Quote:
Originally Posted by DeuceKicker
In order for God to forgive humans, why does something or someone always need to die?
I don't think this is actually ever really explained in the Bible. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not doing research tonight :P
I think the idea must be very old, blood sacrifice and atonement probably predate the OT and is common to early human religious belief in general, which is probably why it's not really explained? In any case I'm fairly sure in the original Levitical law it's just asserted: Atonement for sin requires a sacrifice of life.
From a moral perspective, it seems to me that Christianity moves away from this perspective substantially, in the emphasis on mercy and forgiveness, and for example when Jesus says "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also." (among other sayings). But the juridical view of the atonement of Christ preserves the idea, I think it's really the only area of Christian soteriology that does.
I personally think that seeing the crucifixion purely as an analogue of earlier animal sacrifice, or solely as the payment of a debt (some theologian once asked whether the incarnation would have occurred if there was no sin) misses some other rather potent symbolism, in part because Christ is said to be God Himself, and so the idea of God as Humble, which is a somewhat contradictory to the image of God the Pantokrator, is emphasized, and also because self-emptying is such a powerful idea in Christianity apart from sin and morality. It is a requirement for an experience of God. "Unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone, but if it dies, it produces many seeds", or "blessed are the poor in spirit", or more directly "take up your cross and follow me", which of course would not be strictly necessary if the cross is only about repaying a debt from sin.
Then of course there's also the part where the idea of an omnipotent God demanding payment in this particular form seems rather arbitrary and crude to modern sensibilities, but at root there is this idea that to be separated from God is a terrible and weighty thing. I'm not sure if the modern view which asks logically "why couldn't God have done this some other way" really gets to the kind of thinking that underlies the experience of ritual atonement as people practiced it.
In any case, I don't think it's possible to remove that element of atonement and blood sacrifice from Christian soteriology, it's too bound up with the biblical view of the crucifixion in general, and with judaic spirituality. But I do think it's reasonable to say that the Christian view of Christ does not end there, and that there are other meanings to be found as well, and other symbolisms, which are equally important in Christianity
