People who frequently read this blog know that I have many posts clearly explaining why the animal sacrifices in the Bible were not 'taking the punishment the sinner deserved' (Penal Substitution). In this brief post I want to share a most significant aspect that is typically overlooked entirely.
Many folks think the animal's getting slaughtered for sacrifice were 'paying the price' for the individual's sins, so that the individual would not have to 'pay the price'. But the simple fact is, animals were not free (cf 2 Sam 24:24). Whether you raised animals or whether you had to buy them, there was a noteworthy cost. I estimate that a lamb would cost around $300 dollars. Because finances were a factor in whether someone could meet their obligation, the Law makes room for those who could not afford a lamb, e.g., those who could only afford two pigeons (Lev 5:7), or even those who could only afford a sack of flour (Lev 5:11). The point remains though, even if scaled down, the person who sinned (unintentionally) was going to take a financial hit of $300 dollars (or equivalent) each time. That's not chump change, and it can add up.
Imagine getting a $300 speeding ticket every month of the year (which is like a monthly car payment). That would be around $3,600 in fines per year. Thus, if you're an Israelite paying a few thousand dollars for animals each year, that's definitely a significant punishment. Financial punishments are no joke. And in the context of Penal Substitution, we can see that an Israelite taking the financial punishment, not to mention the time investment, means they were the one 'paying the price' for their sins. It makes little sense to think the animal being killed was being punishment in your place when just prior to the slaughter you had to pay $300 which you worked hard to earn. If someone was making minimum wage and working 40hrs per week, then to sin within the Levitical system meant you lost wages for basically a whole week of work! You definitely didn't escape personal punishment as an Israelite. And Leviticus 6:5 (Lev 5:16) explains that if you defrauded a neighbor, you had to pay back that amount, plus an additional 20%, plus offer a sacrifice! Ouch!
In closing, I should add that such a system seems unjust for God to put people under. The fact is, this 'burden' was not originally part of what God expected of them, but rather many of these rules and regulations were placed upon the Israelites only after they kept turning to sin. St Thomas Aquinas and other theologians explain that by putting all these expectations upon them, God was trying to not leave them with any time or resources to turn back to idolatry. But, this was only a temporary fix, as the real problem was an interior one, of the soul, which requires the Sacrifice of Jesus to heal.
2 comments:
Excellent points!
As a Catholic I think its pretty obvious jesus suffers the punishment for sin, I don’t believe in penal Substitution, but i do believe that Christ suffers the punishment for sin. But for me I think that christ suffers by choice, and that it is under the permissive will of god not his absolute will that he suffers. In other words God allows his son to suffer evil for the benefit of humanity rather then directly punshing him. Notice that adam is punished for sin and also all of mankind, Christ enters the world as a man and suffers that punishment with us but not instead of us, not as a substitute. Yet being all just his death merits salvation for he suffers as a just man for sin, and we as sinners get what we deserved. Christ in a sence does perfect penance for us. Now if we unite our imperfect suffering to christ it will be accepted for it is united with the perfect suffering of christ.
I also wanna point out all of Christ sufferings are natural not supernatural, christ is not sent to eternal hell, so if it is substitutional why is does every one still suffer natural pain and death? Why would his natural death replace a person supernatural death? It is appointed to all men to die.
So Im all with you in that penal Substitution is wrong but i dont think you need to argue against the penal aspect merly the substitution aspect. And if you say how does God punish an all righteous person consider job he is all righteous but he suffers under the permissive will of God, and not Gods direct will. Satan accuses job of sin because he is in the flesh, and God gives satan permission to test job to see if he is really sinful. But lets ask this question would satan have the right to make this accusation if Adam never sinned in my opinion no.
Post a Comment