Love does not require a sacrifice on the cross because Love simply forgives

 I think somebody will appreciate the invitation to think out of the box (tradition). Let's consider these questions.

Why would 'you' need grace from a God that is love? WHEN would LOVE have ever stopped loving? Are you sure that you have a clear understanding of what grace is all about? Love would simply forgive! NOT require a son on a cross!

These questions raise a pertinent point about grace because "grace" has often been used in a legalistic way in the christian circles. To some preachers, grace is like having a transaction with God, such as "God gives us his grace only when we give God our faith" or "God needs to punish Jesus to fulfill the law in order to give us his grace and forgiveness". That is not grace; that is legalism disguised as grace because the law is always conditional whereas grace is always unconditional.

Teachings that represent God/Jesus as a vindictive and vengeful divinity are actually anti-Christ because revenge and retribution are against his loving, gracious and non-violent nature. Jesus himself taught people not to return an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth, but to love their enemies. It is amazing to think how much the mainstream christian teachings that propagate a picture of a judgmental and vengeful Jesus have the gospel upside down that is contrary to his true nature.

The cross simply demonstrates Jesus' love, compassion and forgiveness. He had said "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do". If he had wanted revenge, he would have said something that was condemning.

Since God is love, and love keeps no records of wrong, then it does not make any sense for God to punish or require a sacrifice to atone for people’s wrongs. The “atonement for sin” theology therefore is man’s theology. I think Jesus came to help people repent (change their mindset) about God – that the idea of “an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth” is not compatible with God’s love (which keeps no records of wrong), and that God’s heart is to love one’s enemies. He also came to show us that we are already innocent and perfect/complete, for the kingdom of God (innocence/righteousness, peace and joy) is within each of us.

This also answers the question “If God doesn’t require sacrifice for “sins”, then why did Jesus die on the cross?” because Jesus’ suffering and death was to demonstrate what Jesus himself taught in the sermon on the mount – he did not return an eye for an eye when he was beaten, and instead he blessed those who cursed him, and prayed for those who persecuted him. The cross is a demonstration of the love of God which keeps no records of wrong, and not to atone for so-called sins (which man-made religions have mistakenly taught).

I believe there are people who will appreciate the invitation to think out of the box and question religious traditions, so as to find their own freedom from any kind of bondage of fear and condemnation imposed by organised religions, and experience peace within themselves and with others.

Related posts

Once you start seeing The Love of God, Hell Won’t Make Sense ~Dr. Michel W. Jones
Progressive thoughts on why Jesus died on the cross and whether God’s justice is retributive or restorative

Christian Theology of Violent God is Both Misleading and Pornographic

Someone astutely observed that the preaching on law and grace is part of the dispensationalist christianity camp. I think that this observation is true as the teachings on law and grace tend to portray God as a legalistic judge who will one day execute so-called "judgment" on "unbelievers". As for me, I would subscribe to fulfilled eschatology (as the preterists do), and my understanding of "judgment" is in terms of the conscience of the Jews in AD70, who mistakenly thought their God was judging them when the Jerusalem temple was destroyed. So yea, it wasn't God "judging" them or anyone at all. It was simply the "roaring of the lion" in their consciousness - Satan or the human ego - accusing them, and trying to deceive them into thinking God was angry with them, when all the while, God is already one with humankind and is never separated from humankind.

Another realisation I had recently is that Isaiah 53 also mentioned it was man who thought God was angry with Jesus at the cross. Isaiah 53:4 says "Yet WE esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions". So it is clear that it wasn't God who smote Jesus at the cross, although it appeared like that to people surrounding Him. Psalm 22 also recorded that God was all the while with His Son - "For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; nor has He hidden His face from Him; but when He cried to Him, He heard." (Psalm 22:24)

The truth of the gospel is that God is not angry with humankind at all - not with His Son, not with any one of us. God is love, and love keeps no records of wrongs, so the penal substitution view holds no water.

Preaching of Violent God is Nothing More than Pornography

The online Merriam-Website dictionary has an interesting definition of the word "pornography". One of the definitions given is: 

"the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction <the pornography of violence>"

It is ironic that many evangelical or fundamentalist church preachers are condemning people for watching pornography (which they often think is referring to sexual materials, maybe because they are struggling with sexual temptations themselves, for whatever one resists only becomes stronger), yet by their very condemnation of people with threats of hellfire and damnation, these same preachers are promoting pornography themselves without even realising it. Why is that so? Because they are projecting the "pornography of violence", painting God as some mean, vengeful and judgmental egomaniac. Not only are they manipulating people with guilt and fear, by preaching do's and dont's instead of the divine life indwelling people, the preachers are strengthening the power of addiction and temptations over them.

Want to see an example of a "christian" hellfire and damnation pornographic material? Well, for the sake of your health and wellbeing, I won't post the video here directly. I will just put a link here - watch it only when you are prepared. If you are already set free from religion and condemnation, knowing that the christian "hell" is a myth, then you may even find this video laughable because you know the person who did the voice-over was just being blinded, brainwashed and unconscious himself. "Oh the madness!" cried the preacher in the video. Yea, right - what a mad, crazy, looney fundamentalist preacher, that is.

Someone wrote, "I think that looking for God outside of ourselves is the problem; thus, I have chosen to reconnect myself to the real world. Therefore, I'm not an object of weekly incessant brainwashing, spiritual and emotional rape, psychological and mental manipulation and abuse anymore." I totally agree with that - what sweet freedom we experience - like a breath of fresh air - when we are no longer subject to the pornography and violence of evangelical or fundamentalist church teachings!

Related link:

"the god who burns you" - David Hayward

How are we righteous?

 Video commentary:

Christianity fosters self-hate in mankind (sometimes tastefully called "conviction of sin") so that it can offer its own special answer (salvation) to an entirely artificial problem. The real solution begins by understanding that there is nothing wrong with you just as you are - that man is not a "fallen" being.

If you consider yourself a christian, does it strike you as strange if people say christianity is a self-loathing religion? After all, you think christianity is about God loving us unconditionally, even the worst of us. Yet I realise there is something amiss with the presentation of the gospel by mainstream or traditional christianity. The doctrine of "original sin" tends to paint a picture of how sinful and fallen we once were, and a holy and righteous God could not stand being around us for a second more and had to come up with a plan to send His Son to die and cleanse us with His blood to make us acceptable before Him, and even then, those who are seen as "rejecting this good news" will continue to fall out of favour with God and will continue to suffer misery and separation for ages and ages in a place called hell without end after they die. What a miserable existence, is it not?

Another common refrain I have heard in the evangelical christian circles goes something like "We are nothing without Jesus" or "It is all about Jesus, not about me". It is as though to love ourselves the way we are is a terrible sin and can cause us to become proud or puffed up, and so we must see ourselves as originally dirty and condemned, and only Jesus' blood can wash us clean. I also hear believers say things like "All glory to Jesus", as if Jesus is somewhere up there and we are down here, and the only way to defeat pride and demonstrate humility is to try to make ourselves nothing and make Jesus everything.

Why is this important? Well, for a start, it keeps us from actually loving and accepting ourselves the way we are if we think God is constantly trying to change us into something we are not. Secondly, it may cause us to see others as lost and miserable creatures if they do not profess to believe in Jesus. No doubt, some of us may say Jesus saw people as sheep not having a shepherd, but I believe it does not mean that Jesus saw people as being destined to go to a so-called place for hell.

Thirdly, it can create a sense of false humility when people insist on saying that it is all about Jesus and not about them. The question is: How can it be only all about Jesus when He is already one with us? We are inseparable from Jesus, so if Jesus is glorified, so are we glorified together with Him. It is impossible to glorify Jesus without us sharing the same glory that He had, so it might as well be better for us to be truly humble and accept the fact that we are as perfect and complete and righteous and beautiful and powerful as Jesus is.

1 Corinthians 6:17 says "He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him."

"Yes, but that is referring to believers", someone might say. Really? When Jesus died on the cross, who died with Him? When Jesus was raised from the dead, who rose with Him? Only believers? No, every one of us rose together with Him and we are united with Him.

"If we are already righteous, why did Jesus shed His blood then?" Good question. The interesting answer that I have come to learn is that God is not the one who requires the blood sacrifice. The religious sacrificial system is actually a pagan practice, which the Israelites borrowed from the pagan cultures in the old testament times. God does not need to appease His anger because He was not angry with us at all. "What? This is blasphemy! Heresy!" I hear some of you say.

Wait a minute, folks. Why would the Israelites think God was angry with them whenever something bad happened to them? Has it occurred to us that they interpreted events based on their concept of God or Yahweh, thinking that God must be punishing them whenever they were attacked by enemies or harmed by natural disasters like earthquakes? I believe before Jesus came on the scene 2,000 years ago, people back then felt separated from God. It began in the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and after that, they felt alienated from God. It was interesting to note that God was all the while with humankind, and yet humankind thought their sins had separated them from God.

To cut a long story short, the Jews in the new testament times needed to be saved from sin-consciousness because they had been under the law for so many years (about 430 years). The law of Moses could not save them; it only condemned them. The only way for them to be saved from the religious mindset is to understand that Jesus came to be the perfect offering. Again, it is not to appease God's wrath, but rather to silence the roaring of the lion that accuses them day and night in their own conscience.

"For the worshippers once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins" (Hebrews 10:2)

This blood sacrificial system is never for us today. Why? Because we are never under the law in the first place. We are living in the new covenant of grace already. The law system ended officially in AD70, marked by the destruction of the temple by the Roman army in Jerusalem. So, since we are under not law, and by the law is the knowledge of sin, it means that sin has never been imputed to us.

So let's fast forward to the main question - How are we righteous? Is it by believing in Jesus or is it by Jesus' obedience? Some might say, "well, it is definitely not by our works, because the Jews sought to be righteous by obeying the law to obtain their own righteousness and have not submitted to the righteousness of God, according to Romans 10". I agree we are righteous not by our performance, but it is also not by believing in Jesus either. "What?" I hear you say. Yes, you read it correctly, we are righteous not by believing in Jesus, but by Jesus' obedience.

Romans 5:19 says "For by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous".

"Fine" you might say. "That happens when Jesus did the divine exchange at the cross, for God made Jesus who knew no sin to be sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. That means before Jesus died on the cross, no one was righteous."

Well, not really, because the cross is outside time - Jesus is the Lamb slain from before the foundation of the world. Therefore, by the time God created humankind, He created us to be righteous and innocent and perfect and complete. We were originally beautiful and good and perfect - that is our true identity, and Jesus came to restore that identity to us. Our part is simply to renew our mind with this wonderful good news.

"And be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness." (Ephesians 4:23-24)

So, the heart of the gospel is that we are created righteous and holy and beautiful, and it is not by our doing but by God's doing. We are crowned with glory and honour. Christ in us is the hope of glory. And Love is who we are because we are made in Love's image.

CON/science

I think the word "CON/science" is a creative play on the spelling and captures the essence of many religious teachings about the human "conscience". Yes, religion majors on the art of pricking people's conscience to the point it becomes a science of conning people to think there is something wrong with them and they need to fast, confess sins and/or do a thousand and one things to appease a displeased deity. It plays on people's guilt and fear of rejection, abandonment and punishment.

The preaching of penal substitution view of the cross doesn't really alleviate guilt either; it only perpetuates the illusion of an imaginary god with anger and ego problems. Hence, I believe when Jesus said you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free, He was saying that the truth will make us free from illusion, guilt, shame, fear and condemnation.

What is truth? 

Some evangelical christians think that telling the truth is telling people they will go to hell if they don't believe in Jesus. That's not truth because truth is synonymous with grace. Truth is about being free from illusion and ignorance. The good news is about God's unconditional love and our true identity in Him.

I also have been thinking about the question Pontius Pilate asked Jesus. After Jesus had told him "Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice", Pilate asked "What is truth?" I believe Jesus was saying those whose eyes have been opened to see the kingdom of God within themselves have known the truth, and therefore they hear His voice of love, grace and mercy. Those who were under religion (including the Pharisees) and world system (including the Roman governor) were still living in illusion and ignorance. They neither knew God as unconditional love nor knew their true identity.

When Jesus began preaching the gospel in Israel, He was essentially warning the Jews that in the days to come, there would be no more temple and no more sacrificial system. What then would the Jews do to get right with God (or at least they thoughts so)? They would probably experience a sense of alienation and condemnation when these outward rituals ceased to be. In the same way, today's religions still very much depend on outward rituals, like going to "church" etc, to get in the good books of "god". It's living in illusion. Truth is the antidote to illusion.

Truth is not con/science. Truth says we are already innocent, already blameless, beloved and favoured.

[Salvation of All] "The Reconciliation of All Things" by Clyde L. Pilkington, Jr

DAILY EMAIL GOODIES
Issue #2554 December 14, 2010

THE RECONCILIATION OF ALL THINGS

“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” (Colossians 1:20).

Even though the Bible is a book specifically about the details of human redemption, Paul’s unequivocal testimony is to the reconciliation of “all things” that have been alienated from God – not just man.

According to Paul, “all things” will be reconciled to God – “all things … in earth” and “all things … in heaven.” We know what is alienated in the earth that needs to be reconciled to God; but what about “in heaven”? What is alienated there that is in need of reconciliation? Why, Satan and the fallen celestial powers, of course!

Satan and the fallen celestial powers are exactly what the backdrop of Colossians 1:20 includes. Listen to Paul, just a few verses earlier –

“… all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers” (:16).

Again, it is clear revelation given to Paul that there will be a reconciliation of “all things” – all things that have been alienated. The context is abundantly clear – the “all things created” ARE the “all things” RECONCILED.

Specifically included here in the “all things” are the exact same adversaries – the “principalities” and “powers” – against which we currently wrestle according to Ephesians 6:11-12. God says that they, too, will be reconciled. God will leave no corner of His vast and wonderful universe outside of His unfailing love.

Therefore, the context of the reconciliation of Colossians chapter one plainly includes Satan and the fallen celestial powers. Oh, the great grace, love and mercy of God that are abundantly demonstrated and magnified in the full extent of their reach – even to the reconciliation of Satan and fallen celestial powers.

Paul repeats these gloriously triumphant truths in Ephesians 1:10:

“That in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in Him.”

Again you will notice the context of “heaven” and “earth.” This dual sphere is also repeated in Philippians 2:10-11:

“That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

This reconciliation is truly universal! No creature will be left out. Nothing will be left alienated or unreconciled to God. There will be an entire, universal “restoration of all things.”

“For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things …” (Romans 11:36).

“And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him Who put all things under Him, that God may be All in all” (I Corinthians 15:21-28).

Clyde L. Pilkington, Jr,
© Daily Email Goodies™

Some Reflections on a Trinitarian View of the Cross

The following is a very interesting article by Bill Nieporte, which refutes the penal substitution view of the cross in a positive way. I can relate to this article because like the author, I used to subscribe to the penal substitution view of the cross, and later realised that this view faces several problems. I think he summarised the main problems of that view well, such as the triune God – the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – is not separated from Himself or one another, and the fact that Jesus came as a revelation of God as our loving Father.

After all, in the past few years, I have listened to preachings like this: “Yes, God is love, but God is also just. God hates sin and has to punish sinners, so God punished His Son on our behalf at the cross.” Or “Yes, God is our Father, but God is also a Judge. As a Father, He wept for His Son, but as a Judge, He had to turn His back and forsake His Son at the cross – He was forsaken by the Father so that you and I will be accepted by the Father.” I have accepted this view without much questioning in the past, because the preachers sounded convincing in the way they presented this view of the cross. It was also a popular view, as it seemed to be widely accepted by people among the evangelical christian circles.

I guess the penal substitution view might even sound logical to most people because we tend to equate our human sense of justice with God’s idea of justice. In most (if not all) societies, the law court would impose on an offender some form of punishment, such as fine, jail or death penalty, depending on the severity of the crime. But this punishment is mainly retributive and serves as a deterrent for others – it is neither remedial nor restorative. The judge also gains nothing out of it. God, on the other hand, has a different view of justice – He judges on behalf of the poor, the downcast, the oppressed, and the sinners. God is love, and His justice must be viewed from the perspective that His nature is love — love wants the best for us.

So who did God judge at the cross? Not us. Not His Son. I believe God judged the devil, who is the accuser of the brethren, and he is none other than our guilty conscience, so that today, our conscience can no longer condemn us or make us think God is angry with us or out to punish us. God saves us from wrong thinking (which began in the garden of Eden), by sending His Son to open our eyes to the truth of the gospel – through His finished work at the cross, He has cleansed our conscience so that we can have the boldness and freedom to fellowship with God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit who is all the while with us and for us. We can boldly and freely enjoy the warm fellowship and love with the triune God in our daily life.

“The reason I am ‘hung up’ on this (as you put it) is that I am passionate about biblical theology. What is advocated by those who hold ‘penal substitution’ view of redemption is a hermeneutic that is imposed on the scripture from the outside. It does not rise up from the text. I once believed otherwise – but as I have more carefully studied the Bible – I am no longer able to accept the schizophrenic view of God that teaches that Father was dumping anger or wrath out on Jesus when he was on the cross. My foundation has been a renewed understanding and appreciation for the biblical doctrine of the Trinity.

The ‘penal substitution’ view is in error in that it divides God into parts differing personalities, rather than a Triune who share the same nature (LOVE). The early church fathers referred to this as perichoresis – a Greek term that means ‘cleaving together.’ It describes the fellowship (Baxter Kruger calls it ‘the Divine dance’) that exists between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as they embrace and infuse each other. This is more than just intimacy and self-sufficiency. It is also the understanding that the Father, Son, and Spirit are one in being. Karl Barth considers the  doctrine of the Trinity so important that it became the lynchpin of this entire theology. In fact, the doctrine of the Trinity (Barth referred to the ‘one in threeness’ and ‘three in oneness’ or God) was the prolegomena of his systematic theology.

Here is where the problem lies. The idea that one part of God could be angry at us and the other loving toward us is contrary to this core biblical doctrine of the Christian faith. The idea that Father could in any way pour out anger or wrath on Jesus in anathema to a good Trinitarian, as it cuts up the Godhead into separate entities, rather than affirming the unity of the Godhead. This is unbiblical.

Compounding this biblical error is that it serves as a basic denial of the doctrine of the Incarnation which teaches us that Jesus was the perfect expression of the Father in human form (see Hebrews 1:3). In Jesus, God is seen not as some wrathful God of vengeance who must be appeased. Rather God is full of compassion and mercy, as witnessed in Jesus.
What Trinitarians advocate is that the place from which to understand scripture and all doctrines of the Christian faith is by looking at the love and kindness of Jesus, who came to reveal what God was really like (as John 14:9 says, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father.”) Those who work from a ‘penal substitution’ view say that the discussion about the nature and identity of God begins with ‘the law’ and not with Jesus. In fact, ‘penal substitution’ draws the attention so much to ‘the law’ that even God must submit to its dictates. In this view, God is so uptight about sin (disobedience against the law) that God MUST punish lawbreakers. So, then, the two hermeneutical principles that inform my interpretation of scripture are the doctrine of the Trinity and the conviction that the nature (DNA, if you will) of God is LOVE. Both these principles rise up from the scripture, where as the ‘penal’ view does not. So, while you may disagree with me, please don’t see my objection as merely a visceral discomfort with the notion of God’s ‘anger’ or ‘wrath.’ Rather these ideas (as they are understood from a ‘penal substitution’ viewpoint) are simply inconsistent with biblical theology.

So, then, the logical question is this: “If God was NOT pouring out wrath on Jesus as a penal substitution for us, then what exactly was happening at the cross?” The answer is that the cross is a unified expression of LOVE from our Triune God. Texts that affirm this include 2 Corinthians 5:19 and Hebrews 9:14 which together place Father, Son, and Holy Spirit together, on the cross, bringing all humanity the gift of salvation. Beyond all else, salvation is an invitation to participate in ‘the Divine dance’ (perichoresis).

As I said earlier, God is not schizophrenic. He does not suffer from a multiple-personality disorder. There is not a good guy God in a white hat named Jesus, and a mean God in a black hat called the Father. There is one Triune God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) who loves without condition and has not only forgiven us, but has removed sin from us, and has made a way for full participation in the love relationship the Godhead shares. The word Paul uses is ‘adoption.’ God becomes one of us in Jesus. God takes up our cause. God draws us into relationship. (Ephesians 1:4-5)

Now with this picture in mind, how do we see this concept of God’s wrath? God’s wrath is God’s anger at sin because it hinders our ability to have intimacy with God. As a parent, I have often been angry at my children’s behavior. But I have never stopped loving them. I have never disowned them. Jesus makes this exact point in Matthew 7:9-11, when he says, “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!” The message of the cross under the ‘penal substitution’ view is that God is angry with you and poured out His wrath on Jesus. The message of the cross from a proper Trinitarian understanding of the scripture is that God loves you. That’s why we call it GOSPEL.”

- Bill Nieporte