Tuesday, May 05, 2009

"Without the shedding of blood ..."

A quote from this week's lesson exposition:
Though many have called the blood sacrifice of Jesus gory and unnecessary, the Scriptures teach just the opposite. “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22) is stated without equivocation.
I am finding more and more that there is sense behind the laws given us in the Bible. As I read this statement, I wonder: Why? Why would forgiveness require the shedding of blood? And does it truly depend on "the blood sacrifice of Jesus"? Isn't a compassionate God free to have mercy on whom He will have mercy? Is He bound by some incomprehensible cosmic rule that blood must be shed before He can forgive?

A couple of thoughts along this line:

1) More intuitively obvious than bloodshed seems to be the requirement for recognition of the need for forgiveness before forgiveness can be received -- not because God isn't willing or able to give it but because the offender doesn't notice it being offered. If I don't realize that I need to be forgiven, God's offer of forgiveness is simply puzzling to me. Perhaps it takes a wound (to someone or something) deep enough to draw blood to reveal to me how desperately I need forgiveness and prompt me to receive it into my life.

2) Jesus' death brought forgiveness for others. Perhaps the full impact of sin isn't clear to us without seeing the ultimate effects of that sin in putting God Incarnate to a bloody, tortuous death. We weren't in Jerusalem that day, but we have all stood in the place of those who rejected Jesus and called for his death in order to get rid of him.

3) Is there figurative bleeding involved every time we extend forgiveness to others? Do we have to die just a little in order to let go of the wrongs done to us? Does that inner death give us a glimpse of what God sacrifices when He forgives?

I'm not sure there are any firm conclusions here, just some thoughts about the how and why behind this call for "the shedding of blood" in connection with forgiveness.

Friday, May 01, 2009

The "flesh" or the "sinful nature"?

I print out the scripture for every week's lesson. The lesson exposition uses the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible. Our church has NIV pew Bibles. I don't have a problem using NIV. Usually. This week's lesson is from Romans 8 and Galatians 5. I'm printing it out from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) for one reason - the Greek word sarx. The NIV translates it as "sinful nature" in these passages with "flesh" in the footnotes. The NRSV uses "flesh" in the text. I think the difference is important enough to switch translations.

I'm not sure why the NIV uses "sinful nature," but it opens the door to the idea that we can get rid of that nature. After all, who needs a sinful nature? Cry to God and He will cleanse you of that nature so that you are no longer bothered by it.

It's a little more difficult to put forth the idea of ridding ourselves of "flesh." We live in flesh. We can deny the appetites of our fleshly selves, but if we get rid of our flesh, our life on this earth will be over.

In both these passages, Paul contrasts life according to the flesh/sinful nature with life according to the Spirit. If we talk about the "sinful nature," we are choosing between right and wrong. In theory, we can totally eliminate wrong from our lives, get rid of the sinful nature completely. However, if we stick to the word "flesh," it's easy to see that the pull of the flesh includes legitimate appetites and desires. When my flesh is hungry, I need to eat in order to maintain my health. However, if I am walking in the Spirit, I won't let food become the focus of my life. It's not that I quit eating but that I make a conscious decision when and how much I will eat. The "flesh" doesn't dictate my actions and choices.

Freedom from the "flesh" doesn't mean I no longer have desires and appetites that trace back to my physical body and my human nature. Not only do I need to eat and sleep and maintain body warmth but I also need a sense of significance and value and purpose in life. If I follow the dictates of the "flesh," I will elevate those natural needs and desires to the place where they dictate all my actions. Everything will be about me and my needs. Walking in the Spirit doesn't mean no longer having those needs and desires. It means recognizing them for what they are and looking for legitimate ways to "keep soul and body together" while keeping in step with the Spirit. I am free from the "flesh" in that it no longer controls me.

By the grace of God -- when I am at my best -- I choose to deny the self-focus that tugs at me and make deliberate choices that glorify God and edify those around me. I feed my body what it needs without letting food become my focus in life. Similarly, I find personal value and significance in being loved by God and then focus on those around me without further concern for myself.

This is good stuff we're studying here. I think the "flesh" part of it is important.