Long ago in this discussion, Roger asked for explanation of Hebrews 9:22, "and according to law almost all things are purged with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no remission." In searching through all you have written, I have not found a response. What say you?
Homer, I actually thought that the answer to Roger's question could be found in my post "The Supreme Sacrifice of Jesus Christ". I did a search, and though I did refer to the expression "without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin" (or "fogiveness of sins"), apparently I did not explain it in that writing.
Here as elsewhere, the author of Hebrews contrasts the covenant under the law with the new covenant under Christ:
Hebrews 9:
22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
God wanted righteousness in man right from the beginning. But when the Hebrews went so far as sacrificing to othe gods, then Yahweh gave instructions as to how to sacrifice to Him and cease sacrificing to other gods. He didn't really want sacrifice ---- He wanted obedience! But He permitted it as a concession. Indeed, He even went so far as to forgive their sins when they sacrificed, so that they could have a new start in trying to obey Yahweh. Under the Mosaic Law, blood had to be shed, and sacrifices offered to receive forgiveness.
23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with more useful sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ has entered, not into a sanctuary made with hands, a copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the Holy Place yearly with blood not his own;
26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Christ's shed His precious blood on our behalf and offered a more useful sacrifice. Under the old order, God merely forgave the sin of the Israelites.
But under the new order, Christ does much more than that. He sacrificed Himself in order to begin the process of
eliminating sin in His disciples. This is the reason Jesus died, as the New Testament states in several places. How much better, or more useful, is the sacrifice of Christ!
How inferior the OT sacrifices of animals.
The old order of the law versus the new order of enabling grace is also contrasted in the following passage.
The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. Acts 17:30
I'll answer you second question in my next post.
Just now (about an hour or so later), I just realized that my answer above is not complete. I think the hidden question behind the question is : "Could God have forgiven us, if Jesus hadn't shed His blood for us?"
God
could have. After all He forgave the Israelites on the basis of their animal sacrifices.
However, when we see that the purpose of Christ's death was to eliminate sin from us --- to render us righteous, we will understand that when we repent and submit to Christ, entering the door of salvation and beginning to travel the path of righteousness, that God will have forgiven us for our past sin. For God will complete the good work He began in us, and will some day perfect us. For that reason, correction in Gehenna will not be necessary in the case of His disciples. Thus if Jesus had not died for us, we would be unable to walk the path of righteousness (The flesh availeth nothing). Therefore God would not forgive us, but hold us accountable for our past sins. So, yes, the sacrifice of Christ is
necessary for our forgiveness. But the purpose of His sacrifice is not the forgiveness of sin, but the forsaking of sin.
