Friday: Further Thought – Understanding Sacrifice
Daily Lesson for Friday 9th of May 2025
Further Thought: The Scriptures make it clear that Christ is the only One worthy to secure our salvation.
Image © Stan Myers from GoodSalt.com
His life was the only sinless human life, the only example of a life that rendered perfect satisfaction to the glory of the Father. He is the spotless Lamb of God, and now He stands at the head of the human race as our eternal security. At the same time, He took our guilt on Himself, satisfying the judgment that is God’s response to wickedness. As John witnesses the incredible scene of heavenly beings gathered around God’s throne, he is told to stop weeping because “ ‘the Lion of the tribe of Judah . . . has prevailed’ ” (Revelation 5:5, NKJV).
Think, too, just how bad sin is, and just how fallen the human race really is, that only the death of Jesus, God Himself, would suffice to solve the problem of sin. No doubt, if there were some other way that God could have saved us, without violating the principles of His divine government, surely He would have done it.
“The broken law of God demanded the life of the sinner. In all the universe there was but one who could, in behalf of man, satisfy its claims. Since the divine law is as sacred as God Himself, only one equal with God could make atonement for its transgression. None but Christ could redeem fallen man from the curse of the law and bring him again into harmony with Heaven. Christ would take upon Himself the guilt and shame of sin—sin so offensive to a holy God that it must separate the Father and His Son. Christ would reach to the depths of misery to rescue the ruined race.”—Ellen G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 63.
Discussion Questions
|
(7)
Why was the life, death, and resurrection of Christ the only means by which the human race could be saved? Again, what does such a cost tell us about how bad sin must really be?
The simple answer is: He was the only one worthy for reconciliation of us back to God.
Did He have to die? Yes, I do believe Christ had to be born, live and die in our stead once for all who keep responding to His love with love to God.
To be honest, I struggle with sharing my thoughts in the “public square” as so many preclude it to be 'invalid'. While I can appreciate aspects of this past week's lesson about 'sacrifice', I cannot accept the idea that Jesus’ blood is required by God or serves as the atonement for sin in the way it is often presented.
Many Protestant churches emphasize Jesus’ death as a “sacrifice” required for atonement. But I question whether this aligns with the broader message of God’s Grace and Mercy — offered to the sinner in Jesus’ name — not as payment, but as a gift of His Love.
John 3:16 declares the purpose for which God gave His Son: “that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” Salvation, then, centers on believing in Jesus Christ, not any other gods or their teachings.
John 1:29 records John the Baptist proclaiming, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” But does calling Him a 'lamb' strictly implies the method of His death or simply affirms the mission humbly accepted by Him to save mankind?
John 15:5 and John 10:10 point clearly to our life: “I am the vine ... apart from Me you can do nothing” and “I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly.” Everything we need is in His Life — His Spirit, His teachings, His example — not in the horrors of sin leading to His death.
To interpret Jesus’ death as a by God-required sacrifice risks distorting the image of our Creator, who is the Source of the True Life and Light contained in His Love. Would He endorse, or worse, require, a human sacrifice — something He repeatedly condemned in pagan religions?
Man's sin is not just “bad” — it is deadly to the living soul. It is only overcome by the steadfast Love - Grace and Mercy - of our Creator God and Jesus Christ, His Son, who laid down His life that we might live. We are saved by God's Grace through our faith in the same Spirit which Jesus followed throughout His Life - inspired loving obedience; this is our example when living selflessly - Eph. 4:22–24; 2 Cor. 5:17; Col. 3:3; John 10:10.
Would it change your thinking if Jesus "sacrifice" was not required, but freely given to demonstrate his love for us? We sometimes think of "required" in its strict forensic sense when maybe we should thnk of it in the sense that true unselfish love "acts this way". If the word "required" is allowed to be more nuanced than you have expressed, then it make sense.
Maurice – thank you for your kind consideration. In response to your question, I turn to the words of Jesus to His apostles:
John 15:12–15:
“This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.
Greater love has no one than this: that he lay down his life for his friends.
You are My friends if you do what I command.
Henceforth I no longer call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything I learned from My Father I have made known to you.”
Jesus laid down His life not only in love for His friends but to reveal that He is truly the Son of God — raised again by the Father unto eternal Life. In doing so, He offered a foundation for our faith and a demonstration of God’s redemptive power for all who believe and live their new life in Him.
Brigitte, where in this week's lesson do you read that "Jesus’ blood is required by God"?
That sounds as though Jesus Christ was/is NOT God, and I can't find that idea in the lesson, but maybe I'm missing something.
Inge – I hope you do not mind my a bit lengthy reply. Yes – the Scriptures state that Jesus’ blood is required by God for the forgiveness of sins – Heb.9:22; Eph.1:7.
Monday’s lesson:
“The innocent dying for the guilty. That’s what it took to solve the sin problem. And Christ’s death was what all these harsh, cruel, and unfair sacrifices pointed to.”
Tuesday:
1 Peter 1:18–19 speaks of being “ransomed with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot.”
Wednesday:
Matthew 1:23 references the name Immanuel, meaning “God with us.” This speaks to God being with us in Spirit. His flesh, filled with the Spirit of God to speak unto His Light and Life.
Philippians 2:6–8 describes God “emptying Himself” and taking on the form of a servant, being born in human likeness.
1 Timothy 2:5 identifies “one mediator between God and men — the man Christ Jesus.”
Thursday:
“The Old Testament types in the sanctuary service indicated that there was only one path by which humanity could enter God’s presence: the blood of Christ.”
“The cross, then, should show us two things: first, how much God loves us—that He would sacrifice Himself for us; and second, how deeply sinful and fallen we are — 'that only through the cross could we be saved.”
I hold that we are saved by God's Grace through faith in the Son Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, who laid down His life to empower His friends to have faith and believe in Him and His message as the true Son of God - John 15:13.
You are not alone! A tight interpretation of the law, sin, and death etc are not just distasteful but portray more law than grace.
The plan of Salvation wasn't an afterthought by the Godhead. It was planned out before this world was made. When the first couple sinned, I'm sure alarm bells went off in heaven but they weren't unprepared, rather, like a perfectly executed "fire drill" the plan was put into action, that Adam and Eve not die that very moment. Satan probably had hoped that they would. However, God had a plan.
We see alot of things happening in Genesis 3.
We see the temptation and fall of Eve, followed quickly by Adam listening to his wife and completing the fall of mankind. We also see the immediate results of their sin, fear, shame, an attempt to project their guilt (the blame game), attempts to cover their nakedness (fig leaves sewn together, a type of works Righteousness). They essentially made themselves underwear, but God said that's not going to work. God confronts all the parties involved and assigned consequences for each party. Yet the first couple weren't left hopelessly lost. That's when the preincarnate Jesus explained the plan of redemption and demonstrated it by sacrificing animals to cover their nakedness. What a horrible experience that must have been.
Today we need the blood of the Lamb of God to take away our sins. We need His Robe of Righteousness to cover our nakedness and make us fit for heaven, not based upon our goodness or works but upon Jesus's. (Ephesians 2:8-10) Faith is the key which turns the lock and opens to us the blessings of heaven.
What an awesome God we have. He has done and is doing everything to save us. Again I say that the only reason anyone will be lost is because they refused to believe in God’s provision for their salvation. We can say to God, " have thine own way Lord, or He can say to us, "have it your way," and we will be lost.
The author of the lesson guide this week writes, "The lambs and other sacrificial animals were mere symbols pointing forward to the atoning sacrifice of the Lamb of God. They were acts of faith, giving sinners a tangible way to express faith in the work of the coming Messiah."
Sorry Mr. Boonstra, it’s just not that simple. I’d be hard pressed to find someone who, through their Passover sacrifice, expressed faith in the work of a coming Messiah. Why? Because God didn’t make it clear, much less obvious. Moses didn’t explicitly tell the Israelites explicitly, “This lamb represents the Messiah.” There’s no mention of a future redemptive figure or spiritual deliverance. The blood is not described as symbolic—it is functional.
On the other hand, I would argue that while these symbols were ideally supposed to point forward to the Lamb of God, nowhere in the OT is that made explicit. The OT sacrificial system was shrouded in ritual and not understood or discussed as pointing to a person - especially not one who would be rejected and killed. The Jews celebrated the Passover with a backward focus toward Egypt, not with a future look toward the Messiah.
That the sacrificial system was actually pointing forward to a Messiah who would liberate the world from sin, that the messiah would be killed in order to fulfill the sacrifice that was so long prophesied – none of this is an unambiguous teaching of the Old Testament. The people of His day anticipated a Messiah that would fight against and defeat the Romans; they were not expecting a Messiah who would die like a lamb.
So then I ask, couldn’t God have done more to emphasize the actual role of Jesus, and better prepare a people to receive Him? Could God have told Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:15, “I, Myself, will become human and die to save the world”? What would have happened if all along it was super clear that God Himself would become human to take up the sin of the world, the sin from Adam and Eve, and redeemed the entire human race, not just the Jewish nation?
First, Jesus rebuked the religious leaders because they could have known better: “You search the Scriptures... yet you refuse to come to Me” (John 5:39–40). Second, the clarity of Scripture was sufficient for those whose hearts were open. Simeon held Him. Anna saw Him. John the Baptist declared Him. Third, Jesus learned about His own mission directly from Scripture.
If people couldn’t accept God when He lived among them, performed miracles, and fulfilled prophecy in real time, would more forewarning have helped? The fact that Jesus’ life was the ultimate revelation of God’s character, and that He was still rejected, suggests that the problem wasn’t inadequate revelation—but insufficient receptivity. The problem was not with Him, but with us.
But I ask again, What would have happened if God had made Jesus' identity and mission undeniably obvious? Had God made everything obvious from the beginning—if it had been unmistakably clear that He Himself would come as a man, die to take away all sin, and restore not just Jews but the entire human family:
First, perhaps it would have prevented people from wrestling to understand God’s character and making meaningful, trust-based choices. Even Jesus said, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29), implying that mystery leaves room for faith. And maybe that’s why we first needed to experience the failure of our own systems—our sacrifices, kings, and temples. Only when these fail can we realize that salvation cannot come from within the system. This struggle creates the need to trust in something beyond ourselves.
Second, it likely would have compelled belief out of obligation or fear, rather than love. If the Messiah’s mission had been spelled out in neon from the beginning, following Him might have felt like submission to power, not surrender to grace. Instead, we discover the surprise of grace in the face of legalism—a love that breaks the mold of performance, purity codes, and exclusion. Grace only astonishes us when we’ve first exhausted all the alternatives.
And third, we may not have had the story of a God who is patient, long-suffering, and humble, revealing Himself step by step, giving humans every chance to choose freely. In fact, we may have missed the scandal of a God who stoops so low that He dies even for His enemies—a God who conquers not through force, but through suffering love.
Only in the ambiguity could we fully grasp the completeness and beauty of a Messiah who is both King/Lion from the tribe of Judah, and suffering Lamb.
Ultimately, Scripture seems to suggest that God did all that was necessary to make the truth known—but never in a way that overrode free will.
It was the religious leaders of all times who have emphasized law and ritual. They created a hedge around the law, making sure every dot was followed—but in doing so, they lost sight of the storyline. How often today do we celebrate communion by looking backward to the cross, and forget to look forward to His return? How often do we honor Sabbath as a memorial of Creation, but miss its symbolism of present and future rest?
In the end, perhaps God’s seeming silence was not a failure to speak, but an invitation to listen more deeply. He gave symbols not to satisfy our certainty, but to stir our longing. He gave shadows not to obscure the truth, but to prepare us to receive it fully when it stood in flesh before us. The Lamb was always there—for those with eyes to see. And still today, He calls us not to mere understanding, but to trust.
It’s not so much how bad sin is but how infinitely holy and righteous is God, against whom we rebelled in Adam. Law came in to magnify sin. Believers now magnify God who has redeemed His people from under law and from sin, who in the new covenant promised to remember our sins no more. God’s righteous judgment against the sin was “you shall die”. That includes eternal death for the offense against eternal God. All are justly condemned to death, God’s righteous wrath (Rom 5:9;1 Th 1:10).
We take note of God’s decree concerning blood: “The life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.” (Lev 17:11) see Heb 9:22. Who can deliver us from this eternal death. Who can atone for our sins. The atonement or the ransom has to be infinitely holy and righteous. Jesus Himself calls his sacrifice a “ransom”: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and give His life a ransom for many.” (Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28) see on ransom Ex. 30:12; Lev. 25:24, 51; Num. 35:31, 32. Why should we be offended by the terms “sacrifice” and “ransom” etc when God is not offended? The sacrifice must die the eternal death because the sinner must die for his/her sin. It’s why Christ, Son of God, became human, son of Man (Heb 2:9-15; Phil 2:7; 2 Tim 1:10) - to take our sins away, to bear the punishment we deserve, and be presented to the Father by resurrection with all His merits in place of our condemned self. It is the resurrected Christ - holy, righteous, sinless - not literal blood, who is presented before the Father in place of us. Blood represents the life…
I believe sin can be thought of as every thought, word, and action that is contrary to God. Righteousness can be thought of as every thought, word, and action that is in harmony with God. God knew before the great controversy began what sin (the transgression of His law of love) would do to the harmony of His universe. But his creation did not. God’s plan of salvation from before the foundation of the world included the judgement of sin, that it had to die to preserve this harmony. It included by what method the judgement against sin would be accomplished, including His dying for His creation. This would place the universe on an eternal foundation against sin ever rising again. It is sin that has to die spiritually in the minds of his creation. The problem is our attachment to it. Is there any sin that is not attached to life? Sin is only a concept until attached to life. “For he that is dead is freed from sin”. Rom. 6:7 Jesus died so we could be separated from it. But since our nature was inseparably attached to it we had to die. And so a new life through Jesus apart from sin is offered to us. But if we choose to remain attached to it God’s judgement on sin will include us.
Men can try many ways to feel justified. But to render to other men the role of redemption is madness. Christ's cross may seem madness, but looking closer reveals the deepest reaction of a Father towards the desperate need to be reunited with His sons and daughters. Let's not refuse the invitation.