
The blood of Christ has always been an important concept to Christian people down through the centuries of Christian belief. The inspired Scriptures contain numerous references to the significance of the blood of Christ.
But as with any object of belief, there are those who take the object and ascribe to it meaning that it was never intended to possess. Some Christians have done that with the blood of Christ, giving it magical and mystical significance that the Scriptures do not ascribe to it. The purpose of this study will be to expose some of the improper conceptions of the blood of Christ and to look carefully at what the Scriptures legitimately say about the blood of Christ.
Unbiblical Conceptions of the Blood of Christ
The unbiblical conceptions of the blood of Christ can be divided into two categories: (a) those which regard the blood of Jesus as less important than Scripture indicates, and (b) those which regard the blood of Jesus as having more significance that Scripture indicates.
Obviously, there are those who have diminished the importance of the blood of Jesus. Christianity has been caricatured by some as a "slaughterhouse religion," because it speaks about the shed blood of Jesus as the sacrificial death for sin that was prefigured in the death of sacrificial animals in the Old Covenant. Some think that this makes Christianity a revolting, "bloody" religion with a "gospel of gore." Some denominations have even removed from their hymnals all hymns which refer to the blood of Jesus, so as not to offend people's sensitivities! (Genuine Christian sensitivities are not offended by reference to the blood of Christ!)
There have been so-called "scholars" who have tried to convince us that concepts of blood in Scripture are but carry-overs from pagan religions, which were introduced superstitiously into the Jewish religion and thus, into the Christian religion. Their presupposition is that all religions have evolved and that all religious features can be traced back to their alleged origins in the "evolution of religion." The explanation they offer is that blood covenants and blood sacrifices within animistic and spiritistic religions are the origin of such ideas in the Old Testament, and that mystic conceptions of the efficacy of blood in the mystery religions are the mythic base of all conceptions of blood in Judeo-Christian thinking. Their reasoning is based on unsubstantiated presuppositions, and warped by unbelief!
Others would diminish the importance of the blood of Jesus by indicating that it does not matter if Jesus ever lived, or if He ever had blood flowing in His veins, or shed His blood on a cross. Historicity and the tangibility of the person of Jesus Christ are irrelevant in their perspective. All that matters is how the "story" (they call it "myth") affects people in each age, and whether people find religious comfort, and a sense of peace and love in what they believe. Historical veracity, whether it really happened and is true or not, means nothing to these existentialists. All religion is regarded as pure subjectivism and spiritualized fantasy. They certainly regard the blood of Jesus as... Read Full Article...