Study Guide: Twisted Scripture: Hebrews 9:18-22

Sunday June 29, 2014 | Greg Boyd

Focus Scripture:

Hebrews 9:18-22
18 Hence not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment had been told to all the people by Moses in accordance with the law, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the scroll itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God has ordained for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

Brief Summary:

Our Twisted Scripture series continues this week as Greg explores Hebrews 9:18-22. This scripture passage is commonly used to support the penal substitutionary atonement theory in which our guilt was transferred to Christ and He was punished on the cross on our behalf. Greg raises several objections to this line of thinking and discusses the use of animal sacrifices as a method of atonement in the Old Testament.

Extended Summary:

A key question is raised by the scripture in Hebrews 9:18-22. Why does there have to be blood for the forgiveness of sins? The scripture in Hebrews 9 has historically been used to support the penal substitution view of atonement in which the guilt of sinners has been transferred to Christ, and His death on the cross is viewed as a substitute punishment in the place of guilty sinners. His blood shed is seen as a satisfying God the Father’s wrath and need for justice.

Those who support this view argue Christ’s sacrifice in taking our punishment upon Him shows us His deep love for us. While we affirm the depth of Christ’s love for us displayed on the cross, we believe the scripture has been twisted creating a very ugly picture of God the Father. Greg raises several challenges to this interpretation:

How is this vengeful, wrath filled view of God consistent with the revelation of God shown in Jesus Christ? God the Father is essentially pitted against Jesus who steps in to satisfy the Father’s wrath. This view has created a love affair with Jesus while making people terrified of the Father.
This view makes the “myth of redemptive violence” the centerpiece of history. The myth that more violence will bring peace. As people imitate the God they worship, it’s no surprise the Church’s history is littered with violence and bloodshed (i.e. The Crusades, 100 years’ war, 30 years’ war, etc) in the 11th century A.D. as this theory became popular.
If forgiveness is simply releasing a debt, and in the penal substitution view of atonement Jesus essentially pays the debt for us, does God ever really forgive anyone? It creates a picture of God as desiring justice and sacrifice over mercy and forgiveness which is the opposite Jesus teaches.
If God is too holy to be in the presence of sin, why did Jesus constantly fellowship with sinners? In reality God’s holiness, unlike that of the Pharisees, actually attracted sinners, not repelled them.
How is it morally just to punish an innocent person for the guilt of others?

To provide more depth to these challenges, it’s helpful to understand more about the animal sacrifices referenced in the passage. People had been sacrificing animals long before the OT to appease the various gods they worshipped. When God starts out with the Israelites He is entering their world as a missionary in a foreign land. Because of their sinfulness He had to accommodate His ideal will in order to meet them where they were at and bring them toward His ideal gradually. Although God really wanted a contrite and surrendered heart, while he was weaning them off their culture’s influence, he gave sacrifice a new meaning. Instead of appeasing the gods’ anger and wrath, God made it a symbol the covenantal relationship He was establishing with His people.

We see the human condition reframed in the NT. God’s problem is not how to love sinners, but rather how to free sinners from the bondage to the kingdom of darkness we’ve entered by our covenant breaking sin. God’s self-sacrificial love in shedding His own blood through Jesus’ death on the cross was the only way to open our eyes to see who He truly is and receive the forgiveness He freely offers. Christ’s death puts on display self-sacrificial love as the way to defeat evil, not violence. God’s justice doesn’t compete with His love, it’s an expression of it. So when it’s not loving to do justice, he doesn’t. In essence, this is mercy and grace. In Christ, not only do we not get what we deserve, we actually get what we don’t deserve – an abundant life free of fear and full of the life giving joy of the triune God.

Reflection Questions:

What further questions do you have about the text in Hebrews 9? Is there anything unclear about the context?
How would you summarize the differences between the penal substitutionary view of the atonement vs. the Christus Victor view? Do you agree with the conclusions Greg has come to about each?
If Jesus is the exact representation of God’s essence (Heb 1:3), and we know that all scripture testifies of Christ (Jn 5:39), how does that reframe our picture of God in the OT?
How is perfect love to cast out fear in your life? Where does this need to happen?
Does this message of self-sacrificial love change at all your motivation for being involved and active in the Kingdom? What other motivations do you have or have you had (positive or negative) that have influenced your level of participation in the kingdom?