. Consider the biblical verse where God stresses on personal good deeds:
But Israel, you say that what I do isn’t right. I am going to judge you by whatyou do (Ezekiel 33:20)
Compare it against Paul’s words:
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (Rom 3:28)
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. (Rom 3:20)
Hardly did Paul realized that he was even contravening his “lord and savior” since Jesus (peace be upon him) for salvation, (1.) did not place any weightage on cross (2.) gave much importance to deeds. As is illustrated from the following statements of Jesus (peace be upon him):
“And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there isnone good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said,Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Mat 19:16-19, King James, e-Sword Version)
Observe that according to Jesus (peace be upon him), not Paul, salvation can be achieved by (i) not murdering (ii) abstinence from adultery (iii) abstinence from theft (iv) abstinence from false witnessing (v) honoring parents (vi) and loving our neighbor. Al-hamdolillah.
Starkly, Jesus (peace be upon him) did not enlist belief on his alleged cross to attain salvation which for Shamoun is “both necessary and foundational for salvation”. Seems that for Christ (peace be upon him), cross was neither necessary nor foundational for salvation!
Christians need to choose between Shamoun and Jesus (peace be upon him) – I will put my money on Jesus (peace be upon him).
No matter what God ordained, Paul always seems to contravene Him and yet he is ironically purported to be a divinely appointed “apostle”! More on this topic in our future papers, inshallah.
Bible does not stop with biblical prophets Joel and Ezekiel only (peace be upon him) but even Jeremiah taught the concepts of forgiving God through repentance from sins.
In the following verses observe the ghastly sins committed by Jeremiah’s community:
“But the worship of Baal, the god of shame, has made us lose flocks and herds, sons and daughters – everything that our ancestors have worked for since ancient times. We should lie down in shame and let our disgrace cover us. We and our ancestors have always sinned against the LORD our God; we have never obeyed his commands.” (Jeremiah 3:24-25)
Even after the worship of the idol – “Baal”, witness the love, mercy and forgiving capacity of God – Almighty:
“The LORD says, “People of Israel, if you want to turn, then turn back to me. If you are faithful to me and remove the idols I hate, it will be right for you to swear by my name. Then all the nations will ask me to bless them,and they will praise me.” (Jeremiah 4:1-2)
Notice that even when the Israelites acceded that they have “ALWAYS” sinned against God by worshipping others besides Him and “NEVER” ever obeyed His command, the forgiving God responded by embracing them “BACK TO HIM (SELF)”. God had no need for Jesus’ (peace be upon him) blood to forgive even the most hideous and perennial sin of worshipping BAAL!
In fact God confirms through Jeremiah that if sinners mend their ways then He would forgive them (without any need of innocent’s blood):
“If at any time I say that I am going to uproot, break down, or destroy any nation or kingdom, but then that nation turns from its evil, I will not do what I said I would.” (Jeremiah 18:8)
The only ground on which God would not afflict punishment on the sinning nations is when it wouldturn from its evil. Starkly, God did not need the alleged cross to forgive sins.
According to yet another biblical figure, Samuel, God – The most merciful will blot out even the most heinous sin if heartily repented for:
“Samuel said to the people of Israel, “If you are going to turn to the LORD with all your hearts, you must get rid of all the foreign gods and the images of the goddess Astarte. Dedicate yourselves completely to the LORD and worship only him, and he will rescue you from the power of the Philistines.” (1 Samuel 7: 3-4)
Notice that according to Samuel (also), God “will rescue” the Israelites not because they believed Jesus (peace be upon him) would allegedly die on cross someday and subsequently their sins would be forgiven, rather, they would be forgiven if they turned from sins “with all your (their) hearts”. Thus, here again, a strong importance is laid on heartfelt repentance and God’s infinite mercy rather than any alleged cross!
In fact, at one place God explicitly says that to forgive sins He does not needsacrifices but emotions of heart:
“I do not reprimand you because of your sacrifices and the burnt – offerings you always bring me. And yet I do not need bulls from your farms…Do I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of goats? Let the giving of thanks be your sacrifice to God,” (Psalms 50:8-14)
Next we have very important chapter from Psalms where in important OT prophet David (peace be upon him) not only teaches how to repent but he also puts forth the conditions how sins could be forgiven:
Jewish commentator Solomon Ben Isaac (Rashi) also concurs of the free and unconditional mercy:
For My thoughts are not, etc.:My laws are not like the laws of man [lit. flesh and blood]. As for you, whoever confesses in judgment is found guilty, but, as for Me, whoever confesses and gives up his evil way, is granted clemency(Source)
It can be deduced that for grant of clemency or forgiveness, unlike the understanding of vicarious atonement, one needs to:
- Confess his/her sins.
- Turn away from sins.
- And subsequently, receive clemency/forgiveness of sins.
In the above facts, it is hard to insert the concept of vicarious atonement through the alleged death of Messiah (peace be upon him).
From the above cited Isaiah verse, esteemed Christian Commentator Albert Barnes (also) postulates pre-requisites to avail salvation. It would be interesting to observe if he gives place to the alleged blood and cross of Christ (peace be upon him). He comments:
“Let the wicked … – In this verse we are told what is necessary in order to seek God and to return to him, and the encouragement which we have to do it. The first step is for the sinner to forsake his way. He must come to a solemn pause, and resolve to abandon all his transgressions. His evil course; his vices; his corrupt practices; and his dissipated companions, must be forsaken.
And the unrighteous man – Margin, “Man of iniquity.” This is a literal translation. The address is made to all people, for all are such.
His thoughts – The Hebrew word denotes all that is the object of thought; and the idea is, that the man must abandon his plans and purposes of life. The thoughts, in the sight of a holy God, are not less important than the external deportment; and no man can obtain his favor who is not ready to abandon his erroneous opinions, his pride and vanity, his plans of evil, and his purposes of life that are opposed to God.
And let him return unto the Lord – Man, in the Scriptures, is everywhere described as having wandered away from the true God. Religion consists in returning to him for pardon, for consolation, for protection, for support. The true penitent is desirous of returning to him, as the prodigal son returned to his father’s house; the man who loves sin chooses to remain at a distance from God.
And to our God – The God of his people; the God of the speaker here. It is the language of those who have found mercy. The idea is, that he who has bestowed mercy on us, will be ready to bestow it on others. ‘We have returned to God. We have had experience of his compassion, and we have such a conviction of his overflowing mercy, that we can assure all others that if they will return to our God, he will abundantly pardon them.’ The doctrine is, that they who have found favor have a deep conviction of the abounding compassion of God, and such a sense of the fullness of his mercy, that they are disposed to offer the assurance to all others, that they may also obtain full forgiveness. Compare Rev 22:17 – ‘And let him that heareth say, Come.’
For he will abundantly pardon – Margin, as Hebrew, ‘Multiply to pardon.’ He abounds in forgiveness. This is the conviction of those who are pardoned; this is the promise of inestimable worth which is made to all who are willing to return to God. On the ground of this promise all may come to him, and none who come shall be sent empty away. (Albert Barnes’ notes on the Bible, Isaiah 55:7)
It is observable that Barnes felt no need to mention the alleged cross of Christ (peace be upon him) to forgive sins, on the contrary, he states that sinners need to return to God as the “prodigal son” returned to his father. Now, this father exacted no price from his squandered son to forgive him, rather he merely forgave him, accepted him and went out of the way to organize a feast for him!
Book of Proverbs also has the criterions for free mercy without any conditions of cross:
“You will never succeed in life if you try to hide your sins. Confess them and give them up; then God will show MERCY to you.” (Proverbs 28:13)
Once again, to have “success” one needs to (i) Confess his/her sins (ii) Turn away from them (iii) subsequently, God will show “mercy” and forgive sins.
Did you notice if God required any human sacrifice for forgiveness! Rather His forgiveness comes out “freely, fully, without any grudges” or reserves even on the most hideous of sins.
Not merely Jewish Rashi but even much celebrated Christian scholars John Gill, who does believe in vicarious atonement, agrees that God does and can forgive sinsfreely without the need any human sacrifice:
In some things there may be a likeness between the thoughts of God and the thoughts of men, as to the nature of them: thoughts are natural and essential to them both; they are within them, are internal acts, and unknown to others, till made known; but then the thoughts of men are finite and limited, whereas the thoughts of the Lord are infinite and boundless; men’s thoughts have a beginning, but the Lord’s have none; though not so much the nature as the quality of them is here intended: the thoughts of men are evil, even the imagination of their thoughts, yea, every imagination is, and that always and only so; but the thoughts of God are holy, as appears from his purposes and covenant, and all his acts of grace, in redemption, calling, and preparing his people for glory: the thoughts of men, as to the object of them, are vain, and nothing worth; their thoughts and sentiments of things are very different from the Lord’s, as about sin, concerning Christ, the truths of the Gospel, the people of God, religion, holiness, and a future state, and in reference to the business of salvation; they think they can save themselves; that their own works of righteousness are sufficient to justify them; their privileges and profession such, that they shall be saved; their wisdom, riches, and honour, a security to them from damnation: however, that their sincere obedience, with repentance for what is amiss, will entitle them to happiness: but the thoughts of God are the reverse of all this; particularly with respect to pardoning mercy their thoughts are different; carnal men think of mercy, but not of justice, and of having pardoning mercy in an absolute way, and not through Christ, and without conversion and repentance; and so this is a reason why men’s thoughts are to be forsaken, because so very unlike to the Lord’s. OR else these words are to be considered as an argument, proving that God does abundantly pardon all returning sinners; since he is not like men, backward to forgive, especially great and aggravated crimes, but is ready, free, and willing to forgive, even those of the most aggravated circumstances.
Neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord; the ways which God prescribes and directs men to walk in are different from theirs; his are holy, theirs unholy; his are plain, theirs crooked; his are ways of light, theirs ways of darkness; his are pleasant, theirs not so, at least in the issue; his lead to life, theirs to death; and therefore there is good reason why they should leave their evil ways, and walk in his. Moreover, the ways which he takes in the salvation of men are different from those which they, naturally pursue, and especially in the pardon of sin; he pardons freely, fully, without any reserve, or private grudge, forgetting as well as forgiving.(John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible, Isaiah 55:8)
It is very interesting and ironical to note that John Gill, a proponent of vicarious atonement, firstly defends forgiveness through Christ (peace be upon him), however, he continues to decidedly assert that the verse “proves” God forgives incessantly to all returning sinners (why?) since He is unlike niggardly men“backward to forgive especially GREAT and AGGRAVATED CRIMES” ; He does not pardons on the basis of someone else’s (alleged) sacrificial death but He forgives freely, fully, WITHOUT ANY RESERVE OR PRIVATE GRUDGE, keeps nothing in His mind!
As we saw that a returning sinner is forgiven freely and “FULLY” by the outpouring of a loving and merciful God then is Christ’s (peace be upon him) alleged death really required?
In fact Paul alludes that Jesus’ (peace be upon him) (alleged) death is in vain if there is free flowing and unconditional forgiveness of God:
“I refuse to reject the grace of God. But if a person is put right with God through the Law, it means that Christ died for nothing!” (Galatians 2:21)
The book of Isaiah is far from over. We quote yet another passage from it:
“Thou hast bought me no sweet cane with money, neither hast thou filled me with the fat of thy sacrifices: but thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities. I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.” (Isa 43: 24-25, King James Version, e-Sword version.)
Unlike Christian theology where sins are forgiven because of Christ’s (peace be upon him) alleged death’s sake, in the above passage, God emphatically asserts that He forgives sins of HIS OWN SAKE!
Albert Barnes provides a very unlike Christian commentary on the above verses where he puts no stress on the alleged crucifixion of Jesus (peace be upon him):
“I, even I, am he – This verse contains a gracious assurance that their sins would be blotted out, and the reason why it would be done. The pronoun ‘I’ is repeated to make it emphatic, as in Isa 43:11. Perhaps also God designs to show them the evil of the sins which are mentioned in the previous verses, by the assurance that they were committed against him who alone could forgive, and who had promised them pardon. The passage also reminds them, that it was God alone who could pardon the sins of which, as a nation, they had been guilty.
That blotteth out thy transgressions - This metaphor is taken from the custom of keeping accounts, where, when a debt is paid, the charge is blotted or cancelled. Thus God says he blotted out the sins of the Jews. He cancelled them. He forgave them. Of course, when forgiven, punishment could not be exacted, and he would treat them as pardoned; that is, as his friends.
For mine own sake - Not because you deserve it, or have any claim, or that it would not be right to punish you. Not even primarily to promote your happiness and salvation, but for my sake;
1. To show the benevolence of my character;
2. To promote my glory by your forgiveness and salvation (see Eze 36:22).
And will not remember thy sins – They shall be forgiven. Hezekiah Isa 38:17 expresses the same idea by saying ‘thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back.’ We may learn from this verse:
- That it is God only who can pardon sin. How vain, then, is it for man to attempt it! How wicked for man to claim the prerogative! And yet it is an essential part of the papal system that the Pope and his priests have the power of remitting the penalty of transgression.
2. That this is done by God solely for his own sake. It is not,
(a) because we have any claim to it, for then it would not be pardon,but justice.
(b) because we have any power to compel God to forgive, for who can contend with him, and how could mere power procure pardon? It is not
(c) because we have any merit, for then also it would be justice, and we have no merit. Nor is it
(d) primarily in order that we may be happy, for our happiness is a matter not worthy to be named, compared with the honor of God. But it is solely for his own sake – to promote his glory – to show his perfections – to evince the greatness of his mercy and compassion – and to show his boundless and eternal love.
3. They who are pardoned should live to his glory, and not to themselves. For that they were forgiven, and it should be the grand purpose of their lives so to live as to show forth the goodness, compassion, and love of that merciful Being who has blotted out their sins.
4. If people are ever pardoned, they must come to God – and to God alone. They must come, not to justify themselves, but to confess their crimes. And they must come with a willingness that God should pardon them on just such terms as he pleases; at just such a time as he pleases; and solely with a view to the promotion of his own glory. Unless they have this feeling, they never can be forgiven, nor should they be forgiven.” (Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, Isaiah 43:25)
There are various important details to be noted from the above exegesis. Firstly, the merciful God “blotted out, cancelled and forgave” the heinous sins of the Israelites and by doing so God not only evinced His glory (as a God of mercy), His“compassion, boundless and eternal love” but God also made the sinning Jews His “friends” and awarded them “salvation”. Did you notice the Jews wereforgiven, made friends and awarded salvation (!) without so need of belief in cross or vicarious atonement.
Secondly, Christian apologists claim that justice demanded (alleged) death of Christ (peace be upon him) since God is both merciful and just. Through Christ’s (peace be upon him) (alleged) death Christians can claim their salvation. However, God out of his “boundless mercy”, not justice, is willing to forgive sins without any claim on Him: “…because we (do not) have any claim to it, for then it would not be pardon, but justice.”
Another Christian Scholar accepts that God has no other reason (of cross etc) but of His own goodness He forgives sins (!):
“For mine own sake – In the pardon of sin God can draw no reason but from his own infinite goodness. (Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible, Isaiah 43:25)
If the Divine God forgives out of his own “infinite goodness” then it has to obviate all econcepts of ransom offerings to God otherwise it will belittle and devoid God off his divine attribute of “INFINITE goodness”.
Till now we have seen how God shows His merciful and forgiving nature by freely and unconditionally pardoning sinners thereby obviating the eccentric notion of atonement through alleged crucifixion.
In the next section we would see those biblical verses which out rightly negates Christ (peace be upon him) taking on sins of mankind upon himself.
These set of verses teaches, as we would soon observe, that each one has a personal responsibility towards his/her sins; if a person sins then s/he personally needs to repent rather than finding a scapegoat in Jesus (peace be upon him) to pass the burden on.
Personal Responsibility – Not Christ’s (peace be upon him)
We read in Deuteronomy, God, not a mortal Paul, providing the following Law:
“Parents are not to be put to death for crimes committed by their children, and children are not to be put to death for crimes committed by their parents; a person is to be put to death only for a crime he himself has committed.” (Deuteronomy 24:16)
“The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.” (Deu 24:16, King James, e-Sword version)
No stodgy passages are needed for the above limpidly clear verses. Each sinner is responsible for his own sins; he can either repent or die in that state – God will deal with him accordingly. Son cannot take Father’s sin on himself, even if he wants to! yet Christians claim that son (of man) took sins of others!
We also have a similar message in the so called book of Kings where Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him) is pleading to God:
“When a person is accused of wronging another and is brought to your altar in this Temple to take an oath that he is innocent, O LORD, listen in heaven and judge your servants. Punish the guilty one as he deserves, and acquit the one who is innocent.” (1 Kings 8: 31-32)
Finally, we have important and famous (3.) Ezekiel (peace be upon him) verses:
“But you ask: ‘Why shouldn’t the son suffer because of his father’s sin?’The answer is that the son did what was right and good. He kept my laws and followed them carefully, and so he will certainly live. It is the one who sins who will die. A son is not to suffer because of his father’s sins, nor a father because of the sins of his son. A good man will be rewarded for doing good, and an evil man will suffer for the evil he does.
“If an evil man stops sinning and keeps my laws, if he does what is right and good, he will not die; he will certainly live. All his sins will be forgiven, and he will live, because he did what is right. Do you think I enjoy seeing an evil man die?” asks the Sovereign LORD. “No, I would rather see him repent and live.” (Ezekiel 18:19-23)
Although the verses are lucidly clear, however, very important deductions are to be taken from them.
Notice that (1.) through Prophet Ezekiel (peace be upon him), God defends the notion why SON should NOT be punished for the sins of the FATHER (!)because son is/was righteous and did what was good thus, he should not bear the sins of father.
To further support His divine Law: Punishment to un-repenting guilty and Safety to innocent; God states that He will not pardon bloodshed of innocent:
“And also for the innocent blood that he shed: for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; which the LORD would not pardon.” (2Ki 24:4, King James Version, e-Sword)
If we apply the same principle of “Individual Responsibility” (Ezekiel 18) betweenson (Jesus) and father (Adam) then Jesus (peace be upon him) should not be afflicted for the so called “sins” of Adam (peace be upon him), especially, when God will not pardon shedding of innocent’s blood.
It is hard to reconcile that God who was resolute not to pardon bloodshed of innocent in OT era all of a sudden He completely changed His methodology to kill an innocent to pardon sins of entire human race! It raises questions whether God changed His ways or human(s) coined new doctrine!
(2.) The verse emphatically asserts that the one who has sinned is responsible; obviating any substitute to bear the sins for other. It will be against the just law of a just God to punish innocent son for the sins of the father.
(3.) However, if father repents and turns back from evil, then ALL his sins will be FORGIVEN! – it yet again obviates the concepts of substitution for bearing of sins of others. No surprise, Bible scholars and translators sub-headed the passages as“Individual Responsibility”:
To sum up, neither is there any need of Jesus’ (peace be upon him) alleged crucifixion for bearing the sins of others nor can he take sins of others on his head because according to OT books, namely, Deuteronomy, Kings and Ezekiel:
- Every man is responsible for his own deeds – son is not to be held accountable for father; father is not accountable for the sins of son.
- And, there is room for repenting sinners in mercy and forgiveness of God
In fact according to OT scholars, prophet Ezekiel declined any concept of vicarious atonement:
“God’s prophet Ezekiel said that each person is held responsible for his or her own sins. The Christian idea of vicarious atonement through belief in the blood sacrifice of Jesus is a moral reversion. Mere belief is not an adequate substitute for following God’s moral and ethical instructions in the Torah. In essence, the Jewish prophet Ezekiel rejected the Christian concept of vicarious atonement.
In rabbinic thought, man does not stand before God, either as acceptable because of what he is. Rather, he successfully stands before God by being good enough. Rabbinic Judaism rejects any need for a vicarious atonement for sin. Man does not have this need. Being made in the image of God, he was never separated from God. Regardless of his conduct, he has the potential of correcting his sins by returning to the proper course of action. Since we can make any needed correction ourselves, we need no mediator. In turn, if man can approach God on his own merit, God coming to man’s aid as a mediator is unnecessary. Worse than that, it would be an interference with human progress and man’s job of perfecting creation.”(Twenty-six reasons why Jews don’t believe in Jesus, Asher Norman)
Based on the law of “Individual Responsibility”, God rejected when Moses (peace be upon him) tried to vicariously bear the sins of Israelites:
“Please forgive their sin; but if you won’t, then remove my name from the book in which you have written the names of your people.” The LORD answered, “It is those who have sinned against me whose names I will remove from my book. Now go, lead the people to the place I told you about. Remember that my angel will guide you, but the time is coming when I will punish these people for their sin.” (Exodus 32:32-33)
Yet Paul goes out of the way to coin a new doctrine in which Christ (peace be upon him) was somehow made to bear the sins of others:
So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (Heb 9:28)
Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: (Gal 1:3-4)
By writing so, Paul expects everyone to reject multiple teachings in scores of OT passages from multiple OT prophets, Jesus (peace be upon him) and God-Almighty – teachings which comes naturally acceptable to human cognizance.
We have seen over and over again that God in Old Testament is willing to pardon returning sinners and award salvation purely because of His own self and merciful nature.
Yet Paul contravenes God and claims that there cannot be any forgiveness of sins and subsequent salvation without the alleged blood shed of Jesus (peace be upon him):
“And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.” (Heb 9:22)
Unlike what Paul taught, a just God – Allah (SWT) warns that it is another sin to commit a transgression and then try to pass the burden on an innocent:
“And if anyone earns sin he earns it against his own soul: for Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom. But if anyone earns a fault or a sin and throws it on to one that is innocent He carries (on himself) (both) a falsehood and a flagrant sin. (Qur’an 4: 111-112, Yusuf Ali Translation, Al-Alim CD – Rom Version.)
Nevertheless, much like OT rendering, Allah – The Most Merciful is always willing to forgive returning sinners:
“Say: “O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-ForgivingMost Merciful. (Qur’an 39:53, Yusuf Ali Translation, Al-Alim CD – Rom Version.)
Conclusion, Recapitulation and Reconciliation
Christians who champion vicarious atonement should explain why Pauline verses is to be blindly believed while rejecting multiple OT verses which teaches that:
- God is very merciful, willing to forgive (freely) and forget, without any condition or “give and take” policy, entirely for His own sake; if at all, then He wants to see HHis creation feeling guilty and repentant.
- Moreover, we saw numerous instances rigged in the Bible where sinners were forgiven by God.
- That there is a law of “Individual Responsibility”, wherein others cannot vicariously bear for others. Thus this law obviates Jesus (peace be upon him) allegedly dying for the sins of others. We saw how God rejected Moses’ (peace be upon him) attempt for vicarious punishment.
- In fact, if God despises bloodshed of innocent so much so that He would notforgive it, then there has to be strong enough ground and proof to believe Paul who claims that Jesus (peace be upon him), an innocent, was killed to bear the sins of others.
- Prophet Ezekiel rejected vicarious atonement; Paul wants us to believe in it. It is much safer to put our money on Ezekiel – God’s chosen Jewish Prophet than Paul who never met Jesus (peace be upon him) let alone God; except that he saw some thunder and lightning in sky, converted his Jewish name Saul to Gentile one and incorporated Gentile ideas of vicarious atonement.
- Based on OT scriptures, traditionally, Jewish sages never harbored any concept of vicarious atonement. They never felt any need for it, given they had knowledge of God’s mercy, their repentance and man’s capability to return back to correct path denouncing sins.
Although the above facts are irreconcilable, however, it can be done. All Christians need to do is:
I. Either reject Pauline verses as they contradict verses of multiple Jewish Prophets of OT.
II. Or, accept Pauline verses with a condition that Jesus’ vicarious death is neither necessary nor foundational for salvation. Yet Hebrews 9:22 is to be rescinded.
III. Or, reject teachings of multiple OT prophets and their practices which, ironically, availed them “life” and salvation.
There were numerous other OT verses which we did not quote because already much was quoted, therefore, we request Christians to ponder once again if it is worthwhile to reject vast amount of OT teachings from multiple OT prophets based on Paul’s theology.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق