5

To Peter Turner’s point A) Scripture is the source that says blood was necessary and that blood was sufficient, question revolves around why a Non-Trinitarian Jesus has sufficient worth to save mankind from sin of He is not God and therefore not infinitely valuable as God is.

For by a single offering (blood offering) he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭10:14‬ ‭

.

“he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭9:12‬

To point B) this question is for non Trinitarians, if moderators require a more specific group, to Jehovah Witnesses. (Not for Modalist Non-Trinitarian)

——————

The OT foreshadowed a coming sacrifice through which sin would be purged and expunged

“For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭10:4‬ ‭

Animal sacrifices were done in faith anticipating the future redemption of mankind

But why was Jesus’ death/blood sufficient?

If Jesus was merely a coequal to satan or of the same kind any other ‘angel’ as some claim, and NOT God incarnate (as Trinitarians say He is) then why is an angel incarnate a sufficient sacrificial lamb for the sins of mankind?

It is clear that prior to incarnation Jesus existed as a non “Adam” man, two texts, one is His own admission because the conversation was prior to the prepared body

“Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me;” “Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭10:5‬,7 “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.” ‭‭John‬ ‭6:38‬

And secondly

“But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from eternity.”” ‭‭Micah‬ ‭5:2‬ ‭

If He is not God, as God the Father is God, but a created being on what basis is His sacrifice sufficient?

“But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent ( not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭9:11-14‬

Why is His blood sufficient if he is not the eternal God?

————

  • Animals were used in substitution for sin as foreshadowing
  • One man could die for another man or take the punishment in substitution
    • Since when can an angel substitute the sins of all mankind? It would make sense if it were the eternal everlasting God but a created being makes no sense, humans are created, as are angels why is one angel worth all of mankind?
1

This is from the perspective of Jehovah's Witnesses. A full explanation of Jesus' ransom sacrifice can be found in chapter 5 of the book, "What Can the Bible Teach Us?"

Jesus' death is sufficient for redemption from sin on the basis that Jesus was a perfect man, without sin, just as Adam had been.

When Adam was created, he was perfect, but when he disobeyed God, he became sinful, selling himself and all his children to sin and death. (Romans 5:12; 7:14) In order for Jehovah God to have a legal basis to repurchase mankind, forgive sins, and restore humans to a perfect state with the opportunity to live forever, there must be a corresponding ransom to replace the life that Adam lost, one who lives their whole life without sin, obedient to God. (1 Tim. 2:6; Romans 5:19; 1 Cor. 15:21, 22) No descendent of Adam can serve as this ransom because we are all born sinful, imperfect. (Psalm 49:7, 8)

To provide the ransom, Jehovah miraculously caused one of his perfect spirit sons to come to earth as a human. (1 John 4:9; Luke 1:35) This was Jesus. Jesus remained obedient to God until death. Later, when Jesus returned to his Father in heaven, he presented the value of his perfect human life to Jehovah as the ransom. (Hebrews 9:24) Furthermore, Jesus disproved Satan's accusation that no human would remain obedient to God if that person was severely tested. (Job 1:9-11; Prov. 27:11)

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    My question revolves around the “corresponding ransom” that you speak about. Why is it that Jesus as a man was able to ransom all men and Creation (Rom8:21) if he being a created being is no greater than another man. Psa8:5 says man is a little lower than heavenly hosts (God excluded uncreated). I can’t understand how legally this ransom would be valid. Satan would object. God would object. God can’t arbitrarily assign value, the value must be intrinsic and one incarnated spirit son is not worth all creation. God the creator on the other hand yes He is sufficiently valuable, infinitely so. – Autodidact Jun 13 at 15:04
  • 1
    I understand a ransom is needed, we both agree on that. My question is why is the ransom (Jesus) worth all mankind’s salvation and Creation’s for that matter? For example, in a kidnapping scenario a ransom is demanded. The release of the victim is contingent on the value of the ransom. The kidnappers need to agree that the ransom is sufficient. Why was the ransom enough? Are you understanding the question? – Autodidact Jun 13 at 17:30
  • 1
    You can’t say it was sufficient because it was a ransom or it was sufficient because it was without blemish. That’s like saying, the kidnappers should accept the ransom because $2 is money. I’m asking why was the ransom sufficient. What was the intrinsic worth? Angels are only a little higher than humans psa8:5 humans are equal to each other. One human is not sufficient to save all humans because he is without blemish. There has to be a greater worth. There had to be justice paid, hence propitiation. Clearly animal sacrifices in the millions were not enough though they were without blemish. – Autodidact Jun 13 at 17:39
  • 2
    That only fixes Adam’s issue. Now fix all his descendants too. One man for one man. Value for value. Eye for an eye. Tooth for a tooth. Jesus has to be worth at least what Creation is worth to restore creation and mankind. You’re saying he was only worth what Adam was worth. ““Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.” ‭‭Deu24:16‬ – Autodidact Jun 13 at 17:57
  • 2
    The answer addresses mankind's sinfulness as a disposition going forward from the ransom sacrifice: The aspect of God reconciling the world unto himself through Christ. The question, I think, has to do with the propitiation or payment for each individual sin committed by each individual human who ever lived both before and after the sacrifice of the cross. OP is this right? – Mike Borden Jun 14 at 12:34
-4

According to Biblical Unitarians...

There is no biblical precedent for Jesus' sacrifice/offering to be God. There IS a precedent for the offering to be without fault and blemish. Jesus was without fault and spiritually perfect as he was without sin and the son of God. He could only be perfect - w/o sin, if he was born outside of the sin of Adam (Rom 5) which he was, as his Father was God, not Joseph. The whole deal of Jesus, the man, being foreknown by God and already 'slain' figuratively was always part of God's plan of redemption before the first sin happened. So he has appeared in these last days to finally accomplish God's plan of salvation prophesied throughout the OT.

1 Pet 1:20 For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you

IF Jesus was 'God' he couldn't be tempted as we are, able to sin as we do, or die as we do. He was raised to immortal life as all who believe in him will also be.

When God 'gave His only son' He meant it! He didn't give 1/2 a son in a flimsy mock-up sacrifice.

As the last Adam, Jesus death is sufficient to cover the sin of all men and to redeem his Father's creation from the results of Adam's sin because all are included by God's grace.

Jesus’ death was sufficient because he was without sin... as Hebrews 10 sets out in abundant detail.

Most probably understand the basics of OT sacrifice/worship. The priest could enter the Holy of Holies only once a year an behalf of the people of God. He had to thoroughly cleanse himself according to God's specific instructions. No one else could enter in - they would surely die! Even the priest would die if he did things wrong - Aaron's sons died because they didn't follow instructions carefully (Lev 10:1,2).

Jesus is now the high priest - operating constantly for our well-being. His one sacrifice - for all people for all time, far supersedes the old model. He is perpetually clean because of the sinless life he lived in obedience to the Father's will.

If the blood of an animal could 'atone' for sin for a time (as a type, Heb 9/10), Jesus one perfect sacrifice atones for all until there is no more death.

We have the moment when the veil was torn, as Jesus granted us access to the Father like never before (Matt 27:50). There is no more 'Holy of Holies' in a physical tabernacle - it is defunct.

Hebrews 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy place by the blood of Jesus.

God has to accommodate the law. Sin = death. Sin is annulled when a death covers it. We can die for our own sins, but never get raised up again - ever. Jesus, foreknown by God before the world began, is the life that could be raised again, and we in him, because he was without sin.

Jesus is only worthy because he, as a man, was without sin. Having God w/o sin as a sacrifice is a nonsensical construct without biblical support.


The odd construct that an 'angel' could suffice is nonsensical in that they would NOT be an 'Adam' as Jesus was. A man to battle the adversary (seed of a woman Gen 3:15) is a fair deal. For the devil to battle God is also nonsensical - it would be called a foul. God does not need to stack the deck - ever!

https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/articles/why-did-jesus-have-to-suffer-and-die

| improve this answer | |
  • Please add quotes or references to authoritative Biblical Unitarian sources so that we can know this isn't just your personal opinion. – curiousdannii Jun 22 at 1:11
  • 1
    I’m asking on what basis was Jesus’ sacrifice sufficient. I’m not asking why you don’t believe Jesus can be God incarnate. Your answer As best as I can tell is because He was blameless and without sin. I can’t see how that would satisfy God’s wrath given if he were merely human he wouldn’t be worth more than one other mortal, certainly not all Creation. Appreciate your answer, maybe 4castle will get back to me on why Jesus was worth more than one person. – Autodidact Jun 22 at 1:12
  • Where do you get 'worth' from? If you're just happy with making up your own parameters then you don't need a bible at all... If there IS 'worth', God has included that in the sinlessness, coupled with, a man had to be a second Adam. – user48152 Jun 22 at 1:43
  • 1
    @user48152 worth comes into play when purchasing comes into play. “And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased ηγορασας for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.” ‭‭Revelation‬ ‭5:9‬ ‭ – Autodidact Jun 22 at 2:08
  • 1
    yeah... like I said. It's one aspect, a result of maintaining a sinless life against all temptation. Succeeding where the 1st Adam failed. The 'worth' of an animal was it's 'perfection' as best as it could be by sight etc. Jesus was perfect to the core, to the very heart that God looked apon. THAT'S what made him worthy and sufficient. Jesus wouldn't have been worthy if he had failed. – user48152 Jun 22 at 2:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.