In, Loraine Boettner's book on The Atonement, speaking on the blood of Christ, he states, “The term "blood" as used in theological language is, of course, to be understood as a figure of speech. It is used as a synonym for Christ's atoning death, and it designates the price which He paid for the redemption of His people."
I have trouble with the 'figure of speech/ 'synonym' concept, it just doesn't seem to go far enough. I believe John MacArthur takes a similar stance as Boettner. Any comments, thoughts?
Can you please clarify what you mean by "
I have trouble with the 'figure of speech'/'synonym' concept"?
Can you also clarify what you mean by "
it doesn't go far enough"? How much farther do you think the blood, or the theological use of the term 'blood,' should go?
Surely you understand the Bible is filled with figures of speech and it employs figures of speech almost from its beginning all the way through to the end. Surely you also know the Bible uses the same word in many differing ways. Words like "life" and "death" would be two obvious examples of diversely used words. Take, for example, Jesus words when he states,
Matthew 26:27-28
And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins."
Jesus is likely referencing Old Testament precedents, such as
Leviticus 8:14-15
Then he brought the bull of the sin offering, and Aaron and his sons laid their hands on the head of the bull of the sin offering. Next Moses slaughtered it and took the blood and with his finger put some of it around on the horns of the altar and purified the altar. Then he poured out the rest of the blood at the base of the altar and consecrated it, to make atonement for it.
The word "
poured" is used in both verses but not in the same way and when applied to what happened on the cross a third meaning is evident. When Moses "
poured" blood on the altar he either did so by elevating a container full of blood above the altar and literally pouring it over the altar (the blood was drained from a sacrificial animal into a vessel according to the prescribed ritual). Jesus was pouring wine out of a cup into his throat. He was drinking wine (despite the RCC's view on the matter). He was not literally drinking his blood, poured out into his own throat in order to forgive sins of others. Jesus was alluding to his death on the cross but his death on the cross did not have a "pouring" out of his blood upon any altar, nor upon a bunch of people whose sins were thereby forgiven. In fact, the only blood that ever left his bod was that which escaped the thorn-induced punctures on his head, the nail-induced punctures in his hands and feet, and the puncture in his side from the soldier's spear. No pouring.
In other words, neither of the New Testament examples just cited are literal. All of it is some sort of figure of speech.
So, I assume the use of figures of speech is understood and something else, something specific is meant when saying you have trouble with the figure of speech concept. An examination of the word "
blood" as used in scripture would take some time (and probably many posts). I will say, for the sake of the op, the very first use of the word "
blood," is found in
Genesis 4:10 and it is a figurative use of the word. We know this because blood does not literally cry out. I'll also add this: when Jesus appeared to Thomas he showed everyone his hands, feet, and side, and the wounds were still present. However, he says, "
see that I have flesh and bones," NOT that he has flesh and blood. However, the survivors of the tribulation are said to have washed their robes in Christ's blood and Revelation 19:13 states the one who is Faithful and True, whose name is The Word of God, is wearing a robe dipped in blood. Are these literal? It is a vision, after all.
One more wrench thrown into the works: the word "atonement" is an invented word! It does not actually exist in scripture. The Hebrew and Greek words used are best translated as "
cover over" or "
pacify." "appeasing." You'll find the word "
propitiate," but that simply means appease. The word "atone" is usually defined to mean "
make amends," but here's the rub:
The word "atonement" comes from compounding "at" and "one" and "ment."
At-one-ment
Atonement
In other words, the entire concept of "
atonement" is a theological construct. It is a term used to communicate the premise Jesus made amends for human sin and by making amends we are made "at one" or more simply, made one with God. At one-ment.
How much farther do you think the blood should be understood to go?
