Running through the Bible from Genesis to Revelation are multiplied references to sacrifices and blood.

The New Testament references to “the blood of Christ” are so numerous and specific that they in themselves constitute a theology of redemption.

That the doctrine of the blood atonement is attacked and rejected as a “slaughter house religion” by many is a matter of deep concern. If the shed blood of Calvary has no relationship to God’s redemptive act, then men should know it. If allusions to Christ’s blood, and faith in its saving efficacy, are “offensive”, and on this assumption to be eliminated from Christian doctrine, we should know on what authority such action is being taken.

I have before me letters which deplore in the strongest terms a concept of God which requires the sacrifice of his Son for the sins of the world.

These letters speak of such beliefs as “sadistic,” “revolting,” “outrageous,” “atonement of retaliation,” “masochism,” and other vigorous terms.

Little is to be gained by engaging in polemics. To me the decision must center in the revelation which God has given us of himself and his Son through the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures.

Here we are confronted with the holiness and justice of a God who is utterly righteous, and we see the great mercy of the same God who is love.

The Bible tells us that the sacrifices of the Old Testament were types and symbols of the death of Christ on the Cross, and the New Testament affirmations about the blood shed on Calvary require us to take them in their rightful context and accept them as the inspired explanation of the central event of all history. ...

Subscriber access only You have reached the end of this Article Preview

To continue reading, subscribe now. Subscribers have full digital access.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.

Our digital archives are a work in progress. Let us know if corrections need to be made.