Thank you, Jean, for your insightful commentary. I covet the opportunity sit in your classes and discuss topics such as this. You have opened the door to examining atonement theory from another angle by suggesting the blood is not necessarily a metaphor for death.

The killing of an animal was for the purpose of obtaining or releasing “the blood” or “the life”. While it is true that an animal “died” when the blood was released, death of an animal was not the purpose of the sacrifice. Freeing the blood was. In the Sanctuary system, the blood or “the life” was taken into the presence of God indicating that God and the worshipper were again in union.

The passage in Romans chapter three is so very significant to our understanding of atonement as you have well pointed out because it indicates that Christ is God’s method for resolving the sin problem. God’s justice (or rightness) is reveled not by a death nor a ritual sacrifice but by his becoming incarnate. Christ is a living sacrifice.

It seems to me that Paul is pointing out that Christ is “the place” or “the location” where atonement occurs. Isn’t the Greek word there “hilasterion” used elsewhere in Scripture as “the lid” or covering of the ark of the covenant? It is strange that this word, hilasterion, becomes expiation or propitiation in various translations. What I see Paul actually saying is Christ is the place where God and Humanity are joined. In Christ, man and God are again one. Problem solved.

How might the Lord's Supper inform us of the meaning of Christ fulfilling covenant and it's meaning? How might the writer of Hebrews help inform us of the meaning of the means of fulfilling covenant?

26 And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29 “But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.” Mt.26:26-28.

Heb.9:11-22,26.
"But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 And for this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, in order that since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16 For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. 17 For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives. 18 Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood. 22 And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness...26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."

pat

Animal sacrifice began far before the Israelites and has been practiced in all the world's religions. In the Axial Age (c. 1600-900 B.C.), and before, religion was about doing things that changed you at a profound level, and animal sacrifice was central to that religious quest. It was not about belief, but experience of the divine was like a sacred drama, that introduced you to another level of existence.

Animal sacrifice was a universal religious practice as a way of recycling the depeleted forces that kept the world in being. People realized that they survived only because other creatures laid down their lives for their sake, so the animal victim was honored for its self-sacrifice.

The Israelites, from which Christianity was born,
were not very different from the surrounding local peoples: Abraham, Isaac, asnd Jacob had worshiped El, the High God of Canaan, and later generations merged El's cult with that of Yahweh.
When animal sacrifices were offered, the patron
WAS the offering because he was really offering himself; he WAS the animal victim for the same reason. The smell of the sacrifice was said to be a pleasing odor to God; yet the later prophets declared that God did not want their sacrifices.

All sacrifices were not offered in penance for sins: some were on the occasion of a new child born, thankfulness for the first fruits, or to appease an angry god. It appears that Noah was the first (?) to offer animal sacrifice on exiting from the ark.

In light of the early sacrificial traditions in the world's religions, which sacrifice best represents Jesus' death? Was it a "pleasing aroma" to God? Surely not. Was it a sin offering for all the people? How? and when did this interpretation originate?

The eating or drinking of blood has always been anathema to the Jews, and continues to this day.
Is it respect for life (as blood represents life)? Ironically, while the Hebrews eschewed blood, the Passover meal in today's communion service, states that we are drinking Christ's blood! Explain that irony.

Fascinating discussion. Elaine, didn't Abel offer an animal sacrifice before Noah?

Without the Cross, antecedent religious rites of animal sacrifice would have no type value. The most significant was the Ram caught in the thicket. God was telling Abraham and us that He didn't have a Ram. He gave His only begotten Son, because of His love for His world. We celebrate that gift in the bread and the wine. We should be praising God for His unspeakable gift. The Supper gives us the opportunity to celebrate as community that which we have received individually.

Now at 83 going on 84 with Betty entering her 80th year. We seldom are able to attend Church. The Pastor personally brings the Supper to us and we celebrate together. It is the highlight of our lives.

Years ago, as an elder in the Church, Betty and I would bring the supper to shut-ins also. What a way to celebrate the fullness of life. Why argue about what pagan uses of blood signified. We have the Christ event to celebrate. Each one of us have loved ones we long to celebrate around the table He has prepared for us. So the Supper is to celebrate the Christ event and to anticipate the great reunion in which Christ Himself will once again take the bread and the cup with us.
Praise be to God. Tom

It is interesting to note that the story of Cain and Able is couched in the sacrificial language of the holiness codes. It is being told by someone obviously familiar with the temple services. But that’s another train of thought.

The discussion at hand is the word blood – its use and meaning as it relates to atonement. Ms. Sheldon has challenged us to examine this word. Is blood a symbol? If so, what does it mean when used by various biblical writers and Jesus himself? She suggests that truth is a way of interpreting its significance. If so, then we need to try it on for size; does it fit.

What does God need in order to forgive? Does he really need anything? Is he truly forgiveness personified? Would he like to forgive but requires some action, some event, some response, some blood as a prerequisite? Would his whole government collapse if he forgave without conditions or proper rewards and punishments being executed?

Was Christ’s death just demonstrative and revelatory? Or did his death actually make a change in the universal economy of justice, a substantive change that was needed in order to maintain stability?

When we drink his blood and eat his flesh what are we actually doing? Merely performing a ritual? An exercise in recalling a past event? What does the service of communion say about God and about ourselves? Why would Jesus give use this symbolic rite? How did he expect us to understand it?

Is the phase, “shedding of blood” a synonym for death? Do we really believe that without “death” God could not forgive sin with impunity? Was it the death of an animal that conveyed forgiveness on the worshiper? Did God really need the pure blood of his sinless son to consummate atonement? Was Jesus sacrifice “sweet smelling” in his nostrils?

I’m not being factious in asking but would like a dialog on this subject that takes the topic at hand seriously. The whole systematic theology of the atonement needs to be examined. The common assumption that "God killed Christ so that he didn't have to kill me" and the notion that Christ's blood was the essential ingredient for salvation needs our careful consideration.

God did not kill Christ. Christ WAS God who willingly died to put away sins commited by the means of His atoning death as the lamb that taketh away the sins of the world...effectual for those who are believing.

Oh Cross that lifted up this sinner's head, I dare not flee from thee!

regards,

pat

Pat

Again on target. Thanks for your power of reason and skill with words. Tom

I don't think there is much controvery with orthodoxy on the Bread and the Wine. But why in the world the feet washing?

Let us read some justification for that ritual--. Tom

Tom,

"But why in the world the feet washing?"

Well for one thing it feels good after a dusty walk! :) Then I guess there is the idea of servanthood and an attitude of humility which fit nicely with our need of God's grace and the fact that as God has forgiven us our 2 Trillion we are to forgive others their billions.

Perhaps it isn't an essential service but the thought isn't all bad related to community.

All the best Tom,

pat

"didn't Abel offer an animal sacrifice before Noah?"

We cannot assume that everything written in the Torah was chronologically composed; IOW, because the writer speaks of Cain's sacrifice, where is the command to offer one? Why was it offered?
This can only have been written long afterward, as Donna suggests, by someone who was familiar with much later sacrificial rituals.

There would have been no reason to explain in such great details the symbolism of sacrifice and blood, were it not the most important rituals around which all of Jewish life. Temple sacrifices were mandatory, and from the youngest to oldest, they were all well schooled in their meanings: each reason required a different animal (many were females--an interesting aside).

Because the writers and first hearers were Jews keenly familiar with the sacrificial system, there was no difficulty in their understanding when it was applied to Jesus' death. Who was the first NT writer who used this symbol? And why? Although the Gentiles living in Judea and surrounding countries were aware of the Jewish rituals, did it have the same meaning for them when it was first heard? Surely, they were familiar with pagan worships which also had animal sacrifices, too.

With Tom, I also ask: What possible symbolism can foot washing mean to moderns? And why has it always been part of the Communion service in Adventism when it was not originally part of the Passover meal? Has it not become a ritual with no meaning, considering the abstention always noted when such a service is conducted?

Reflecting on the foot washing, why and how are moderns (vegetarians?) to gain a deep sense of blood symbols today when we are so far removed from ever physically slaughtering animals, and even blood which has various meanings (both life and death)? Should we not ask these questions, are continue, often mindlessly going through the rituals that have little or no connection to our lives today?

Elaine:

"What possible symbolism can foot washing mean to moderns? And why has it always been part of the Communion service in Adventism when it was not originally part of the Passover meal?"

I think the answer can be found in Matthew 13:12-17:

When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them. 13"You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. 14Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. 15I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. 16I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. 17Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.

This is why Adventist's continue the practice of foot washing.

"'17 Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.' This is why Adventist's continue the practice of foot washing."

Somehow I feel that we as Adventists continue to do observe a literal rite that has all but totally lost its cultural and social relevance...some 2000 years removed from its original setting.

For those disciples, washing feet was absolutely humiliating...a dirty and revolting job required of the lowest household slave. When Jesus said to them that they would be blessed in the doing and reenacting of the foot washing, it would be because they were truly putting themselves into a humbling social position, setting aside all privelege, status and rights in order to serve others. How such an ancient social practice can still speak with this kind of impact today in more egalitarian societies is really beyond me...unless practiced in a church that exsists in a society that still operates under a caste system or the like.

Maybe a contemporary equivalent that would correspond to the foot washing, would be something like a CEO voluntarily cleaning out his employees lockers and toilets. I feel that Jesus is saying the blessing is really found in the performance of acts such as this, not simply in the literal, wooden performing of an acontextual ritual. It is when we willingly stoop to serve...when we truly treat others better than ourselves within and outside our fellowship that we are blessed.

Maybe engaging in real meaningful acts of service on a communion Sabbath (something that could even be organized intentionally) would help us to find the spirit of the footwashing instead of, or in addition to, the performance of the form.

Thanks...

Frank

Shane, I believe you meant John, rather than Matthew. Is he not the only Gospel writer who mentions this event? If it was of ultimate importance, why did none of the other Gospel writers mention it?

John is not considered one of the synoptics because he has stretched the timeline of Jesus' ministry longer than the other gospels, and has added many stories not included in any of the others; plus, he wrote it much later (lst-2nd) century and is full of symbols unlike the other three.

If those who believe that this "ordinance of humility" should be continued as meaninful, why not also literally accept that the blood and bread is in actuality, Jesus body?

I think Jesus meant, washing another's feet was to impress man of his equality and Christ's commission for His followers to be of useful service. I recall early in my teaching career at Marquette University, the students complained about having to "clean up" the lab if they hadn't dirtied it! I told them soon, probably very soon you will have to wash diapers you didn't soil and bottoms not your own.

It is remarkable the career choices of SDA's, Medical work at all levels, teaching at all levels, any number of humble trades and careers of helping people in need. I think that is the message Jesus was teaching us. Tom

Tom,

You have given specific examples that pertain much more to our lives today. There are far better ways to demonstrate humility in offering needed service for others: washing dirty clothes, caring for an invalid, driving someone for medical treatment, etc. Washing dirty feet in the climate and area where it began has no relevance to our modern lives today and as such, there are far too many who no longer participate in a meaningless, and difficult gesture for older and physically challenged folks. Surely, there must be a more appropriate manner that would be of help rather than removing socks and shoes and washing people's feet as part of worship service.

Those same comments have been made by the many church members who "absent" themselves when this is scheduled. Pastors should ask why attendance is so much lower on those days and respond favorably.

Elaine:

Thank you for the correction. My mind must have been in two places. You're right, it's from John 13.

>Is he not the only Gospel writer who mentions this event?

Yes, as far as I know.

>If it was of ultimate importance, why did none of the other Gospel writers mention it?

Good question. I don't have an answer to that; however, Jesus did say "I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you." Christ is my example in all things and I have seen no evidence from the Bible to negate this.

>If those who believe that this "ordinance of humility" should be continued as meaninful, why not also literally accept that the blood and bread is in actuality, Jesus body?

I assume you're referring to the text that says:

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take it; this is my body." Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it. "This is my blood of the[b] covenant, which is poured out for many," he said to them. "I tell you the truth, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God." (Mark 14:22-25)

No where does it say that God changes the bread and juice into flesh and blood. Bread is often used as a symbol in the bible for Christ, and the grape juice according to these verses is a symbol of the blood of the covenant.

I like to think of foot washing as a miniature baptism – one we as believer can perform on one another. Following our birth as a Christian, we all make mistakes and fail to love as we should in our Christian walk. Therefore prior to communion with our Lord, we need to feel clean again. But we do not need to be re-baptized – washed all over - only our feet. Now we can celebrate the feast with a clear heart and pure conscience.

We, as a church, do not observe a service of penitence or reconciliation (confession of sins)prior to communion even though the Bible enjoins us to confess our sins and pray for one another. But we are counseled to make things right with our brothers and sisters prior to communion. The foot washing service commemorates this reconciliation.

Rituals are important. Symbolically acting out our faith helps to confirm our commitments. This is why they are called sacraments. Baptism, Marriage, Communion and Foot washing are sacramental actions. Participation in these events are important in the spiritual life of a believer.

Jean,

Good analysis. We often "just know" what the blood means and never really take a good look at it. I thought you especially gave the context in:

"If we recall how God's righteousness was questioned as sin began (see Gen. 3:4), we can logically recognize that atonement—the dealing with sin—would necessarily involve God's righteousness, as well as the nature and results of sin. This the blood represents."

For I think that it is only when we consider the meaning of Jesus incarnation, life, death and resurrection that the meaning starts to become clear. While Jesus' death certainly included making provision to save you and me, it would seem to have more to do with resolving the literally cosmic questions about God and how he runs his universe. Seen in that light the act of Jesus, his "blood", takes on a deeper significance than just salvation for us humans. And in so much as the Old Testament sacrificial system was to point forward to Jesus' act, it too takes on deeper significance. This is God revealing himself to us.

Mark

With many congregants today comprised of older citizens, the foot-washing is so uncomfortable that we cannot participate. That is why there should be other ways of expressing humility that speaks to all the members.

There was a recent article in one of the newspapers about automobile design engineers who were dressed in "aging suits" that resembled the difficulty seniors had in entering and exiting cars, as well as glasses to simulate reduced sight and stiff joints, and more. In wearing these all day and attempting to drive, they then were able to design cars that would much better accommodate to older customers--who are a large customer base.

Keeping that in mind, most churches need only look at the "gray hairs" in the pews to realize that excluding them in such services is depriving them of full participation. Something that the bread and wine does not affect.

Dear E,

As an Elder, I take communion to elderly and shut-ins. Often I take a damp cloth in a baggie - and wash hands. I explain the symbolism - that in today's word - it is hands that need washing - not feet.

Then I massage their hands with hand cream. This act conveys God's healing touch in their lives.

So I agree our rituals must be adaptive to the recipients.

"Rituals are important. Symbolically acting out our faith helps to confirm our commitments. This is why they are called sacraments. Baptism, Marriage, Communion and Foot washing are sacramental actions. Participation in these events are important in the spiritual life of a believer."

Donna,

Yes, agreed.

My point however, is that we are so far removed from the original cultural and social context of footwashing as the disciples understood and experienced it, that reenacting it cannot possibly have the impact on us that it had upon them. It was not a sacrament or ritual to them as we understand such... it was something that was right in touch with their contemporary world, and spoke to their perceptions of life as they experienced it day to day. Footwashing in that culture carried real social stigma for the one who was called to wash, and by thus taking part in it the disciples were acknowledging and recalling the shocking way in which Jesus called for that stigma's obliteration.

I think the challenge for us would be to find new expressions of the same ethos that would speak to us in our contemporary circumstances as the footwashing spoke to the disciples in their's. What could we engage in as a type of "sacrament" that would touch us as powerfully about the call to humble service and equality as the footwashing touched them?

Just some thoughts...

Frank

Elaine and others

I believe the essence of Jesus washing the disciples feet is found in Phil 2: 5-11 "Let this mind be in you---

We are equals in the sight of God--We are kin when we pray: "Our Father"

Elaine you gave us an excellent list of kinship. Thanks. Tom

I think I told this story before. Dad was building the original James White Memorial Library at E.M.C. The farm manager had unwashed gravel for sale from the "second cut" of the old inter-urban rail bed. However, that gravel was left by glacial deposites and had a lot of sand stone in it. Sand stone offered no structural strength. Dad accepted several loads and used them for fill. He then told the farm manager, get me clear washed gravel and I'll buy it, otherwise, I can't use it. The next 13 week Sabbath, the farm manager asked to serve dad at the foot washing. Dad agreed. After the service they shook hands and embraced each other. At which time the farm manager said--now will you buy my gravel. Dad replied certainly as soon as you get the sand stone out!

Sometimes washed gravel beats washed feet. Tom

I enjoyed this SS lesson very much. I believed for a long time that "pagans" borrowed the bloody appeasement rituals from the Hebrews and then just switched off God for their own gods. Since then, I have come to believe that the modern understanding of the atonement is immersed in pagan religious definitions - not the truth that Jean so beautifully outlined.

After hearing some people reject this concept and argue that God's justice requires a sacrifice - I am convinced this categorical-reward-punishment mindset also champions the death penalty and corporal punishment as a child-rearing tool.

My daughter attends public school and has a Christian teacher who posted a sign at the entrance of the classroom:

"Violence is for those who have run out of ideas."

If some humans such as Ghandi and Martin Luther King can turn away from retaliatory methods and opt for loving their enemies - than how much more is our God able?

"We thought God was wounding Him and making Him suffer." Isaiah 53

We ought to know better after how many years now of spouting lofty and not so lofty atonement theories? We ought to know better the nature of our God after how many years of hours devoted to personal bible study,prayer, prayer meetings, conferences, Revelation seminars and M.Divs?

-s.n.belmonte

Re footwashing.

OK, we do not get the meaning of demonstrating humility in the meaning of Jesus` days any more.

Skip the "humility".

In footwashing you face a special mutual encounter of equality with the others in the ceremony : One sister of quite hostile character times ago repeatedly brought along her special mate from another SDA church - so not to get into the bashful situation to share footwashing with anyone of the celebrating congregation.

Question yourself : Am I ready to share the footwashing with everyone here now ?

And the very special experience : The encounter is by touching in a unique manner. I shared old feet, young feet, vital feet, tired feet, ruined feet - - I experienced loving hands, caring hands, gentle hands, cautious hands, timid hands, hurting hands, careless hands, bored hands, helpless hands - -

The SDA arguments for footwashing with only the very one Gospel of John reporting it, yet taking the word in John 13 : 14 + 15 literally, the experience of "humility" only being vivid in "Bible times" are at least questionable.

But : If we did not have footwashing, well, it urgently should be invented. It provides the access to sharing the Bread and the Cup according to I Cor 11 : 28 - 30. That is a blessing.

Greetings GSS

Okay Donna,
Back to the blood. Jean has suggested that the symbolic meaning for blood is truth. This is a very helpful interpretation for me. It takes me directly to the process of forgiveness where acknowledging the truth about a situation is always the first step. When I think about Christ coming to this earth and dying, the idea that he modeled for us how to forgive is very practical and compelling. However, when our talk about his death is only about the fulfillment of law, I think it puts the law above God and makes him subservient to it.

Gerhard,
Thank you for lovely footwashing images. I think washing someone's feet is one of the kindest things we can do for another person.

"I think washing someone's feet is one of the kindest things we can do for another person."

Really? There are hundreds of more effective ways to demonstrate kindness. It depends on the other person's needs, not the giver. If someone needs love, compassion, sympathy, a little time to talk, that is much kinder than such an outdated symbol.

We make an arbitrary assumption that in order to conform to the rituals and liturgy of our belief, that it will be interpreted by someone else as showing humility. Who is benefiting most? Only by determining what another fellow human needs, are we able to begin to meet that need and in humility, attempt to provide it.

Compare: an invalid or non-driving school age child needs a ride to the doctor, or church. Just tell her you will be happy to wash her feet at the church the next time it occurs? Where are our priorities? Find a need and then fill it.

So now blood represents Truth? Pray tell, because blood was so important to the ancient sacrifices conducted in many religions, is there no end to the analogies that may be conceived or imagined?

Maybe someone can draw up a list of the many represntations for blood.

One more personal, and maybe universal side comment about foot washing. While I'm only an occasional participant, I still find that the act remains somewhat humiliating and awkward. It's not something I look forward to doing, even in its most stylized performance in our little rooms with warm water and feet that aren't even dirty. So the lesson of humility and service still comes through. I've also often wondered why participation is drastically dwindling, and think that it's tied in part to a noticeable lack of marketing by local church leaders and pastors. It's awkward and only a side event in the communion service, so why not skip it altogether-especially when it's not being given any encoragement? (And it doesn't help that humility is totally out of fashion these days.)

All of the forgoing notes agree (me too) that this symbolic service cannot, nor should ever take the place of real servantship. The much more useful real act would be to wash another persons actually dirty car, rather than pretending to wash their imagined dirty feet. But I think ditching it altogether would deprive us of a valuable and penetrating ritual that reminds us of the need for the real.

Back to the meaning of Blood - many thanks for this subject. I have friends who are repelled by my Christianity because of this issue, explaining that they think the whole dying bleeding business of Christ, and then the follow up communion service, is just repulsive. Any help in this regard is welcome.

To me, blood being both life, and a representation of life, always seemed the most logical? Christ gave his blood/life, not because of pay back, but because he was willing to demonstrate (a) sin kills and (b) he, God, really is selfless???

thanks for your insights.

Where and by whom did the concept of Jesus' death represent so much? Since nothing was written until some years later, and the quotations and timing of Jesus' life do not agree, plus the writers were left to "quote" him as they chose, how can we be certain that any of the reasons and explanations were not conceived later by the distraught and grieving disciples?

The entire passion week is so contradictory, which one is the "correct" one, and how can we be sure that his death was not: a ransom; penalty requiring death; demonstration of love; sacrifice to who? God? Devil? Doesn't a sacrifice require both a victim and one who performs it?

If this was to fulfill a predicted prophecy, were the Jews or Romans actually fulfilling a God-given prophecy and if so, was it destined to occur as it did? We know the the OT prophecies were not directed to Jesus, but were a later re-interpretation of the NT writers who were using the common Midrash interpretation.

How does one choose from the many symbols and reasons, exactly which is the true Christian belief? Or, can one be a Christian without accepting any of them and living by the principles Jesus gave, such as the Sermon on the Mount?

Elaine

We are belated spectators in the Drama of the Ages. The War in Heaven was fought and won by Jesus Christ. The stage then moved to our planet. Our first parents made a poor choice. God replayed the event on earth to the extent of allowing His Son to die, exposing the true nature of the Devil and man without Godly restraint.

Having demonstrated the true intent of Satan, Jesus Christ retook His rightful place as regent. We are now His by creation and redemption--unless having witnessed the event, we choose to rejecting Him once again. The details differ as man differs, as witnesses to the same event differ--but the
essentials are clear and compelling. Christ is Lord! Tom

Elaine,

I appreciate what you said about filling needs. Foot washing is probably the most ineffective way to show love in my neighborhood. However, within the proper context like an SDA church communion service, the significance is huge.

You said:

"Where and by whom did the concept of Jesus' death represent so much?"

Within a Christian based context - it means everything. To some - it signifies a penalty paid for the human race. That idea brings peace to many. For others, like SDA Christians who respect EGWs writings pertaining to the great conflict or controversy - it means everything. To some SDAs, the idea that God was accused as a Godfather who seeks to enslave us by Satan, is why they believe God's coming as a vulnerable baby, living a vulnerable life, dying a vulnerable death and rising again is beyond significance - its at the very heart of why we are here and where we are going.

I belong to that latter group of believers.

Let me preface my appreciation for EGW...and now ask who said EGW's GC ideas are unique? Do we need her insight to see that goodness is often misunderstood and that darkness often fools the brightest mind?

You said:

"How does one choose from the many symbols and reasons, exactly which is the true Christian belief?"

For one self.

"Or, can one be a Christian without accepting any of them and living by the principles Jesus gave, such as the Sermon on the Mount?"

Great question! I'd like push further and say say that one NOT be a Christian at all to live a moral and principled life. In fact, God's principles of empathy, compassion, peace,freedom and love are not the exclusive children of any religion.

God's principles transcend any religion that man seeks to conjure up. That is what kicks all man-made doctrine to the curb because at the end of the day - God heals, not doctrine.

s.n. belmonte

Elaine---

Thanks for helpful thoughts.

As for animal sacrifice being present in all the world religions (or even all the major ones), we'd have to admit that it appears to be completely absent from Buddhism, Taoism and Shinto -- as well as from several lesser ones such as Jainism, Sikhism, Baha'i or Manicheeism. Confucianism, for all of its emphasis on ritual, only had one annual animal sacrifice (of a red bullock) to "Heaven," performed by the emperor each lunar new year.

On a more general note, I'd like to suggest that the ancient Israelite offerings were self-referential: they contained their own meaning in the mind of the priests and believers. As Jean Sheldon indicated, each offering would have been regarded as immediately effective in and of itself, for atonement purposes. This seems in line with general ancient ideas of placating a divinity. This, surely, operated without any particular or explicit external reference to the coming messiah. Helps us understand why so many of the Jews of Jesus' time didn't make the direct connection from temple sacrifices to Jesus' death.

John

For a younger generation who have not have the opportunity of sitting at the feet of Dr. Jack Provansha, may I suggest reading his books as preparation for this quarter’s topic of atonement. “You Can Go Home Again” and “God with Us” are invaluable aids in helping Adventists think about God’s work in Christ.

Dr. Provansha said, “So exalted a theme (atonement) can be approached by, but must not limited to, language. Metaphor is the appropriate medium, but we must never push it beyond its appropriate function. Like flowers, living figures of speech are killed then we press them into formal theories.” (Page 47, You Can Go Home Again.)

"This, surely, operated without any particular or explicit external reference to the coming messiah."

Precisely, my sentiments. The NT writers' overweening attempt to connect the Jewish services to Jesus' death resulted in 2,000 years of confusing symbols for reality. Today, we are Gentiles and it was Gentiles who made and gave the world the Christian church.

While historically, the Jewish Scriptures and rituals was the milieu to which Jesus was born and raised, to limit Christianity to the multitude of laws, duties, and sacrifices, was plainly removed at his death as Paul so eloquently explained. Jesus never founded a new and different religion, but lived and died a good, obedient Jew. It was left to Paul to change the Jewish system to a new belief, which was the birth of Christianity.

Donna, I, too, loved Provonsha and have listened to him many times. He was far ahead of the church in his concepts, as were some of his peers, including Richard Nies. "Radical ideas" in Adventism died out with the first generation.
Now, it is becoming staid, conservative, and exercising its strength in preserving the status quo, just as most old institutions.