WITHOUT THE
SHEDDING OF BLOOD THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS OF SINS? Hebrews 9:22
Santo Calarco
What
does Hebrews 9:22 mean when it says that “without the shedding of blood there
is no forgiveness”? Is God mandating
that blood be shed before he can forgive?
I will
demonstrate in this paper that this statement has been used out of its context.
This verse does not speak to the issue of the forgiveness of personal sins at
all. Rather it refers to the role of
blood in the inauguration of priestly ministries; earthly and heavenly. In
other words, blood and forgiveness are discussed in the setting of Christology,
not Soteriology.
Nearly all things are cleansed with blood.
For the sake of argument let’s take this verse in the popular way it is
understood nowadays. Let’s assume that
Hebrews is insisting that blood must be shed for forgiveness to take
place. If this is what it is saying then
we are presented with theological problems.
Why? First of all when we read
the whole verse we see that the writer is not presenting a rigid rule. “According
to the law we can almost say … that without the shedding of blood there is no
forgiveness.” NASB. Almost, but not all
the time!
The
truth is that in the law we read of many cases where sins are forgiven without
the shedding of blood!
Blood not always required for forgiveness. Atonement and forgiveness could
be granted on the basis of application of oil (Lev 14:29), burning flour (Lev
5:11-13), burning incense (Num 16:41-50), payment of money (Exod 30:11-16),
gifts of jewelry (Num 31:48-54), the release of a live animal (Lev 16:10) and
simple appeals to God through words (Exod 32:30). In the Psalms, sin is put
right largely in the absence of sacrificial or atonement language. Psalm 32; 51; 103.
In the
non-ritual texts of the Old Testament, the proper atonement for moral wrong
doing is repentance. For example:
2 Chronicles 7:14
14 if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, pray, seek my
face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will
forgive their sin and heal their land.
Sin offerings not always required blood
sacrifices. Even in the case of the sin offering we find
exceptions to the rule regarding blood!
If a person was extremely poor and could not even afford two turtledoves,
a grain offering became acceptable!
Atonement was still granted and sin was forgiven; without blood.
Leviticus 5:11-13. So even under the law bloodshed was not a rigid prerequisite
for forgiveness!
So this
means that the popular understanding of Hebrews 9:22 is faulty. We assume too much when we read Hebrews 9:22
to mean that blood must accompany forgiveness all the time!
Nonetheless,
the particular phrase “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of
sins” does seem to connect blood and forgiveness in a powerful way. At this point I want to introduce the crux of
my argument.
As we
consider the immediate and larger contexts we see that this verse does not
speak to forgiveness of individual sins whatsoever! It is found in the setting of the
inauguration of the earthly sanctuary and the commencement of the earthly
priesthood!
Jesus “appointed” as High Priest of New
Covenant in Heavenly Sanctuary. The larger context starts back in chapter 8:1-3 where we are told:
Hebrews
8:1-3 NIV
Now the main point of what
we are saying is this: We do have
such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the
Majesty in heaven, 2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord,
not by a mere human being. 3 Every
high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it
was necessary for this one also to have something to offer.
Please
note the specific emphasis on the fact that every high priest is “appointed”
into his office to serve. Jesus followed
this pattern. He too was “appointed” as
High Priest but of the sanctuary in heaven. This is the specific point addressed in
Hebrews 9:22 which I will address later.
In fact the larger setting of Hebrews 8-10 compares
the old covenant with the new, demonstrating the superiority of Christ over the
old covenant in each of its facets.
Earthly
blood, priesthood and sanctuary ineffective. After introducing the high priestly ministry
of Jesus in chapter 8, the writer moves into chapter 9:1-7 and provides a brief
description of the sanctuary precincts and the functions of the priests within it
in order to contrast it with the work of Jesus. The writer concludes in verses
9-10 that the earthly building with its priests and sacrifices were unable “to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10
They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying
until the time of the new order.”
Better blood: forgiveness of personal sins accomplished. The writer has emphasised the point that the earthly sanctuary,
priesthood and blood were limited in their results: the conscience of the worshipper could not be
cleansed through the earthly ritual. A
new order was required and the time of the “new order” came with Jesus. Verse 11.
The blood of animals only
managed to cleanse outwardly; in
contrast the blood of Jesus obtained eternal redemption and so cleansed “our
consciences from acts that lead to death so that we may serve the living God!”
Verses 12-14.
From personal forgiveness to inauguration and cleansing of
sanctuaries. Hebrews has just dealt with the cleansing of
sin as far as the individual person is concerned. But now in the verses that follow, the writer
focuses not on personal removal of sin but its removal from the sanctuary
building itself in order to inaugurate the priest in his work in the sanctuary.
Verses 18-22, which the
particular verse is a part of, recall the inauguration and authorization
[ratification] of the old covenant.
Please note these words carefully since they contain the particular
verse under consideration!
Hebrew 9:18-22
18 This is why even the first
covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every
command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together
with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and
all the people. 20 He said, “This is the
blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.”[e] 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the
tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22
In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood
and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
The section starts with a
clear reference to the commencement “putting into effect” of the first covenant
with blood! The inauguration of the old
covenant is clearly and only in view in this section. Personal removal of sin is not in focus
here. Hebrews has already told us the
results of the blood of Jesus on a personal level in verses 1-14. The blood of
Jesus cleansed the conscience and resulted in eternal inheritance! This is a done deal.
The writer shifts from
personal cleansing from sin effected by the blood of Jesus [v.11-17] to the
inauguration of the heavenly sanctuary and the commencement of the priestly
ministry of Jesus. Christology, not Soteriology
is now in view. Let me explain.
Verses 18-22 immediately
follow verses 12-17 for good reason.
They explain the death of Jesus in terms of a covenant ratifier in order
to become a priestly mediator. He is not explaining the blood of Jesus in
terms of personal remission of sins; he has done this already in verses
12-15! The blood of Jesus cleansed
personal sin on an inner level and resulted in an eternal inheritance! The focus is now on death and blood leading
to the inauguration and commencement of priestly mediation and ministry. The new role of Jesus as High Priest
[Christology] is now the concern of this particular segment of Hebrews! The
writer shifts from Soteriology to Christology!
The writer speaks of the
blood of calves and how it was sprinkled on the tabernacle, everything within
the tabernacle used in its ceremonies to put “the first covenant into
effect”! The context is very specific
and clear. The removal of personal sin
is not under consideration in this specific section: the inauguration of the high priestly
ministry of Jesus is the only focus!
Verse 22 relates directly
to the verses immediately preceding it! When
we read verse 22 within its immediate setting we can see that it does not speak
to the necessity of bloodshed for forgiveness to take place! To paraphrase: “People under the old covenant
remained with the stain of sin; it only cleansed on an external level. The blood of Jesus under the new covenant
cleansed their consciences and resulted in eternal inheritance. Not only so but the whole old covenant
priestly ministry was inaugurated with blood as well. They took the blood and applied the blood and
so cleansed all defilement from the sanctuary building in order to initiate the
old covenant and inaugurate the priestly ministry! In fact in the period of the law nearly
everything was cleansed with blood and without the application of blood there
is no remission.”
Applying, not shedding of blood. The
word translated “shedding of blood” is misleading! The context is referring to the cleansing of
the sanctuary precincts through the application of blood throughout. The original Greek word is haimatexchusias
is made up of two words: haima [where
we get our English word haemaglobin etc] and texchusias which means to apply.
This word actually means the "application of
blood" rather than the act of "shedding of blood". The
implications are vastly different! The context specifically describes the
application of blood throughout the sanctuary precincts in the inauguration of
the Old Covenant and earthly priestly ministry.
Where the writer says “there is no
remission”, he is referring specifically to the removal of the stain of sin and
thus it’s cleansing from the sanctuary precincts through the application of
blood in order to inaugurate covenant and appoint priests. The writer in
context is not discussing the removal or forgiveness of sins from the
individual. The context is clear. Even when Hebrews says that the blood was
sprinkled on the people, it was done as part of the inauguration/dedication/cleansing
of the sanctuary, the covenant the priestly ministry as a whole. Verse 22 is part of this direct context. It does not refer to the way a person was
granted forgiveness for individual sins committed. Individual forgiveness was
already addressed in verses 1-14.
The statement concerning
blood and forgiveness is set in the specific context of cleansing of the
earthly sanctuary during the time of the inauguration of the earthly, priestly
services. The building was cleansed with
blood for “remission” to take place; that is for the removal of the defilement
of sin from the sanctuary precincts so that the earthly priestly ministry could
commence!
This point is further
emphasised in the very next verse.
Hebrews 9:21-23
21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything
used in its ceremonies. 22
In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood,
and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. 23 It was necessary, then, for the copies
of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the
heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
How much clearer can it
be? It is not the personal forgiveness
of sins that is under discussion in verse 22!
This verse is sandwiched in statements that refer to the cleansing and
inauguration of sanctuary buildings!
Please note that v.21 and
23 describe the cleansing and inauguration of both earthly and heavenly
sanctuaries. The verse in question is
bookended by these statements. It would
be very strange indeed for this verse not to fit within the flow of the
unfolding logic! The truth is that verse 22 relates to and connects to verses
either side of it. Both the heavenly and
earthly sanctuaries are inaugurated/cleansed by blood. The blood cleanses to inaugurate a priestly
ministry: that’s all verse 22 is saying!
Many read into verse 22
something which is not there. They often
refer to the verse and say “without the shedding of the blood there is NO
FORGIVENESS OF SINS.” The last part “of
sins” is not actually in the text at all.
Note the NKJV,
Hebrews
9:22 NKJV
22 And according to the law almost
all things are purified with blood, and without
shedding of blood there is no remission.
My question is this:
remission of what from where? The specific
context addresses the remission [removal] of defilement from the sanctuary
precincts in order to cleanse it and so inaugurate it for service. Yes it did
include the people but as I have already pointed out this was not the way an
individual person appropriated forgiveness for specific sins committed! They were sprinkled with blood together with
everything else within the sanctuary as an act of dedication. The remission spoke of is from the defilement
from sin and dedication to God! That’s
all!
In this paper I have
demonstrated that Hebrews 9:22 has been used out of its context in a horrendous
way! The writer is not referring to a
rigid law that demands that blood must be shed before God can forgive the
personal sins of people! God
forbid! The specific verse is set in a
specific context.
Hebrews is discussing the
inauguration/cleansing/dedication of old and new covenants with their
respective priesthoods and sacrifices.
That’s all! The purpose of blood in these specific settings is to
initiate two contrasting ministries and covenants; nothing more, nothing less!
It
is not referring to some rigid law that insists that blood be shed before God
can forgive personal sins.