15 September 2006

Sacrifice and Sin

I was pondering the crucifixion of Jesus and asking, "What does it mean that Jesus died for my sins?" I'd like to offer somewhat of an answer.

Luther defined sin as incurvatus in se, or turning in on self. Self-centeredness. When are people the most self-centered? I think it's when people try to appease God by offering things to him (money, food, etc.) so that bad things won't happen to them. To me, the ultimate sin is thinking that I somehow must propitiate the wrath of God. But first I must view God as an angry deity in need of an attitude adjustment.

People throughout history have sacrificed things to appease the gods-- animals, food, people. The Israelites, and later the adherents of Judaism, did the same. They offered sacrifices so that they could be "saved" (whatever they meant by that term). I think this is what the Bible means by "sin". But God took away sin. How?

God provided the sacrifice. The only sacrifice God is pleased with is God. God sacrificed himself. He gave sacrifice-loving people something to sacrifice. He gave them Jesus. Jesus died because of sin!

The early Christians understood this and stopped sacrificing stuff, but instead used their resources to serve others in need. They "died to sin", and lived out from that point. And they saw themselves as giving out of gratitude instead of fear.

We are free from sin; free from attempting to appease God. Free from viewing him as having an eternal rage. We don't need to sacrifice anything. God gave the sacrifice of Jesus.

7 comments:

bruced said...

Do you people who write your paycheck know you think this way?

;-)

I have a slightly different take on the Cross, but I applaud your understanding... and willingness to say it.

Anonymous said...

NIce insight. It also goes along with something I have been thinking lately. We pray for God to move hurricanes and tornados away from us and rejoice when we are "delivered" because the storm hits someone else. Wouldn't a real Christ like prayer be: "Lord, if the tornado is going to hit anybody's house, let it be mine?"

Allen

Anonymous said...

I gotta say something else. Is it possible that it was not God who needed the sacrifice to begin with? Is it possible that man kept thinking some price had to paid in order to satisfy God so Gos said: OK, you wnat a price to be paid before you will belife I love and forgive you? Then how about this one?

bruced said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
bruced said...

Oops, major typo in that last one! Let's try it again!

I've thought that for some time now, Anon... the sacrifice was not what God required to reconcile man. It was what man needed to feel reconciled with God. God gave us what we needed. Not what he needed.

Anonymous said...

So if sin is attempting to appease God, what would you call things like lust, anger, pride, laziness, etc, stuff that one does when either God is the farthest thing from their mind or if one doesn't care what God thinks?

Doug Hoag said...

Bruce,

I think you're right-- God doesn't need sacrifices, and in fact said in Jeremiah 7 that he never commanded the Israelites concerning them. God used what people perceived they needed to give them what they really needed.

Allen,

Thanks for visiting my blog! Yeah... lust, pride, etc. What do we do with those things? I think Jesus spoke of these things to communicate that the Sinai covenant was being violated, and hence was to be rendered null and void, just like God always said would happen. Jesus was following in the footsteps of the OT prophetic tradition of calling a spade a spade. Jesus wasn't randomly inventing rules for people of all times and places to follow. The Sinai Covenant always served as the backdrop for Jesus' prophetic ministry.