Why didn't Jesus preach "the blood" in his ministr

[Elijah John]

If the doctrine of Jesus' martyrdom as a blood atonement has it's roots in the teachings of Jesus himself, why doesn't Jesus mention "the blood" during his ministry in any of his sermons? Instead, Jesus preaches repentance and proclaims Father's mercy with no mention of blood sacrifice in his sermons or parables.

Why is that?

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 20 by MosesY]

My father severely abused me as a chilld. For years I was bitter and angry at him, I felt that he robbed me of my life.

As a Christian I knew that I needed to forgive him. I would pray "Father GOd I forgive him" and then I would walk away bitter and angry. Sprinkling some blood on my head would not have helped, it would not have absolved my sin of unforgiveness; my heart wasn't in the right place.

A year ago or so some things happened and in my heart I forgave my father. Now my heart is right and I am at peace.

Thank you, MosesY, for sharing this key part of your life.

You have not had an easy road, but God has been with you all the way, including, or especially, in those hard times.

You found that all things are possible with Him, and for those who believe.

John 14:27

Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you.
I do not give to you as the world gives.
Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.

Take care.

[LuciusWrong]

If the doctrine of Jesus' martyrdom as a blood atonement has it's roots in the teachings of Jesus himself, why doesn't Jesus mention "the blood" during his ministry in any of his sermons? Instead, Jesus preaches repentance and proclaims Father's mercy with no mention of blood sacrifice in his sermons or parables.

Why is that?

Forgive me diving into a topic like this for my very first post.... But I think when the facts seem inconsistent with the doctrine, the doctrine is at fault and needs to be examined.

I believe that Abraham taking his son to the mountain to sacrifice him is the clearest picture for understanding Jesus' sacrifice. It is the father sacrificing the son, which was literally the command God gave to Abraham. Abraham was willing, but at the last moment God intervened.

Just looking at this story in isolation, forgetting tradition and all our usual presuppositions, it seems to suggest that God wants the idea of the father sacrificing the son to be at the foundation of Judaism. But at the same time, God is merciful and didn't want Abraham to actually do it and to live with the memory of killing his own son. So God provided a stand-in for the sacrifice.

So it seems sacrifice is meant to represent the idea of Jesus' coming sacrifice.

Note that the story is about the father, not the son; it is told from the father's perspective.

Tradition causes us to believe that the story of Jesus' death is entirely about the son, but this seems inconsistent with the story about Abram and Isaac. Why didn't the Jews tell this story from Isaac's perspective? They easily could have.

If the story were told from Isaac's perspective, and if the story said that Isaac willing climbed onto that alter under his own power, knowing what his father was about to do, and believing that this is what God wanted, that would be the perfect story to match the traditional interpretation of Jesus' death.

But instead, we always wonder how an old man like Abraham could overpower Isaac or otherwise get him to cooperate. This story is remarkable for it's absence!

And another kink: I believe it is in Isaiah(?) where God declares that the idea of sacrificing children was not his idea and has never even entered his mind...yet in Abraham we see a dramatic story of God commanding that a child be sacrificed...in his name! And yet again, Jesus is the son who is sacrificed! This child sacrifice is the cornerstone of Christianity; Jehovah is the God who sacrificed his son! So how can God say that it has never entered his mind, when most Christians believe that Jesus' sacrifice is God's ingenious, and beautiful, and wonderful....plan to save us?



My simple answer is that Jesus didn't preach "the blood", because that is an idea created by men, not God. I think there is a different story that better explains why Jesus had to sacrifice himself, which is entirely consistent with everything in the Bible, not just the chosen bits we like to string together in the usual way.