Redeeming God

Liberating you from bad ideas about God

Learn the MOST ESSENTIAL truths for following Jesus.

Get FREE articles and audio teachings in my discipleship emails!


  • Join Us!
  • Scripture
  • Theology
  • My Books
  • About
  • Discipleship
  • Courses
    • What is Hell?
    • Skeleton Church
    • The Gospel According to Scripture
    • The Gospel Dictionary
    • The Re-Justification of God
    • What is Prayer?
    • Adventures in Fishing for Men
    • What are the Spiritual Gifts?
    • How to Study the Bible
    • Courses FAQ
  • Forum
    • Introduce Yourself
    • Old Testament
    • New Testament
    • Theology Questions
    • Life & Ministry

Is the Shedding of Blood Required for the Forgiveness of Sins? (Hebrews 9:22)

By Jeremy Myers
147 Comments

Is the Shedding of Blood Required for the Forgiveness of Sins? (Hebrews 9:22)
http://media.blubrry.com/one_verse/feeds.soundcloud.com/stream/428490399-redeeminggod-114-does-god-require-blood-sacrifice-before-he-forgives-sins-hebrews-922.mp3

Hebrews 9:22 provides the main reason Christians believe that if Jesus had not shed His blood for us, we could never have been forgiven for our sins. Hebrews 9:22 refers to Leviticus 17:11 as saying this:

… without the shedding of blood, there can be no forgiveness of sins.

So there we go! The blood of Jesus is important – necessary even – for the forgiveness of sins.

End of story. The question is answered. The post stops here.

Except … hmm … something doesn’t seem quite right with that quick and tidy answer …

For example, I forgive people all the time without requiring that they shed blood for me. And I’m really glad that people forgive me all the time without asking that I open a vein or kill my cat for them.

So if I can offer forgiveness without the shedding of blood, and so can other people, what is going on with God? Doesn’t He freely forgive (Col 3:13)? Since when are there conditions for unconditional love, grace, mercy, and forgiveness? Is God’s forgiveness of a lesser sort than ours? Or maybe His forgiveness is of a more powerful type of forgiveness that requires blood?

And if God’s forgiveness is greater and so requires blood, then my next question is, “Why blood?” I mean, if God is the one making the rules, and sin is a serious affront to His holiness, then why did He decide that blood would appease Him? Why not require … I don’t know … spit? Or hair? Yes, I like the hair idea.

Why didn’t God simply say “Without the cutting of hair, there can be no forgiveness of sins”? Of course, that might not be fair to bald people, but I digress …

Hebrews 9 22

What’s the deal with blood?

Yes, yes, I know. I’ve been to “the seminary.” They tell us:

It’s because the life is the blood.

That’s from Leviticus 17:11. In the Bible. And since we have a verse, the discussion is over.

But wait! That’s no answer. The question still stands. So okay, God wants blood, and it has something to do with the life of a person being in the blood. But God makes the rules, so why did He decide He wanted blood? Why does God want to kill people (or animals in the place of people) because people sin?

In fact, come to think of it, the issue isn’t with blood any more. The issue now is with God. Why does God want blood?

I could follow this line of reasoning further, but I think you get the point. In fact, some of that conversation might sound very similar to conversations you have had with atheists. At least, much of what I wrote above echoes conversations I have had with atheists. Atheists are atheists for a variety of reasons, but some of them have real issues with a god who demands blood so that He can forgive sins.

And you know what I tell them? I say this:

God Doesn’t Want Blood

God doesn’t want blood. God wants life! It is WE who think that God wants blood (when He doesn’t).

The idea of God demanding blood is borrowed from pagan religions. Jesus went to the cross, not to reinforce and support this idea, but to expose and redeem it. That’s a huge idea which would take us down a whole new rabbit trail.

Hebrews 9:22 shedding of bloodBut if God doesn’t demand blood, then how does God forgive? Doesn’t Hebrews 9:22 teach that God needs blood in order to forgive us? No, it does not. Let us read carefully what Hebrews 9:22 says in context.

1. Hebrews 9:22 contrasts Jesus with Moses

The first thing to notice about the context of Hebrews 9:22 is that the author is clearly contrasting the sacrificial system of the Mosaic Law with what Jesus accomplished in His death on the cross.

One way to note this is by looking back to Hebrews 9:15, which is the opening statement in the larger context of this discussion about sacrifice and blood. In Hebrews 9:15, the author writes about the “redemption of the transgressions.” The word used there is not the normal word for “sin” in the NT, but is parabaino (STR: 3847), and means to overstep or go beyond the boundaries.

The TDNT says that parabaino is closely connected with sin in the New Testament, but primarily in the sense of using human tradition to disobey the law of God while claiming to be the fulfillment of the law.

In other words, parabaino takes place when someone tries to explain and apply the law of God, but actually ends up doing the exact opposite of what the law says.

The author of Hebrews indicates that Jesus came to redeem sin, that is, to redeem the parabaino type of sin. More specifically still, Jesus came to redeem the sin of misusing the law. It is this issue that concerns the author of Hebrews.

2. Hebrews 9:22 says there is purification and forgiveness Without Blood

Second, it is important to note that even in Hebrews 9:22, the author pretty adamantly states that there is purification and forgiveness apart from the shedding of blood. The author says, “almost all things are purified with blood …”

If we went back to read the Levitical law, we would see that purification and forgiveness was extended under a variety of circumstances, including the washing with water (Lev 15:16-17; 17:15), anointing with oil (Lev 14:29), burning flour (Lev 5:11-13), giving money (Exod 30:11-16), or releasing an animal into the wild (Lev 16:10).

And in fact, when it comes to intentional sins, there was no offering of any kind which was prescribed by the law. All the sacrifices and offerings of the law are for unintentional sins only. This means that when an Israelite sinned intentionally (as they most certainly did, just as we do), the only way they could receive forgiveness from God was to look to Him for it in faith (just like us)!

The author of Hebrews knows all this, which is why he says that almost all things are purified by blood.

3. Hebrews 9:22 is not about Sin; but about the Covenant

Of course, even this requires further modification, for it is not true that almost all things required blood for purification. A quick reading of the Law reveals that most things did not require blood.

So what does the author of Hebrews mean?

The context indicates that the author specifically has in mind the tabernacle and the religious items within the tabernacle (Hebrews 9:21). The author is talking about the initial dedication ceremony of the first tabernacle built by Moses. This purification and dedication ceremony initiated the Mosaic Covenant (Hebrews 9:18-19).

So the author of Hebrews is not giving a general principle in Hebrews 9:22 for how we receive forgiveness of sins, but is instead referring to how the covenant of Moses was initiated by blood.

4. Hebrews 9:22 says that Shedding of Blood came from the Law

Fourth, notice that the author of Hebrews specifically states where the instruction about offerings of blood came from. He does not say, “and God commanded that all things be purified with blood, for without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.”

No, Hebrews 9:22 specifically states that this these things are “according to the law.” Of course, those of us who hold to the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture don’t see much difference between something the law stated and something God stated, and yet we must be careful because numerous Old Testament prophets emphatically declared that God is not the one who gave the law or commanded that the people offer sacrifices, and He was not pleased with these sorts of religious rituals, nor did He ever want them (cf. Jer 7:21-23; Amos 5:21-24; Micah 6:6-8).

This is the same point the author of Hebrews makes in 10:5-6.

Reconciling the words of these inspired prophets with the modern understanding of inspiration and inerrancy is a difficult task indeed. I have a way that works for me, but again, to travel down that rabbit trail would take us too far afield.

But however we understand that thorny issue, we can all agree that in Hebrews 9:22, the author is simply contrasting how the law inaugurated the Mosaic Covenant with how Jesus inaugurated the New Covenant.

shedding of blood for forgiveness of sins

5. The Shedding of Blood Never Brought Forgiveness!

In light of this contrast, notice fifthly, that the author of Hebrews deftly shows how the Mosaic covenant, with all its bloody sacrifices, was never able to accomplish what it promised.

The author of Hebrews points out that it is “impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Hebrews 10:4). Though it was the law that promised the forgiveness of sins through blood sacrifices, the simple fact that the law required perpetual sacrifices revealed that the law could not deliver what it promised.

Nobody was ever actually forgiven through the blood of a sacrifice! So according to the author of Hebrews, though the law required blood for forgiveness, blood didn’t provide any forgiveness! The law didn’t work!

6. Hebrews 9:22 is not about Forgiveness OF SINS

This leads to a sixth point about Hebrews 9:22 which should not be missed.

I intentionally misquoted Hebrews 9:22 above. I quoted it as saying that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.”

But Hebrews 9:22 does not include those final two words. Hebrews 9:22 says nothing about sin. Yes, sin is mentioned in Hebrews 9:26-28, but only in reference to the sacrifice of Jesus. The first time the author references sin in connection to the sacrificial blood of the Mosaic covenant is in Hebrews 10:4, where, as we have just seen, the only connection between sin and blood is that sin cannot be taken away by the blood of bulls and goats.

So what is the blood for in Hebrews 9:22? Again, as we saw above, it was for the purification of the tabernacle and its vessels when Moses inaugurated the first covenant. Modern western Christians are so infatuated with sin, that we see sin everywhere and believe that our biggest problem in the world is sin and that God is sitting in heaven trying to figure out how to stop us all from sinning.

I believe that nothing could be further from the truth.

God is not nearly as concerned with sin as we are.

Before the majesty of God’s holiness and love, all the sin of the world is little more than an annoying flea jumping around on the ground by his foot. Sin is not that big of a deal for God. The only reason He is concerned at all about sin is because sin hurts and damages us, and since He loves us beyond all imagination, He wants to do something about that annoying flea, because it has bitten us and injected us with all sorts of harmful toxins.

Also, God must do something about sin because sin is a big deal for Satan, and Satan uses sin to lay claim to our lives, which is something God does not want. But this too is another rabbit trail which we must avoid for now. The bottom line is that sin is not a big deal for God, and sin is not the issue in Hebrews 9:22.

7. Hebrew 9:22 isn’t even about “Forgiveness”

But what about the word “forgiveness” in Hebrews 9:22? Doesn’t that indicate that sin is the issue? No, it does not. This is the seventh point about this important text.

The word which the author uses here is the Greek word aphesis. This word does not mean “forgiveness” in the way that modern, English-speaking people think about forgiveness. Instead, aphesis is something closer to “deliverance” or “release.”

It has in mind the picture of someone who is enslaved and in chains, and someone else come along with the key to unlock them and set them free. I have written previously about aphesis.

In Scripture, we are freely forgiven of all our sins, past, present, and future, completely and only by the grace of God. We are, however, called upon to obey God so that we might enjoy the freedom from sin that He wants for us. Sin injects us with toxins that further enslave us, which God wants to liberate us from.

This sort of release often requires something on the part of the one who is being released, lest they fall right back into slavery after having been released! In this way, aphesis is a symbiotic forgiveness. It not only requires that the liberator unlock the chains; it also requires that the liberated run away from what had chained them.

blood of Jesus shed for us forgiveness of sins

8. The “Release” of Hebrews 9:22 is a Release of the Covenant

In Hebrews 9, it is not people who are being released, but the covenant itself! This eighth point is that the blood of Hebrews 9:22 has absolutely nothing to do with the removal of sin.

Instead, the blood was for the enactment of the Mosaic Covenant. The author of Hebrews could not be more clear. He says that a testament, or will, is not put into effect until the one who wrote it dies (Hebrews 9:16-17). My wife and I have Wills, and as is the case with all Wills, they do not go into effect until we die. A “Last Will and Testament” has no power while we live.

So after Moses wrote the Covenant, or the testament, he enacted a death over it to make it effective and active upon the people (Hebrews 9:19-21).

Whose “Last Will and Testament” was this? It was God’s! It was God’s covenant to the people.

But since God Himself could not come down to die and so enact the covenant, Moses symbolized the death of God with “the blood of calves and goats, with water, scarlet wool, and hyssop” (Hebrews 9:19).

The “release” in Hebrews 9:22 then, is the release of the covenant.

Prior to the shedding of the blood of the bulls and goats, the covenant was not active. It was under lock and key. A death was needed to free it, liberate it, or enact it.

And since God was the “testator” (Hebrews 9:16), but God could not die, Moses killed calves and goats to symbolize the death of God, and in so doing, enacted the covenant of God with His people, Israel.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with sin.

Nor does Hebrews 9:22 have anything with the conditions of forgiveness, for as we have seen above, the covenant offered numerous ways for people to receive purification from sin, and when it came to forgiveness for intentional sins, the Israelites believed on the grace of God for forgiveness just as we do.

9. The People were also Released from Slavery

But the “remission” or “release” of Hebrews 9:22 is not just of the covenant. The implementation of the first covenant with Moses took place after the Israelite people had been delivered and redeemed from captivity in Egypt.

From a purely legal standpoint, they were runaway slaves. And according to the laws of slavery, as long as a slave is still living and has not yet been set free, the slave is still a slave, even if they run away.

So the redemption enacted as part of the Mosaic covenant was the redemption of the slaves from Egypt. The death of the calves and goats symbolized the death of the Israelite people to their former life of slavery in Egypt.

Through the Mosaic covenant, the people of Israel died to their old identification as slaves to the household of Pharaoh (i.e., Egypt), and were raised again to a new identification as members of the household of God. This is why the water and the blood was sprinkled not just on the book of the covenant, but also on all the people (Hebrews 9:19).

They were dying to their past and were being born again into a new family. As members of this new family, they had new household rules to live by, which were enumerated in the Mosaic covenant.

10. Hebrews 9:22 in the context of Hebrews 9-10

All of this together helps us understand the discussion in Hebrews 10 that follows about how the New Covenant, which was enacted through the death of Jesus, is far superior in all ways to the Old Covenant which was enacted through the blood of animals.

This also helps explain why Hebrews 10 talks about sin so much. Though we have seen that Hebrews 9:22 is not talking about the forgiveness of sins, we often get confused about the rest of Hebrews 9 and on into Hebrews 10 because there are many references to the sacrifice or offerings of Jesus Christ for our sins.

blood of Christ Hebrews 9-10

The best way to understand this is to remember what we have learned from Hebrews 9:16-22 about why the blood of the calves and goats was sprinkled over tabernacle and its instruments, along with the book of the covenant and the people, on the day the Mosaic Covenant was instituted among them. The blood was to inaugurate the covenant and indicate to the people that they had been set free from slavery.

All of this is exactly the same with the death of Jesus.

Jesus did not die to rescue us from the wrath of God. Nor did Jesus die to secure for us the forgiveness of sins. God has always freely forgiven people of their sins.

No, the death of Jesus on the cross was to inaugurate the new covenant of God with the entire world, and to indicate to all people that we were no longer slaves to sin.

That second point is critical. Jesus did not die for God because of sin. Jesus died for sin.

God’s holiness did not demand that Jesus be put to death. No, it was the devil that demanded death and blood (cf. Hebrews 2:14-15). Sin was the certificate of ownership which the devil held over the heads of humanity.

By dying, Jesus cancelled this debt of sin so that the devil could no longer have any claim upon us. This happened because just as all sinned in Adam, and so became slaves to death and the devil, so all died and were raised to new life in Jesus, and so were liberated and redeemed from our slavery to death and the devil.

Just as the Israelites in the wilderness died to Pharaoh, and were raised to new life in the family of God, so also, all people in Jesus died to sin, death, and devil, and were raised to new life in the family of God. This is the basic meaning of the discussion in Hebrews 10 about the sacrifice of Jesus for sin.

But the discussion goes beyond this as well. The author of Hebrews intentionally subverts the sacrificial elements of the Mosaic covenant by transitioning away from images of blood and death, and writing instead about offerings and purification.

Let just a few of these be noted.

Following immediately after Hebrews 9:22, we read that Jesus also purified the heavenly sanctuary. And just as the first ceremony indicated the inauguration of the Mosaic covenant and the death of the people to their past enslavement to Egypt, so also, the actions of Jesus indicated the inauguration of the New Covenant and the death of the people to their enslavement to sin.

In Hebrews 10:1-4, the author emphasizes the complete failure of the Mosaic law to do anything about sin. In Hebrews 10:2, we are informed that if the law could have taken away sin, the people would have stopped making sacrifices, for they would have had no more consciousness of sins. Yet the sacrifices themselves are a reminder of sins, even though they do nothing about the sins.

Then in Hebrews 10:5-10, the author indicates his understanding that the sacrificial system was never intended to take away sins, and that God Himself never wanted such sacrifices or took any pleasure in them. Again, God is a God of life; not death. What God did want, however, was a life lived in obedience to the will of God, which is exactly the “offering” which Jesus brought. This understanding of “offering” and “sacrifice” as the life of Jesus rather than His death is critical for the rest of the chapter. While it is true that Jesus died a bloody and gruesome death on the cross, it is critical to recognize that the death of Jesus on the cross was for sin, while the life of Jesus was for God. God did not want nor desire the death of Jesus. God always and only wants life.

Building upon this truth, Hebrews 10:11-18 moves on to compare and contrast the covenant enacted by Moses and the covenant enacted by Jesus Christ. After explaining that the sacrifices and offerings of the priests could never do anything about sins, Hebrews 10:12-13 shows that Jesus not only dealt with sin once and for all through His death, but actually perfected forever those who are in Him. The author then makes the absolutely shocking statement that God (and Moses) knew from the very beginning that the Law of Moses was obsolete and useless for doing anything about sin.

The author of Hebrews points at what the Holy Spirit said through the prophet Jeremiah about the new covenant (Jer 31:33-34), and then ties this together with the word “remission” (aphesis) which was used in Hebrews 9:22. In so doing, the author indicates the truth that Moses knew from the very beginning that his law was temporary, obsolete, and ineffective for doing anything about sin.

In Exodus 20, after God had given the 10 Commandments, God wanted to speak to the people of Israel Himself. But they were too scared of God, and declared that they would rather have Moses to speak to God for them (Exod 20:19). What follows in Exodus 21 through most of the rest of the Pentateuch is called “the Mosaic Law” for good reason.

It was how Moses believed God wanted the people of Israel to live out the 10 commandments. But forty years later, Moses saw that what he had given to the people was a complete failure. He had been with them for forty years (Deut 29:5), and knew that the law would be completely ineffective in helping them follow God and live rightly (cf. Deut 31:16-21).

As a result, Moses knew that what he had given to the people would be replaced by what God had wanted all along. Before Moses died, he prophesied that his law would pass away and would be replaced with the law of God written upon men’s hearts (Deut 30:6-20). Long before Jeremiah ever prophesied that God would do away with the written law and write His law upon our hearts and minds, Moses had said the same thing (cf. Deut 30:6, 14). Paul understood Deuteronomy 30 in this way as well (cf. Rom 10:7-8). In fact, in a recent book on the Pentateuch,

John Sailhamer has argued that one of the central points of the Pentateuch is to show that the law was ineffective, obsolete, and not what God had wanted for His people at all. God wanted faith, humility, mercy, and righteousness, which are the things the law could not provide.

But Jesus provided what the law could not, which brings us back to Hebrews 10. Jesus lived the way God intended, and in so doing, accomplished several things.

First, Jesus crucified the law of sin and death (Hebrews 9:26-28).

Second, Jesus revealed what God had always wanted for His people (Hebrews 10:16-17).

Third, Jesus revealed how God’s people could live for love and life instead of sin and death (Hebrews 10:20-23).

In Jesus, we learn that God no longer wants death, and He never did. God always and only wants life.

Hopefully, all this provides a deeper understanding of what Hebrews 9:22 is actually teaching (and not teaching) about the shedding of blood and the forgiveness of sins.

God always forgives sins freely. He does not need or want blood.

Note: This article by Brad Jersak on Hebrews 9:22 is also helpful.

The cross of Jesus is CENTRAL to everything!

Transform your life and theology by focusing on the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus:

Fill out the form below to receive several emails from me about the death and resurrection of Jesus.

(Note: If you are a member of RedeemingGod.com, login and then revisit this page to update your membership.)

God is Redeeming God, Redeeming Scripture, Redeeming Theology Bible & Theology Topics: atonement, blood, crucifixion, cruciform, crucivision, death of Jesus, Hebrews 9:22, Leviticus 17:11, subst, Theology of God, Theology of Jesus, Theology of Salvation, Theology of Sin

Advertisement

[#20] Genesis 1:26 – The Image of God (Part 2)

By Jeremy Myers
1 Comment

[#20] Genesis 1:26 – The Image of God (Part 2)
https://media.blubrry.com/one_verse/traffic.libsyn.com/redeeminggod/20_Genesis_1_26b.mp3

image of God Genesis 1 26What does it mean to be made in the image of God? We began to see an answer to this in last week’s episode, and will finish answering this question in this study of Genesis 1:26.

In the previous study of Genesis 1:26, we began to look at what it means to be made in the image of God. We saw that it cannot refer to anything related to the Trinity, or to the popular idea that humans have intellect, emotions, and will. We do have these things, but this is not what it means to be made in the image of God.

I stated that there were four contextual keys about what it means to be made in the image of God, and I shared the first one with you. The first contextual key was the text of Genesis 1 itself. There are seven activities of God in Genesis 1, and in various ways, God instructs humans to engage in all seven of these activities. When we do the works of God, we are living as the image of God on earth.

That was the first contextual key. The next three keys all pretty much reveal the exact same thing, but from different perspectives. So the final three contextual keys which what us understand what it means to be made in the image of God help the support the idea that we have already seen, that you and I are the image of God on earth, and that we live as His image when we act the way God acts.

We look at these three contextual keys in today’s episode of the One Verse Podcast.

The Text of Genesis 1:26

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

In This Discussion of Genesis 1:26, we look at:

  • What it means to be made in the image of God.
  • The cultural context of Egyptian and Babylonian religion and royalty.
  • The ritual by which ancient priests made images of their gods.
  • The connection between the image of God and the prohibition in the Mosaic Law against making graven images.
  • How Jesus as the perfect image of God shows us how to live as the image of God.
  • Three suggestions for how you can live as the image of God on earth.

Resources:

  • Become a Patron of the One Verse Podcast
  • Gibson, Genesis – Amazon or CBD
  • Hamilton, Genesis 1–17 – Amazon or CBD
  • Hasel Article on Genesis 1
  • Hess Article on Genesis 1–2
  • Heidel, Babylonian Genesis – Amazon
  • Johnston Article on Genesis 1
  • Miller and Soden, In the Beginning – Amazon or CBD
  • Wenham, Genesis – Amazon or CBD
  • Subscribe and Leave a Review on iTunes

Downloadable Podcast Resources

Those who are part of my online discipleship group may download the MP3 audio file for this podcast and view the podcast transcript below.

You must join a discipleship group or login to download the MP3 and view the transcript.

Membership-become-a-member

Thanks for visiting this page ... but this page is for Discipleship Group members.

If you are already part of a Faith, Hope, or Love Discipleship Group,
Login here.

If you are part of the free "Grace" Discipleship group, you will need to
Upgrade your Membership to one of the paid groups.

If you are not part of any group, you may learn about the various groups and their benefits here:
Join Us Today.

Membership-become-a-member

Do you like learning about the Bible online?

Do you like learning about Scripture and theology through my podcast? If so, then you will also love my online courses. They all have MP3 audio downloads, PDF transcripts, quizzes, and a comment section for questions and interaction with other students.

If you want to deepen your relationship with God and better understand Scripture, take one (or all) of these courses. They are great for personal study or for a small group Bible study.

You can see the list of available courses here, and if you join the Discipleship group, you can take all the courses at no additional cost. Go here to learn more and join now.

God is Redeeming God, Redeeming Scripture Bible & Theology Topics: creation, Genesis, Genesis 1:26, image of God, Theology of Jesus, Theology of Man

Advertisement

Which Joshua do you follow?

By Jeremy Myers
36 Comments

Which Joshua do you follow?

There are two famous men in the Bible named Joshua.

One, of course, is the Joshua with a book named after him. This is Joshua, the son of Nun, the successor to Moses. This is the Joshua who led the people of Israel to embark upon the military campaign of defeating the Canaanites so that Israel might enter into the Promised Land.

The other Joshua is actually more well known, but we call Him something different. We call Him Jesus. The Hebrew pronunciation of His name, however, is Yeshua, which in English, is pronounced “Joshua.”

Yeshua

Nevertheless, despite their name similarities, these two Joshuas could not be more different. Yet far too often, Christians who claim to follow the second Joshua, often end up following the first.

Check out a few of the differences between Joshua of the Canaanite Conquest and Yeshua of the Gospel of Grace:

Joshua and Jericho

Joshua and JerichoIn Joshua 6, Joshua leads the people of Israel in their first campaign against the Canaanites. This is the battle of Jericho. After the walls of Jericho fell down, Joshua instructs the people to go into the city and kill everything, including the women, children, and animals, and then burn everything (Joshua 6:17-24). The only people who were spared were those who accepted and helped the Israelite people, which in this case, consisted of a prostitute named Rahab and her family.

The second Joshua, however, handled the rejection of cities quite differently. In Luke 9:51-56, as Jesus and His disciples headed toward Jerusalem, Jesus sent messengers before Him to invite the people of a Samaritan city to prepare for His coming. This is very similar to Joshua sending the spies into Jericho to prepare that city for his coming. But the people of this Samaritan city did not want to have anything to do with Jesus. So when Jesus arrived at the city, James and John asked if they could call down fire from heaven to burn the city and all its inhabitants.

Clearly, James and John were taking a play out of Joshua’s playbook.

But Jesus is not using the same playbook. Rather than follow in the footsteps of the first Joshua, Jesus rebukes His disciples for wanting to kill, destroy, and burn those cities that reject Him, and tells James and John that they do not know what manner of spirit they are of (Luke 9:55). Apparently, the first Joshua did not know either…

Joshua and Achan

After the battle of Jericho, Joshua leads the people of Israel to attack the city of Ai. But Israel is defeated (Joshua 7:1-10). So Israel looks for a scapegoat to explain why they were defeated. To find this scapegoat, they draw lots, and eventually, a man by the name of Achan is chosen (Joshua 7:14-18).

I would not be at all surprised to learn that there were thousands upon thousands of “guilty” men in Israel that day. Knowing what we know of the rules of war and the behavior of men, does it seem likely that of all Israelite warriors that took part in the destruction of Jericho, only one man took a bit of plunder for himself? I find it beyond belief.

So as the lots are cast to choose the guilty tribe, clan, and family, you can imagine thousands of nervous men breathing a sigh of relief as they get passed over by the casting of the lots. In this case, Achan ends up being the unlucky one. After he confesses his crime, Joshua takes Achan, along with his gold, silver, clothes, sons, daughters, oxen, donkeys, sheep, and tent, and stones everything and then burns everything (Joshua 7:24-25). It is especially touching how the sons and daughters of Achan get mentioned right alongside the clothes and the tent.

Anyway, if anyone who is reading this can ever imagine the second Joshua, Jesus, doing anything like this to “sinners” who are brought before Him for judgment, let me suggest that you know nothing about Jesus.

When the women caught in adultery is brought before Jesus, He forgives her and lets her go her way (John 8:1-11). If Jesus was like the first Joshua, Jesus would have not only agreed to have this woman stoned, but would have rounded up all her possessions, including Fido the dog, Fluffy the cat, and Mr. Ed the horse, along with the woman’s sons and daughters, as well as her little makeshift house, and would have had them all stoned, and then when they were lying there crumpled and broken and bleeding on the ground, would have ordered oil to be poured on them all so they could be set on fire.

No, Jesus doesn’t do anything of the sort, and never would. Jesus, as the Joshua of the Gospels, always forgives. And He not only forgives, but instructs others to do the same. And when asked how often we should forgive, He instructs to forgive without limit (Matthew 18:22).

There is no way Jesus ever would have stoned Achan, his children, or his animals. Furthermore, there is no way Jesus ever would have blamed Achan for the failure of Israel to defeat Ai. Jesus never played the blame game (John 9:2-3). Of course, there is no way Jesus would have gone to war with Ai in the first place…

Joshua and Ai

When it comes to the second battle against Ai, it is easy to see that what caused the people of Israel to win was not God’s blessing now that Achan and his children had been killed, but that the Israelites had better tactics this second time around. The Israelites set up an ambush and the people of Ai fall into it (Joshua 8:12-23). The Israelites split into two forces, and one force went and attacked the city, and then ran away, acting like they were losing. When the people of Ai saw the Israelites running away, they came out of the city into the fields around Ai to pursue the Israelites and kill them. This is when the second Israelite force descended upon the city, entered through the open gates, and killed everybody inside.

After the military men are defeated in the battle, Joshua returns to the city and kills all the women and children who were there (Joshua 8:24-26). This time, Joshua allows his men to take plunder from the city (Joshua 8:27).

Interestingly, Jesus also set numerous traps for people during His ministry, but they were always traps of love. He fed people, healed people, and taught people. And when people flocked out of the cities to come out into the fields to meet Him, He did not tell His disciples to enter the city behind the people and put all those who were left to the sword.

No, Jesus does the exact opposite. He lures people into His presence, and then He loves them, blesses them, and helps them. And when the disciples start to get annoyed at all the people coming to Jesus, and especially the noisy, rowdy children, they try to protect Jesus and limit His accessibility.

Let the children come unto me

But Jesus says, “Let the children come unto me; do not forbid them” (Matthew 19:14; Mark 10:14; Luke 18:16). Jesus did get annoyed, but He was annoyed at His disciples for trying to keep people away from Him (Mark 10:14).

Jesus never set a trap for people, unless it was a trap of love.

And the only time Jesus gets annoyed is when people restrict others from accessing His love.

Joshua and the Gibeonites

There was one time that Joshua showed a little … restraint. I will not call it love.

As the Israelites started slaughtering Canaanites, one group of people, the Gibeonites, got a little nervous, and so they sent an envoy to Joshua to make a peace treaty. Yet they tricked Joshua into thinking that they were from a far away land. Joshua made a treaty with them because Joshua only wanted to kill and annihilate the people who were nearby (Joshua 9:1-15).

Later, when Joshua finds out that he has been tricked, he decides to remain true to his part of the peace treaty, but determines that the Gibeonites will become eternal slaves to the Israelites. Joshua curses the Gibeonites, and says that they and all their descendants forever will be slaves to the people of Israel (Joshua 9:21-27).

Does the second Joshua, Jesus, ever do such a thing? No.

Jesus did not come to enslave anyone or put any person in chains. Quite to the contrary, when Jesus embarked on His public ministry, He stated that His purpose and mission was to give liberty to the captives and set free those who were oppressed (Luke 4:18-19). As Paul writes later, there is freedom in Christ; not slavery and bondage (Galatians 5:1).

When people try to trick Jesus, as they often do, He does not consign them to everlasting slavery, but instead tries to liberate and free them from the fear, the shame, the guilt, and the thinking which causes them to behave this way (cf. Matthew 22:23-46).

Jesus does not enslave. He liberates. He frees. He breaks all chains and bonds.

Joshua Slaughters; Jesus Saves

The contrasts between Joshua and Jesus are best seen by comparing Joshua 10 with John 10.

Joshua conquestIn Joshua 10, we have a long listing of all the groups of people that Joshua slaughtered. This list is so long, it carries over into Joshua 11.

In John 10, the contrast could not be more clear. Whereas Joshua killed people so that he could supposedly create a “safe place” for the Israelites to live (How’d that work out for you, Joshua?), Jesus, as the Good Shepherd, did not put anyone or anything to death, but instead laid down His life for the sheep (John 10:11).

Whereas only a thief comes to steal, kill, and destroy (like Joshua?), Jesus came that people might have life, and might have it to the full (John 10:10).

Then in John 11, Jesus shows that He is completely opposed to death by raising Lazarus from death. Through this, Jesus shows that Jesus did not come to bring death, but came to reverse death. Death is the true enemy of God.

Tragically, the only people in John 10-11 who want to kill are the religious people who feel threatened by what Jesus is teaching about God: that God is not a God of death and war, but is a God of life and peace. By this, they showed that in rejecting Yeshua into life and love, they were following Joshua into death and hate.

Which Joshua do you follow?

The First and Second Joshua

Like the religious people in Jesus’ day, many in Christianity seem to prefer to follow the first Joshua, though the differences between him and the second Joshua, whose name we bear, could not be more stark.

Jesus on the cross - YeshuaThe first Joshua sought to kill others in the name of God, while the second Joshua allowed Himself to be killed so that He might reveal God.

The first Joshua called for genocide and fratricide; the second Joshua called for grace and forgiveness.

The first Joshua was threatened by those who were different and killed them where they ate and drank; the second Joshua welcomed those who were different and ate and drank with them.

The first Joshua killed men, women, and children because he saw them as a threat to moral purity; the second Joshua welcomed all men, women, and children, no matter how “impure,” because He knew that any “impurity” in others could only be overcome by the ocean of God’s love, grace, and forgiveness.

Which Joshua do you follow?

When you call yourself a Christian, are you following the deliverer of Israel who provided the Promised Land through the slaughter of others, or are you following the deliverer of the world who provided eternal life through the sacrifice of Himself?

God is Redeeming Scripture Bible & Theology Topics: grace, Jesus, Joshua, Theology of Jesus, violence of God

Advertisement

The Murder of Abel and the Murder of All

By Jeremy Myers
15 Comments

The Murder of Abel and the Murder of All

I have a new eBook coming out soon. The following post hits on one of the themes I write about in this book. To get this new book when it comes out, make sure you have subscribed to receive my blog posts and eBooks by email.

the murder of abel

There is a reason why the very first murder in the Bible is a fratricide – a murder between brothers. What is that reason?

Because every murder is a murder between brothers. When Cain murdered his brother, Abel, it represented every murder in history.

When one person murders another person, they are murdering their brother or sister. Every homicide is fratricide.

But the significance and symbolism goes deeper still, especially for those of us who have never murdered anybody.

The Cycle of Murderous Revenge

The blood of Abel cries out from the ground for justice, for revenge. This is the cycle of murder which is behind every murder as well. Most murderers do not think of themselves as murderers, but simply as vigilantes of justice. Their murder of another person was justified. They were righting a wrong, killing a criminal, or invoking vengeance upon some injustice. Every murderer is able to justify his own murder.

This we also see in Genesis. After Cain kills his brother, Lamech get injured by a boy, and retaliates with murder. But he feels his murder was justified, and says that if anyone tries to re-retaliate against him by killing him, vengeance will come upon them seventy times over (Gen 4:24). The cycle of vengeance and retaliation goes from hurt to murder to mass-murder, and eventually, to the place where “the entire earth was filled with violence” (Gen 6:5, 11).

But the cycle of violence did not stop with violence covering the earth. Whereas a rivalry between brothers led to the murder of one (Genesis 4), and the rivalry between all people led to murderous violence among all (Genesis 6-9), humanity eventually turned their rivalry upon God Himself and sought to place themselves upon His throne (Genesis 11:1-9). But the only thing that ever resulted from all this murderous rivalry and violence was death (Genesis 5), death (Genesis 10), and death (Genesis 11:10-32).

This is why the only proper response to murder is forgiveness. Without forgiveness, murder leads to a cycle of violence that ends only in annihilation.

But who can have the courage (and wisdom) to respond to murder with forgiveness? Nobody! At least, I do not think I have the courage to forgive those who murdered one of my loved ones, or to forgive those who attempt to murder me. In this world, the only way, it seems, to keep from being murdered is to be stronger than the one who wants to murder you, and to murder him before he murders you.

And yet, we do have Jesus as our perfect example of how to treat those who murder us. As Jesus was being murdered on the cross by His brethren, He asked God to forgive them.

This is why the author of Hebrews says that Jesus “spoke a better word than the blood of Abel” (Heb 12:24). And what word did Jesus speak as His own blood was being spilled by His brethren? Though the blood of Abel cried out for vengeance from the ground, as the blood of Jesus poured from His veins on the cross, He cried out, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do!” (Luke 23:34).

Can we do this? I am not so sure.

Cain_and_Abel

A Second Look at the First Murder

Maybe it begins by going back to look once again at the first murder, the founding fratricide. If we look at what happened when Cain murdered his brother, we may be able to get a glimpse of our own hearts also when we have murderous hate for others.

If we go back and look at why Cain murdered his brother, we discover that it was because Cain was trying to please and appease God. His parents had “stolen” God’s fruit, and Cain, as the “promised seed,” was the one who would get his family back into God’s good graces. So He became a farmer and when he received his harvest, he tried to give God back His fruit.

And God’s answer to Cain was, “Sin is crouching at your door, and it will destroy you.” What sin was that? The sin of trying to make amends with God!

In essence, God looked at Cain’s offering of fruit and said, “I don’t want the fruit. You do not understand. I am not angry at you. I do not want sacrifices and offerings. I just want you. I want to live life with you. Go ahead, keep the fruit for yourself. Eat it. Enjoy it. It’s yours.”

But Cain believed that God’s justice had been violated, that His honor had been destroyed, and Cain believed that something must be done to restore God’s honor, and make the world “right” once again. Cain believed that justice must be served, that order must be re-introduced, and that satisfaction must be made.

Most importantly, Cain believed it was his responsibility to make things right, to restore order, and to serve justice. This feeling is the foundational emotion for murder.

For when Cain saw that God had a good relationship with Abel, Cain believed that Abel would become the one who would rescue his family from exile. He didn’t like to have a rival, and so he murdered his brother.

In this way, God’s promise that eating the forbidden fruit would lead to death was fulfilled in the first generation of humans after Adam and Eve were exiled from the Garden of Eden. And it was a murder of brother against brother. This murder of brothers began a cycle of contagious violence, murder, and death that spun out of control and enveloped the whole earth.

As such, it is not an exaggeration to say that violence is the most prominent theme in the Old Testament text. No human activity is mentioned as frequently in the Old Testament as the activity of violence. Raymund Schwager states that the Old Testament books “contain over six hundred passages that explicitly talk about nations, kings, or individuals attacking, destroying, and killing others. … No other human activity or experience is mentioned as often” (Must There be Scapegoats? p. 47).

Yet there is something more troubling than this.

Does God retaliate against violence with more violence?

murder of brother against brotherFor all the mentions of human violence, references to divine violence appear almost twice as often.

Again, Schwager provides the statistics: “The theme of God’s bloody vengeance occurs in the Old Testament even more frequently than the problem of human violence. Approximately one thousand passages speak of Yahweh’s blazing anger. … No other topic is as often mentioned as God’s bloody works. A theology of the Old Testament revelation that does not specifically deal with this grave and somber fact misses from the very start one of the most central questions …” (Must There be Scapegoats? p. 55).

What are we to make of this?

How can Jesus call us to bless and forgive our enemies when it appears from Scripture that God does the exact opposite? Furthermore, how can Jesus be the exact representation of God, when everything Jesus taught about God seems to contradict what we see about God in the Old Testament?

A straightforward reading of the Old Testament text seems to indicate that as violent as humanity can be, God outdoes us all; God is more bloody and violent than all humanity combined.

And if this is the case, is it any wonder that humans are murderously violent — just like their God in whose image and likeness they are made?

Between the violence of humanity and violence of God, it is obvious that “violence is the most central theme in the Old Testament” (Must There be Scapegoats? 66).

But maybe, just maybe, despite all our scholarship, studies, and sermons, we have missed the main revelation of the Bible. Maybe, just maybe, the Bible we want is not the Bible God gave us. Maybe, just maybe, the Bible is not a book of spiritual devotion or “a morally reassuring manual of religious piety” (Bailie, Violence Unveiled, 135).

Maybe, just maybe, we have completely ignored the main truth of Scripture.

The Most Ignored Truth in Scripture

And what truth is that?

That we are the violent ones, and there is no violence in God at all.

That God appears violent because we have made Him to be the scapegoat for our own violence.

That God appears violent to us only because we do not want to admit our own violence and so blame Him for it. In our scapegoating violence, we have made God the universal scapegoat for all violence.

We have, each one of us, killed our brothers. And the blood of every victim in Scripture and in history cries out from the ground. And when God appears and says, “What have you done?” we reply, along with Cain, that we are the victims, that we are the ones God has wronged, that if He would treat us more fairly, life would turn out better.

In our hearts, we secretly desire to become God. We secretly know in our hearts that if we were running the world, we could do a better job than God. In our hearts, we secretly believe that God has wronged us, not treated us fairly, and shows favoritism to others. And so we grow in our resentment towards God. We secretly wish that we could replace God.

With this secret desire in our hearts, we set out to “be God” to the world by doing the things He doesn’t seem to be doing. We try to make things right. We try to enact justice. We try to retaliate against wrongdoers.

And when God whispers into our hearts, “Be careful! Sin is crouching at your door!” we try to protect ourselves from this sin by “righteously” killing “God’s rivals,” who are really only our rivals.

When we place ourselves up as the bringers of peace, as God’s spokesman in the world, as the ones who will restore humanity to the garden, and then God seems to favor someone else who is “doing it all wrong,” we get jealous and envious, and we set out to kill and destroy them so that we ourselves do not lose our privileged position.

This desire to be God leads to a rivalry against others, which leads to murdering our rivals, as we think God should do.

And thus goes Scripture and history. We behave violently toward others. God says, “What have you done?” and we say, “Don’t punish me. It was you. You drove me away. If you would only treat me fairly, I would not have had to do what I did. I got a bad hand in life. I was not treated rightly. If I had not done what was necessary, I would not have received what was rightfully mine.

So we have always blamed God. We blame Him for not running the world correctly. We blame Him for not killing our rivals, and we blame Him for not setting things straight in the world.

And if God were a human, taking all this blame, He would set out to prove His innocence. He would set out to kill us in retaliation for trying to take His place, for trying to be a rival to God, for questioning how He runs the world, and for killing others in His name when He had nothing to do with such murder.

But this is not what God did when faced with all the blame for our sin and shame. God did not behave like a human would, but He showed us how a human could behave.

And He did this in Jesus. In Jesus, God bore the blame. God took the shame.

murder of JesusThough innocent of any wrongdoing, God, in Jesus, let us blame Him for every wrongdoing.

And then He let us kill Him in God’s name.

Why did we kill Jesus? To set things right. To restore order. To defend God’s righteousness. To bring justice.

We were the ones who had the plan to set things right and bring humanity back into Paradise, but the teachings and example of Jesus messed everything up, and when it appeared that God favored Jesus more than all our religious rules, regulations, and restrictions, we knew that He had to be stopped.

We brought our unwanted and unneeded and unasked-for offerings of fruit in order please and appease a God who was not angry at us in the first place, and when we saw that our brother, Jesus, was accepted by God, we became jealous, and so we killed him.

And yet though the blood of Abel cried out from the ground for vengeance, the blood of Jesus cries out from the cross for forgiveness.

In this way, while the sin of the first man, Adam, brought about the murder of brother against brother and a never-ending cycle of retaliatory vengeance, the offering of the second Man, Jesus, also brought about the murder of brother against brother (and of man against God), but in so doing, Jesus offered a word of forgiveness, which put an end to the need for retaliatory vengeance. Of all the murders in the world, God alone could have righteously retaliated for the unjust murder of His innocent Son, but instead, He forgave, showing that the only way to peace, love, and unity is through forgiveness.

So have you been wronged? Follow the example of Jesus. Stop the cycle of retaliation by offering forgiveness instead of vengeance.

Only in this way can both Cain and Abel come together and bring their human family back to the garden.

God is Redeeming Books, Redeeming Theology Bible & Theology Topics: Cain and Abel, cruciform, crucivision, Genesis 4, mimetic rivalry, murder, scapegoat, Theology of Jesus, Theology of Man, Theology of Salvation, Theology of Sin

Advertisement

Dear World, I am sorry. Will you forgive me?

By Jeremy Myers
15 Comments

Dear World, I am sorry. Will you forgive me?

i am sorryWe Christians owe the world an apology.

I, at least, owe the world an apology. So here it is:

Dear World, I am sorry.

About what?

About so many things …

… But the one thing I am sorry about the most is presenting to you a picture of God which you found repulsive and repugnant and worthy only of your rejection.

If I had done a better job of presenting God as He really is, as the God revealed to us in Jesus Christ, you might have loved Him instead of hated Him. You might have seen how much He loves you. How much He likes you.

Instead, I told you that if you do not do certain things that he wants, he will torment you forever in hell.

You could not love or worship a god like that. (Who truly can?) And so you rejected this god.

You figured that if this god really existed, and if he was going to send you to hell anyway, you might as well “live it up.”

I told you that God loves you, but his love has strings attached. His grace has limits. His mercy eventually fails. But you knew better. You knew that this was not true love, not free grace, not real mercy. And so you rejected this god.

You figured that if this god really existed, and since you could never really be sure of his love for you, you might as well live any way you wanted.

I told you that God would forgive you of all sin, but I added conditions to this forgiveness. God would forgive you “if” you did this and this, “and” as long as you kept yourself from that, “but” only when you felt this or that.

You figured that if this god really existed, it did not appear that you could ever know real forgiveness, so you decided to stop trying and go sin all you want.

I told you that the kind of people god wanted in heaven were the types of people who sat in pews on Sunday morning, who dressed in “proper” clothes and spoke “proper” language. Everybody else was headed for hell.

You figured that if god only wanted certain types of people in his presence, and you could never be one of those types of people, you might as well follow all your friends to hell.

I am sorry for all those things I told you.

Not a single one of them was true.

Not one.

I lied.

Jesus reveals god to us

The truth, as I see it now, is the truth you have always known to be true.

The truth is what you always tried to tell me was true, but I never listened. Because I was the Bible expert.

The truth is that you were right all along, and I was wrong. You hated the god I was proclaiming because that god was a god of my own making. I invented that god. And you knew it. Thanks for being patient with me while I came to the same realization you knew all along.

You see, I have recently come to understand that everything you hated about the god I proclaimed, you hated because you were listening to the voice of God better than I was. The true God hates that false god also. The true God hates the god I was proclaiming.

So in rejecting the god I was proclaiming, you were more godly than I.

And I am sorry for condemning you for it.

I have come to see the truth of your position because I have come to see the truth of Jesus.

You have always liked Jesus, because you knew that if God existed, He would look like Jesus. You always knew that if God was like Jesus (as I claimed), He would be loving and compassionate. Full of justice and mercy. He would be kind and generous. He would laugh a lot. He would tell good stories. He would go to parties. He would hang out with people that religious folk labeled as “sinners.”

But the god I was proclaiming looked nothing like Jesus, and so you rejected him.

And as a result of rejecting the god I proclaimed, I condemned you.

So I am sorry.

I never accepted the Jesus you knew to be true, because your Jesus didn’t fit with my conception of god. But now that I see that Jesus truly reveals God to us, and now that I see that the god I was proclaiming was a god of my own making, I have come to see that the Jesus you knew is the Jesus who really exists, and therefore, is what God is really like as well.

So I now see the truth you have seen all along.

What truth is that?

The truth that God loves us. Period.

The truth that God forgives us. No ifs, ands, or buts.

The truth that God likes us so much He wants to hang out with us and our friends. Just as we are.

The truth that God doesn’t care so much if we sit in those pews on Sunday morning. In fact, He may prefer that we don’t.

The truth that God isn’t concerned about our sin. He only cares about sin because it hurts us. And since He loves us, He doesn’t want to see us hurt.

And regarding all those silly rules about what to wear (and not wear), what to say (and not say), and where to go (and not go) … the truth that God doesn’t give a rat’s ass about those things. Those aren’t His “rules.” He never made those. We made those. Yes, we religious people. We invented those rules to make ourselves feel better. To make ourselves think we were better than you. When we’re not.

So we’re sorry.

No, I’m sorry.

And if you ever want to tell me more about Jesus, I would love to learn.

God is Redeeming Church Bible & Theology Topics: crucifixion, cruciform, crucivision, evangelism, looks like Jesus, Theology of God, Theology of Jesus, Theology of Sin

Advertisement

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 24
  • Next Page »
Join the discipleship group
Learn about the gospel and how to share it

Take my new course:

The Gospel According to Scripture
Best Books Every Christian Should Read
Study Scripture with me
Subscribe to my Podcast on iTunes
Subscribe to my Podcast on Amazon

Do you like my blog?
Try one of my books:

Click the image below to see what books are available.

Books by Jeremy Myers

Take Online Courses
with N. T. Wright

Choose from Six Courses:
*N. T. Wright on Jesus
*N. T. Wright on Romans
*N. T. Wright on Galatians
*N. T. Wright on Philippians
*N. T. Wright on the Gospel
*N. T. Wright on Worldviews

Theological Study Archives

  • Theology – General
  • Theology Introduction
  • Theology of the Bible
  • Theology of God
  • Theology of Man
  • Theology of Sin
  • Theology of Jesus
  • Theology of Salvation
  • Theology of the Holy Spirit
  • Theology of the Church
  • Theology of Angels
  • Theology of the End Times
  • Theology Q&A

Bible Study Archives

  • Bible Studies on Genesis
  • Bible Studies on Esther
  • Bible Studies on Psalms
  • Bible Studies on Jonah
  • Bible Studies on Matthew
  • Bible Studies on Luke
  • Bible Studies on Romans
  • Bible Studies on Ephesians
  • Miscellaneous Bible Studies

Advertise or Donate

  • Advertise on RedeemingGod.com
  • Donate to Jeremy Myers

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!

© 2023 Redeeming God · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Knownhost and the Genesis Framework