Hebrew Shorthand
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures, . . . 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 NASB
For our sins – Just suppose for a moment that the sacrifice of Yeshua actually took place on the heavenly altar in the heavenly Temple before the foundation of the world (as Scripture says). Just suppose that those verses in Revelation, 1 Peter and Hebrews actually mean what they say and that, as a result, the atoning removal of defilement that prevents being in the presence of YHWH was anticipated and made available before sin showed up on this planet. If this is true, then in what sense is it correct to say that Yeshua “died on the cross for our sins.” It is possible to read this phrase in two different ways. The first is the way that Christians usually read this verse. Jesus died on the cross because of our sins. Christians usually think of His death in these terms. Because we sinned, an atonement was needed and that atonement was accomplished on the cross. In other words, the cross happened in order to make provision for the sins we committed. The cross is the direct result of the need of forgiveness. In this reading, the preposition hyper expresses causality.
But other writings of Paul suggest a different reading. Hyper can also express consequence. Then the phrase means “as a result of the consequences of our disobedience, Yeshua died on the cross.” In other words, the consequences of sin is death and as a result of our sins, Yeshua died, not to cover over the sins but to remove the consequences. He died in order that death might be erased from the creation, that is, that the defilement produced by disobedience and epitomized in death might be wiped away. This reading upholds Paul’s assertion that the “law” is good and holy while suggesting that it is death that is conquered on the cross. In this reading, the phrase “for our sins” should be read as “in order to erase the consequences of our sins.” It is appropriate Hebrew thought to use “for our sins” as shorthand for “for the curse resulting from our sins” because “sin” and “consequences of disobedience” can be understood as equivalent.
Why do we care about this Hebraic shorthand? Does it really matter? If we read the verse as most Christian theologians, we must supply the background that the cross is a means of atonement. But if the verse can also mean that the cross deals with the resulting consequences of sin and is not necessarily a place of atonement, then we are jolted into the awareness that interpretation of the verse depends on a paradigm. In other words, the paradigm determines the meaning, not the words themselves. And that leads us to ask, “Where did we get the paradigm? Where did the idea that the cross is the place of atonement come from if it didn’t come from the verse itself?” That leads us to ask, “If Paul is a Jewish rabbi, would he have thought of the cross as a place of atonement?” And suddenly we realize that this “sacred cow” is precariously standing on one leg. Are your theological assumptions shaking? Where will you go for help?
Topical Index: cross, sins, for, hyper, atonement, 1 Corinthians 15:3-4
Or,… could Paul be talking about communal responsibility?
The rejection of the Messiah was proof of Israel’s sin and rejection of God – so Yeshua died “because of our sins”. We tend to see the word “we” more individualistically, but like many of the prophets, Paul may have been talking about “we” in a context includes apostate Israel. We the nation. We the people. “We” were released from slavery in Egypt, “we” received the Torah on Mt. Sinai, and eventually “we” were responsible for rejecting and crucifying Christ.
Your exegesis of this passage depends on an implicit anti-Semitism (or at least anti-Judaism) that was not current in Paul’s thought and did not arise until at least the 2nd century. I realize that Church doctrine rewrote the meaning of the text to include this idea, but I doubt Paul would have meant it.
See Gager, “The Origins of Anti-Semitism”
Oh yikes!
I was thinking more along the lines of traditional Jewish prayers that are said individually, but are uttered in a communal voice. For example, one Rabbi explained it to me each Jew is to think of themselves as personally/communally being rescued from Egypt – despite the separation of time and space.
Excerpt from “I Stood with Abraham” prayer:
“I stood with Abraham in his lonely vigil
And read the destiny of my people in the stars.
I was with Isaac when he built the altar
Where his faith and devotion were put to test.
I stood with Jacob when he wrestled through the night
And won a blessing at the break of dawn.”
And the “Avinu Malkeinu” associated with Yom Kippur – was explained to me as using the first person plural even though some lines don’t necessarily include your own personal sins. It would be akin to identifying with the stubbornness and arrogancy of Korah’s rebellion. Or knowing that deep down we ALL have a the experience of Adam/Eve in front of the tree of knowledge,… each day. Our sin is the same (type), that crucified Yeshua.
Exerpt:
For the sin which we have committed in Your sight through arrogance of our will,
And for the sin which we have committed before You by breach of trust.
For the sin which we have committed in Your sight by casting off responsibility,
And for the sin which we have committed before You by denying and lying.
For the sin which we have committed in Your sight by evil thoughts,
For all of these, O God of forgiveness,
forgive us, pardon us, grant us atonement.
For the sin which we have committed in Your sight, either knowingly or unknowingly.
And for the sin which we have committed before You through lustful desires.
And for the sin which we have committed before You by not lifting up Your Name.
And for the sin which we have committed before You by passing judgment.
And for the sin which we have committed before You by resisting those in authority.
For all of these, O God of forgiveness,
forgive us, pardon us, grant us atonement.”
It is a community prayer – a prayer said in group solidarity and mutual responsibility.
Now, I can totally see how interpreting Paul’s words this way could be twisted into “The Jews killed Jesus – get ’em!! ” – but I was just wondering if what Paul was saying might have been more like: “Jesus died because of humanity’s depravity (sin) – but more specifically, “His own recieved him not (for the most part).”
Gabe,
Thanks for posting (part of) this prayer. I forget about it sometimes, but it is one of the most REAL and powerful confessions I have ever experienced. Every year as I say it, it seems that a change takes place in me.
Hello Skip, I believe there are numerous levels of understanding the death of our Saviour on that cross. Yes He has conquered death through His sacrifice, He died as a consequence of the sin of the Jewish Sanhedrin leadership, His death was through sin as He bore the sinful actions against Him, (and prayed to The Father for their forgiveness). He Who knew no sin became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. In my study I have understood the Atonement sacrifice as Antionette shared yesterday with regard to the two male goats; please could you come back to us on that Skip?
Shalom
Dave
Hey Dave,
I use to coach soccer with Dave Sheard in the late 1980’s in a small Canadian town, that wouldn’t be you would it?
I also have some questions that need responding to by Skip. See below. In any case, have a good day, and I enjoy reading your contributions and insights to this blog. kola kavod!
This might take awhile. Heading for Barcelona.
Dave, I believe by Faith Christ died not only for the Jewish Sanhedren leadership, but Adam’s Original Sin, yours, mine and every human who ever sinned, walked and will walk this earth.
In my view, most People Today are still walking in Satan’s footsteps as recorded in Job;
And the LORD said to Satan, Where are you coming from? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
I’d like you to read the material I have posted over the last few years on original sin.
Thank you Skip. I did search “Original Sin” and if I read all the results, I couldn’t do much else Today or Tomorrow.
By your reply, I’m not sure if you agree or disagree with my comment, but if there are 1 or 2 articles you think I should read, I will, if could narrow the search and point me in the right direction.
Dear Skip,
Am I correct in understanding the symbolism in Leviticus:Two goats are presented as one sin offering performing two different functions for sinful man, and the ram is the burnt offering for the Lord?
Lev 16:5 NASB
“He shall take from the congregation of the sons of Israel two male goats for a sin offering and one ram for a burnt offering
Lev 16:7 NASB
“He shall take the two goats and present them before the LORD at the doorway of the tent of meeting.
Lev 16:8 NASB
“Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats, one lot for the LORD and the other lot for the scapegoat.
We are guilty of sin and deserve death.
The blood of the slaughtered goat is offered in our place- the goat paid the price.
The other is kept alive, because we are still guilty of the sins we committed, but the goat paid the price,the guilt we should carry is taken away by the scape goat.
Lev 16:21 NASB
“Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the sons of Israel and all their transgressions in regard to all their sins; and he shall lay them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who stands in readiness.
So One sin offering of 2 goats saves us from death and removes from us the guilt of sin.
It’s interesting that the first burnt offering was mentioned in Gen 22:2 -there Abraham saw “acharei”(what came after) the ram replaced his beloved son as the burnt offering. We believe our Heavenly Father’s beloved son, (whom Isaac and the ram in the thicket, were a foreshadowing of),is our Mashiach, who offered Himself in place of Abraham’s seed as the burnt offering.
Yeshua accomplished (both the sin offerings for the consequences of sin- guilt and death, with His blood and death, He was the substitute for Abraham’s seed symbolized by the burnt offering
Lev 16:32 NASB
“So the priest who is anointed and ordained to serve as priest in his father’s place shall make atonement: he shall thus put on the linen garments, the holy garments,
QUESTION: If the goats signify His victory over our death and guilt, what does the burnt offering symbolize? Hope, resurrection from the dead, ascension to our heavenly Father? Or that it was already accomplished – because Abraham had to look (acharei) behind to see what comes after?
I find whatever you are trying to say is not coming across very plainly: That leads us to ask, “If Paul is a Jewish rabbi, would he have thought of the cross as a place of atonement?” And suddenly we realize that this “sacred cow” is precariously standing on one leg. Are your theological assumptions shaking? Where will you go for help? PLEASE RESPOND
Skip, I agree with Antoinette. You seem to be dancing around whatever your main point or ultimate conclusion is going to be.
I readily accept that I may be wrong, but it seems to me that you are building a theological foundation for (and suspense for) a position that says that observant Jews, or perhaps all ethnic Jews, need not make any recognition of Yeshua as Messiah; that their place in the Olam Haba is secured apart from traditional Christian understandings.
Personally, I am ready to consider that message with humility; to be a Berean.
I am ready to consider that, if it is indeed where this plane is going to land, but I’ll need to know how someone can revile the name of Yeshua their whole life, yet still benefit from Him. If that is true then perhaps all of creation has a place in the Olam Haba regardless of their life here on earth.
Are you building a case for universal salvation? That would be more of a stretch for me.
I hope you will speak clearly and not be a politician.
Dancing around this? I thought I was being pretty clear. If the Lamb is slain before the foundation of the world, then the idea that forgiveness and atonement doesn’t occur until the cross is wrong, and Abraham and I are “saved” on the same basis, namely, the sacrifice of Yeshua on the altar in heaven. Clear?
If that is true, then the cross is not about atoning sacrifice but about something else (just as important) and I now suspect the it is about bearing the consequences (not the guilt) of sin so that death itself might be overcome and the defilement of the whole creation wiped away so that God’s presence with His creation is restored. Clear?
This also means that those who lived before Yeshua’s death on the cross did not come into God’s presence is some other way. They came through Yeshua’s sacrifice, a sacrifice that occurred before any man walked the earth. Clear?
And that implies that contemporary God-fearer’s who reject the Christian “Jesus” because of what the Church has taught about the cross and the obliteration of the Law are CORRECT to reject such an apostasy. This is not what Scripture teaches. But that is not to say that rejecting the Christian Jesus is equivalent to rejecting the Jewish Messiah since Scripture clearly demonstrates that Yeshua is the Jewish Messiah.
But it seems to be impossible for any Torah-observant Jew to come to this conclusion given the anti-Jewish attitude and doctrine of Christian theology (from it very beginning, I might add), and so I do not hold that Jews who follow what they see in the Tanakh are automatically excluded from the Kingdom simply because they cannot accept the Christian Jesus. If I were Jewish today, I couldn’t accept the Christian Jesus either.
I do believe that a scriptural understanding of the JEWISH YESHUA, removed from the centuries of Christian re-interpretation, will show himself to be what the Jewish people are looking for, but removing that burden is a very long and slow process given what the Christian Church has done over 2000 years.
So, I do not believe in universalism. I do believe in the Torah-observant, God-fearing community of the faithful. I just think that a lot of people in that community don’t really know who Yeshua is.
That is an awesome answer Skip and I very much appreciate it. I love your passion. It is infectious.
Thank you.
It still is not clear to me but that is me, not you. I have 61 years of traditional Christian teaching (I have a B.A. in Biblical Literature) and belief to chip away and the job is not done yet. All I have ever been taught, up until a short time ago was that it was “…all about Jesus…” If you did not “accept him” you would not make the cut after death.
Please be patient with me. If I wasn’t wanting to learn I wouldn’t be posting comments on this subject.
I would like to expose myself to additional teaching in this. In addition to this blog do you have any written or MP3 resources you would recommend that specifically address this?
On the subject of non Messianic Jew’s, there is more than just the Hellenized Jesus to deal with. They also have a well developed list of reasons why Yeshua cannot be Messiah. For one, he did not usher in Messianic peace on earth.
Thanks for your attention to my questions Skip.
I will be posting a bit more on this in the next few days. I just finished a seminar here in Jerusalem about the creation of the Christian Church after 200AD and its philosophical and theological base from which we were taught to read Scripture with the “Jesus” lens. Bu the history of the first two centuries reveals something quite different, as we will see, I hope.
I am also, slowly, trying to get a grip on the “cross” issue so that we can understand why thousands of Jews who never gave up their Jewishness could still believe that Yeshua was the Jewish Messiah. They did not become “Christian” since that term and the idea that there was a RELIGIOUS distinction did not appear until after Justin Martyr. We have a lot to unravel before we can move forward.
Thanks again Skip.
I was privileged to have three days in Jerusalem in late December. I miss it.
Dr. Moen, I can only say “wow” to your answer to Daniel. I have been trying to articulate what I think is a similar thought that has been rolling around in my mind for a while. Usually if I talk about these thoughts I get accused of promoting an anti-Christ idea or of universalism. But you, of course, do a much better job of saying what I have been thinking. I look forward to your future blogs on the subject.
I don’t know if you are familiar with a book “Yeshua Our Atonement” by Derek Leman, but I learned a lot from that book. I am going to have to dig it out and read it again. I believe what he said was similar to what you are saying. He goes into detail about how atonement deals not with sin but with death as a hindrance to approaching God. He also says this is what Yeshua’s death deals with. In a section “Life from the Dead in Messiah” he says “For those who can see it, Leviticus and Numbers point to life from the dead. These themes also point to the atonement, complete atonement, that would one day be made in Messiah Yeshua.” I wish Rabbi Leman could be involved in this discussion but you may be familiar with his thoughts.
I am very interested in the subject of your seminar in Jerusalem. That’s what I have been trying to figure out. How could multitudes of Jewish people in the first century recognize Yeshua as their Messiah, still be zealous for the torah, not give up their Jewishness, and still worship in the synagogue setting (at least for a while)?
A few months ago, when I first found this group, you sent me a message about being in Kansas City some time this summer. I am going to try to find to e-mail to see if I can attend. I was wondering if the KC seminar will be similar to what you discussed in Jerusalem?
I do indeed know of Derrick’s book. As for Kansas City, I don’t see why we couldn’t do something on this topic. I’ll plan on it.
The venue for Kansas City (actually St. Jo, MO) is arranged by Sandra Smail.
You can find out about it by contacting her.
Just search my web site for either her name or “Kansas City”
“But it seems to be impossible for any Torah-observant Jew to come to this conclusion given the anti-Jewish attitude and doctrine of Christian theology (from its very beginning, I might add), and so I do not hold that Jews who follow what they see in the Tanakh are automatically excluded from the Kingdom simply because they cannot accept the Christian Jesus. If I were Jewish today, I couldn’t accept the Christian Jesus either.”
Me, neither!
The Hebrew Messiah we know from the original Scriptures is Whom we need to proclaim, not a falsely proclaimed Greek image.
Skip,
I do not believe in universalism either but I do believe in universal reconciliation. In Today’s Word you have taught us all the importance of words! Universalism is a poor word to describe what God has been doing with humanity from the beginning. Universalism means a lot of things to a lot of people even outside of the Christian community. We know that salvation is through Yahshua’s salvific work only. I love Paul’s comments to the Corinthians:
“So that if anyone is in Christ, that one is a new creation; the old one has passed away; behold all things have become new! Anf all things are of God who RECONCILED us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and giving us the ministry of RECONCILATION; whereas God was in Christ RECONCILING the world to Himself, not charging their trespasses to them, and putting the word of RECONCILATION in us.
Therefore, on behalf of Christ, we are ambassadors, as God is exhorting through us, we beseech on behalf of Christ, BE RECONCILED TO GOD.” (2Cor. 5:18-21) TIB JP Green
In confronting the issue of universal reconciliation, the question we all have to ponder is: Is God capable of reconciling all of humanity to himself through His Son? Or is God incapable of overcoming stubborn “free will”? ( That’s the objection most people throw at me in discussions on this topic.) Quiet honestly, it is not too difficult to show that free will is a non issue with God. People are inclined to forget that as the Sovereign Creator HE OWNS OUR WILL!
Skip, you said above that a lot of people do not know who Yahshua is! I will say, additionally, that a lot of people find the concept of universal reconciliation preposterous because they have not take the time to study the pros and cons of the issue. They would rather casually accept Augustinian theory of eternal torment in hell or annihilationism as being viable when, if they took the time, they would find that a simple study of the Greek words: “aion”, “aiones” and the Hebrew word “olam” eliminates many of the misunderstandings of churchmen on this issue.
I think my God looks a lot grander that the God of Augustine and the annihilationists!
The first doctrine to be denied in Scripture is judgment. The Bible records Satan saying to Eve, “You surely will not die!” (Gen. 3:4).
Universalists, for the largest part, feel the same way and deny that there awaits an eternal separation from God for anyone who refuses Christ as their Saviour. More simply put, — those who reject Jesus Christ in this life will have their request honored also in the next.
Scripture teaches that beyond this life, there are no second chances.
The Bible declares, “Today is the day of salvation” (2 Cor. 6:2).
“This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous.” Matt. 13: 49
I like what you have said Dorothy
Are you thinking more along Rob Bell lines?
Skip, I don’t think it is resloved yet who God inspired to write Hebrews, but reading Today’s word brought me to Hebrews 6, which I see as essentially conveying the same ideas you are here.
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us GO ON unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from DEAD WORKS, and of FAITH TOWARD GOD,
Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
And this will we do, IF God permit.
For it is impossible for those who were ONCE ENLIGHTENED, and have TASTED of the heavenly gift, and were made PARTAKERS of the Holy Ghost,
And have tasted the GOOD WORD OF GOD, and the POWERS OF THE WORLD TO COME,
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing THEY CRUCIFY TO THEMSELVES the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
For NOW we see through a glass, darkly; but THEN face to face: NOW I KNOW IN PART; but THEN shall I know even as also I am known.
And NOW abides Faith, Hope, Charity, these three; but the greatest of these is Charity.
1 Corinthians 13
The world has too many people, especially religious types, who think they know it all. The LORD can’t do much with people thinking like that.
Skip, I too agree with Antoinette, PLEASE RESPOND. My mind is shaking with a statement from Paul’s mouth on Philippians 3:8 isn’t he including all he once knew being a rabbi?
If I may respond, in a word, Benny, no. Paul was speaking of the privileges and social standing he enjoyed, not his learning as a rabbi.
What is your Shepherd telling you? Listen to HIS voice.
You need no man to teach you, 1 John 2: 27
Help Dr. Moen!
Help about what?
Skip I’m with you all the way on your last response. Thank you. But it still leaves so many holes to think through. The 2 goats at Yom Kippur are some of them. Shalom brother, it is so stimulating being allowed and able to think through issues without having to take on pat answers.
So, what was done at Messiah’s death on the stake was to take away the consequences of the transgressions of all mankind, that is of course the death penalty.
‘In other words, the consequences of sin is death and as a result of our sins, Yeshua died, not to cover over the sins but to remove the consequences.” YES!
Every action has a consequence, whether right or wrong. We see the consequences of disobedience everywhere in the Tanakh.
So, at Messiah’s death we see He has taken away our punishment, which is death for the consequences of our transgressions, when we turn back to Him through repentance, to receive eternal life. Amein!
So, Yahushua has publicly declared at His sacrificial death HE had abolished that penalty:-
Yahushua our Messiah who has abolished death, and has brought life and incorruptibility to light through the Good News. 2 Tim 1:10
And has freed us from the LAW of sin and death, Rom 8:2,; the law that carries death penalty consequential to transgressions.
May we never be ever-learning but not coming to the knowledge of truth that will clear all previous misconceptions. Thank you, Skip for all your efforts.
“Are your theological assumptions shaking? Where will you go for help?”
To the Torah. Where else? And what do the sacrifices teach us? Atonement? Abolition of death? Both? And who is this Lamb who takes away the sin of the world, including sin’s consequences, death? “But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” (Heb 9:26)
Great food for thought!
Does it not make you wonder why YHWH, in 4,000 years did not say one word about His son “Yeshua who was slain before the foundation of the earth”? If such an important event that is so radically important for all mankind was mentioned for the first time in the Apostolic Writings, will it not make us wonder why?