by A.S.K. Joommal

            Christians say that the Lord Almighty has a Son – His “only begotten Son.” This Son was conceived by Mary through the “Holy Ghost”, and was born in the form of a human child. The Son, i.e. Jesus Christ, was reared as other human children, and when he grew older, he preached the Word of God and performed miracles. His activities met with great opposition from the Jews who persecuted him and finally succeeded in getting him crucified. The Son of God thus died and descended into Hell, remaining there for three days. At the end of these three days he rose from the dead, ascended into Heaven, and is now sitting at the right hand of God. Jesus was innocent, but he sacrificed his life for the sake of mankind in order to atone for their sins. No man will now be punished for his sins if he faithfully believes that Jesus shed his blood for him. 

This, in brief, is the definition of the doctrine of atonement. 

            Christians believe that every human child is born with the taint of the Original Sin. The Original Sin, of course, was committed by Adam and Eve when, in disobedience to the Lord, they ate the fruit of the Tree of knowledge. In punishment for this sin they were expelled from paradise and God, in His Justice, ordained that every single child born from the time of Adam until the end of the world, will inherit this Sin of Adam and Eve. It was for this reason that the Son of God was not conceived by Mary through the seed of man, but through the agency of the Holy Ghost so that he may not inherit the sin of Adam like the rest of Adam’s progeny. 

            Since man is born sinful and the consequence of sin is punishment in hell, it is necessary that a Christian should sincerely believe in Atonement. God, in His infinite mercy, wants to see that man is saved from being punished for his sins. But God is also Just and His Justice demands that man must be punished. How could these two attributes of God – Justice and Mercy – be reconciled? This problem was solved by the Son of God who willingly offered himself for punishment on behalf of the entire humanity. This offer was accepted by God. The punishment for the sins of the whole of mankind was a heavy one, but the person who bore this punishment was no less than the Son of God himself! A little  chastisement on the Son of God, therefore, was taken as remission for the sins of all men together. 

            The doctrine of Atonement is the most important pillar in the whole superstructure of Christianity. Knock down this pillar, and the edifice is razed to the ground. In the course of this dissertation it will be shown how untenable and tenuous this doctrine is. This massive pillar can be knocked down with a feather! 

            An examination of this doctrinal belief in the light of reason and sound common sense will expose its absurdity and hollowness. One can be sure that even after reading and understanding the logic of the reasons given here and not being able to refute them, “believing” Christians will continue to believe as before without the slightest  ripple of thought in their minds. But those Christians whose conscience and soul are not totally shackled by dogmatism and the fear of being called heretics or being excommunicated, would certainly exercise the God-given freedom of reasoning, logical analysis, examination, scrutiny, THINKING. If they exercise the slightest THINKING, their conscience will revolt against the senseless doctrines to which they have been saying Yes and Amen ever since they have been taught to believe in these pillars of faith blindly. 

(1)        An analogy would best illustrate the ridiculous nature of the Doctrine of Atonement. An earthly landowner, having sustained wrongs committed by his tenants, offers to forgo his right to recovery for the damage with full forgiveness and remission of all penalties if his son, his only son and heir, would give his life and die the  death  of a felon in satisfaction of his claim. Or: a number of people arrested for serious crimes against the State are arraigned before the King who, in his great justice and mercy, tells them that he  would grant them an absolute pardon if his only heir to the throne – the Crown Prince – would take the burden and responsibility of their crimes and submit himself to an ignominious   death. 

            Is it possible to imagine a more illogical, cruel and pernicious arrangement in settlement of justice? 

(2)        This doctrine gives mankind licence for the free and unbridled commission of sins. All one has to do is to have implicit faith in Jesus having given his blood with which the past and future sins of mankind have been washed clean. This is a most comfortable, convenient and easy doctrine to follow. It does not require any hard, rigorous or practical form of worship from the believer. He must merely believe and have faith, and his salvation is assured. 

            Martin Luther, the founder of Protestantism, said that a believer in atonement might sin to his fill, for he was sure to be saved. It is this doctrine of Atonement that is chiefly responsible for the gross immorality and moral degradation in which the Christian continents of Europe and America are wallowing. 

(3)             Christians contend that they have no more need to follow the Law because Jesus  fulfilled it by subjecting himself to the yoke of law, and thus relieving them from its “curse” For example, Jesus had himself circumcised, therefore there is no necessity for them to follow this ordinance. If such is the case then we may well ask why do Christians suffer death since Jesus bore death? Why do they perform the ritual of baptism since Jesus had himself baptized? Jesus also prayed: why do Christians then pray? But all these things are thought necessary by them and they perform them, and they find themselves as subject to death as any other mortal. This shows Atonement to be a false belief! 

(4)        It is the order of the world that lesser things are sacrificed for the higher – never the higher for the lower. On the battlefield are to be found soldiers who fight in the first ranks. Behind them stand the officers, and behind  the officers is the general who takes a secure place, while the members  of the Government are safe in their  homes. The soldier gives his life for the sergeant, the sergeant for the officer, the officer for the captain, the captain for the colonel, the colonel for the general, and the general for the commander-in-chief. The Commanding Officer, or the members of the Government, is/are never sacrificed to save the life of a private. Similarly, the green, waving corns of the field are sacrificed so that the cattle may live; the cattle are sacrificed that men may live. Quantities of phenol are poured down sewerage drains in order to destroy noxious germs so that the health of human  beings  may not be affected. But we have never seen human beings sacrificed for the sake of worms and cattle. 

            If such is the order of earthly things, how can we believe that the Heavenly God sacrificed Himself for the sake of insignificant, sinning, puny men who are of no importance whatsoever compared to Him? Such an idea is totally opposed to common sense, and is against the laws of nature. 

(5)             Christians assert on the authority of the Bible that “death is the wages of sin.” The inference from this is that people, the wages of whose sins have been paid for by another person, should not die. Jesus has atoned for the sins of his followers by his death and therefore none of them should be subject to death. But the Christians are just as much subject to death as other mortals are. This shows that the so-called Atonement has done the Christians no good, and it is an empty claim. 

(6)        It is contended that the justice of God cannot be fulfilled except through the atonement of Jesus. But the doctrine itself is such that it infringes the very concept of justice. Jesus was innocent. Is it justice to burden him with the sins of mankind? It may be argued that Jesus was the master of his own life and that he gave it willingly. That he gave his life willingly is simply not true, for we read about him in Matthew 26:39 that “he fell on his face and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me.”  There is also that heart-rending cry which he uttered loudly on the cross:  “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” Do these utterances sound as if they came from a man who gave his life willingly? 

            The doctrine of Atonement presents God in a bad light: as a cruel, merciless God who could not forgive the sins of men without exacting his “pound of flesh.” This Shylockian image of the Almighty is the natural corollary of this doctrine. 

            Reason revolts at the very idea that a Merciful God can punish the innocent Jesus for the sins of others. Such action is TOTALLY incompatible with His Love and Justice. 

(7)        The doctrine of Atonement presents Christ also as unjust. Man commits two kinds of sins: against God and against man. If man sins against God, then (according to Christians) belief in the atonement of Jesus will save him from damnation. Man sinned against God, God’s Son bore the punishment, and man got away scot-free. But what about the man who sins against his fellow human beings? A steals something from B. This sin of theft is already upon the shoulders of Christ since A is a believer in Atonement and hence in the happy position of having all his sins dumped on the head of Christ. But then look at the injustice perpetrated on B who can neither receive his stolen item back nor can he seek redress against A. Has Jesus then not acted unjustly towards B by taking A’s sin on himself? 

            Thus this doctrine presents both God AND Jesus as unjust! 

(8)             Christians maintain that sin was brought into this world by Adam and Eve and that this taint cannot be removed from our soul unless we make ourselves deserving of salvation by faith in the Atonement of Jesus. According to the Bible, then, the punishment meted out to Adam for his sin was: “In the sweat of the face shalt thou eat bread.” (Gen. 3:19) while to women the Lord said:  “In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children.”  (Gen. 3:16) 

            The natural question is: Is there a faithful Christian man, or has there ever been one, who can claim exemption from this punishment and who can positively assert that through faith in the Atonement of Jesus, he no longer has to work in order to earn his living? Likewise is there a single Christian woman who can say that faith in the blood of Christ has relieved her form the pains of childbirth? Is there a single, living Christian, man or woman, living in any part of the globe, who can answer these questions in the affirmative? Our experiences in life clearly falsify this doctrine. Every man has to work for a living; every woman suffers travail at childbirth. Belief in Atonement has in no way exempted or relieved them from the punishment which God had stipulated for them. Atonement, then, is a valueless, imaginary thing. It is merely a theological hocus-pocus and has no bearing at all on the hard realities of daily life. 

(9)        When a man first believes in the Atonement of Christ, he has certain sins which he committed in the past and some which he may commit in the future. If by believing in Atonement his past sins are washed away, then it follows that he should be exempted from the punishment of his future sins as well. But such is not the case. Take the case of the convert to Christianity who committed fornication and thus had the seed of punishment (in the form of syphilis) planted in his frame. 

            Being a believer in Atonement, he should not have been infected with any venereal disease, and the punishment should immediately be transferred to Jesus who undertook to bear and pay for the sins of his followers. But what do we see in life? We all know for a fact that if anyone who breaks God’s commandments and ventures into forbidden territory, always hurts his own self, his own being and soul. There are special hospitals for the treatment of venereal disease patients. All these patients who believe in Atonement should not be in the hospital in the first place because their sin and its consequence should have been taken on by Christ!

              It is thus clear that Atonement cannot save a believer in it from past or future sins. 

(10) A non-Christian steals a sum of money. Having heard that if he places his faith in Jesus who took upon himself the burden of mankind’s sins, he will be saved, he becomes a convert to Christianity. Will his conversion and belief in the Atonement of Christ  save him form being punished by the court for the crime of theft? Most certainly not – and it may be added here that there would not be a more disillusioned person than he! 

(11)      Further proof that belief in Atonement has not made better human beings out of Christians lies in the fact that since the birth of Christ until the present day, crimes of all sorts are prevalent in the Christian countries – more so, perhaps than in any non-Christian country in the world. If belief in Atonement removes from one’s heart the power of doing evil, then the evidence of this is sadly lacking in the Christian world. Not taking the general public into account – who may not understand the meaning of Atonement any better (and who can blame them?) – let us turn our attention to the priests and preachers for a while.

              These reverend gentlemen have been properly trained in theological matters. They know and understand fully the significance of their doctrines. They are the people who ought to be shining examples to their flocks. But what do we find? We find that some of the grosser crimes have been committed by these holy men. A book published in New York called “The Crimes of Preachers”, gives a list of the crimes committed during the last twenty years by the clergy of two Christian countries – the United States of America and Canada. The writer of the book says that about nine hundred Christian priests from these two countries have been convicted by their respective courts for horrible crimes. 

            In view of such revelations, how can one ever have faith in the spiritual efficacy of Atonement? 

            Startling facts have been divulged both about the Roman Catholic and the Protestant clergy which bring the moral condition of the Christian countries under the uncomfortable glare of world spotlight. In order to enable the readers to form an idea of the shocking immorality of the Christian clergymen, they are asked to peruse the following factual works: 

1.         THE CRIMES OF CHRISTIANITY, by J.M. Wheeler and G.W. Foote. (Published in London in 1887) 

2.          LIFE BY THE NUN OF KENMARE. INSIDE THE CHURCH OF ROME. 

3.         LIFE INSIDE THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 

            These books may be difficult to obtain as they are probably banned. Bitter, naked truth always hurts badly. Efforts are therefore made to suppress it. But truth has a marvelous capacity for not remaining hidden for long! 

            It is now being honestly admitted by all THINKING Christians that Christianity is a failure. We do not have to dwell much on this subject as the evidence is there for all intelligent men to see.

              Immorality is the hallmark of Western Christian civilization. Western civilisation is based on Christianity. One can expect the moral turpitude and the general immorality that is to be found in the West today, because the very roots of this civilization are to be found in a faith, one of whose doctrines is Atonement which violates and defies common sense and reason. 

            For further cogent reasons as to why Christianity did not and cannot succeed, readers are recommended to read “WHY IS CHRISTIANTY A FAILURE”, written by a Churchman. It is published by the Ideal Publishing Union, Ltd., London. 

(12)      The doctrine of Atonement is founded on an ignorance of the philosophy of punishment. 

            The aim and motive for punishing a wrongdoer or sinner is his correction and reform. How can this purpose be served if a judge, say, punishes his own son for the crimes committed by the accused before him? Would such a procedure make a better and reformed person out of the accused, or would it encourage him to further commission of crimes knowing full well that the judge’s son is waiting to take the blame and punishment on his own shoulders? 

            If an innocent person is chastised for wrongs perpetrated by another, this would constitute a patent violation of the very concept of justice and make a mockery of the idea of and reason for punishment. 

            This doctrine is therefore palpably false and totally inconsistent with Divine attributes. 

(13)      Justice and mercy are two attributes of God that Christians cannot reconcile. According to their understanding, justice and mercy are two opposing – and not complementary – forces. The demands of God’s  justice were satisfied when He had His  “only begotten Son” crucified for the sins of mankind. (what sort of “justice” this is, may, if at all, be best understood by Christians alone. No sane person can ever comprehend such a concept of Heavenly “justice”!) If that was God’s justice, then where was His mercy? If the doctrine of Atonement is to be believed, then the Deity is represented as being totally devoid of any mercy whatsoever. It would have been bad enough had God proclaimed that Jesus had taken the burden of sins on his own shoulders thus exculpating all mankind; but the act of God in subjecting His “only begotten Son” to a humiliating and ignominious death can hardly be called mercy! 

            Atonement, therefore, stultifies God’s two most powerful traits of Justice and Mercy and renders one incompatible with the other. 

(14)             Clergymen shout from pulpits that there is no remission of sins except through the blood of Jesus. If this were so, then God would not have provided examples from nature itself: When we consume unwholesome or disagreeable matter, we are immediately punished for this sin by pains that arise in the stomach. But as soon as corrective treatment is taken, the pain eases and finally disappears. In the light of this example, what would you think of the doctor who, when you go to him for treatment for a pain in your stomach, drinks the medicine and swallows the tablets himself, or, (following the Crucifixion theory to its logical conclusion), takes a knife and plunges it in his own stomach, telling you that in so doing, YOUR stomach-ache shall disappear? 

            It is obvious, then, that no sane doctor would rip open his own belly or knock his own brains out as a form of treatment for his patient with a stomach pain or a headache. 

            Yet the doctrine of Atonement would have us believe that because mankind suffered from the disease of sins, Jesus Christ’s prescription for its treatment was to give his own life for men’s misdeeds. A more fatuous doctrine is hardly imaginable!

 THE ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT 

            The Doctrine of Atonement is so absurd and preposterous and offends human reason so profoundly, that one begins to ask as to how this doctrine came into existence? Who was the first person who invented this doctrine? 

            The doctrine is certainly not of divine origin, nor has it been taught by Jesus, as we fail to see it anywhere in the four gospels. 

            The answer is that it was Paul whose ingenuity gave birth to this idea of Atonement. Paul was a Jew who was a bitter enemy of Jesus throughout his (Jesus’s) ministry. Paul met Christ’s disciples occasionally and had not had the good fortune of living in their company. He told them one day that Jesus appeared to him in a dream and that since then he became a believer in Christ. 

            Paul, however, wrote his own views about the mission of Christ, and these writings gained a certain amount of currency amongst the Christians of his time.

              Although Jesus was not really dead on the cross but only appeared to be so, he was taken as dead and placed in a sepulchre. Having recovered from his wounds after they were dressed and taken care of, he left the sepulchre and met his disciples secretly. It would have been highly dangerous to reveal that he was still alive, since he was formally tried and sentenced to death by the Roman government. If his identity had been discovered, he would have been re-arrested and sentenced to death for the second time. How could his disciples even expose the fact that Christ was not dead but very much alive? 

            The Jews, on the other hand, exultantly declared that Jesus died because he was an accursed man and an impostor. “For he that is hanged is accursed of God”, says Deuteronomy (21:23). The aim of the Jews in having Jesus crucified was to show that he was an impostor and thus prove the truth of the Word of God. 

            The disciples of Jesus did not know what to do or say. They were in a dilemma. An admission of his death on the cross involved a belief in his having become “accursed of God”, but a declaration that he was alive was most hazardous, for Jesus might be re-arrested and hanged again. It was at this juncture that Paul’s ingenuity came into operation and he devised a clever plan to which the disciples did not object, because it seemed the only way out of the predicament under the circumstances. Paul advanced the theory that Jesus had undoubtedly been subjected to an accursed death, but since he himself was completely innocent having taken on his own shoulders the burden of the curse for the sins of men, this did not constitute infamy, but was, on the contrary, a very meritorious act. Thus the Christians now at least had something to say in reply to the Jews. This  theory, however, which was originally formulated as an answer to the Jews, gradually developed into the Doctrine of Atonement as now preached by the Christian missionaries.

            Present-day Christianity is based mainly on the teachings of Paul. Christians have often asked the question whether Christianity is the religion of Jesus or of Paul. Only recently this question had been answered and thoroughly dealt with in a book by Dr. Arnold Meyer, Professor of Theology at the University of Zurich. This book has been translated into English and is called “Jesus or Paul?” In this book the Professor proves conclusively that the divinity (Godhood) of Jesus and the Atonement are dogmas which owe their origin to Paul. Jesus and his apostles, the Professor says, knew nothing whatsoever about these doctrines! 

            Meander says in his “History of the Christian Religion and the Church” that the doctrine of Atonement as is now believed by the Christian Church was not definitely and distinctly formulated until the 12^th Century, and that “the twelfth century constitutes an epoch in the history of this doctrine.” (“History of the Christian Religion and the Church”, Vol. 1 B, p. 497) 

            We also do not find any mention of Atonement being made in either the Talmud or the Torah. The learned authors of the Jewish Encyclopaedia – a work comprising 12 big volumes and compiled by more than 400 Jewish scholars – say under the word “Atonement” that according to the Jewish Law, the elements of Atonement are divine mercy, repentance, reparation of wrong, prayer, fasting and charity. The custom of oblation, that is, offering sacrifices, was also very prevalent so that   it became a saying  among them: “And without shedding of blood is no remission.” (Hebrews, 9:22). Paul, who was learned in Jewish religious literature, set this saying before him (see Hebrews 9:22), and after perverting, distorting and twisting certain sentences of the Jewish scriptures, created Pauline Christianity (Paulianity) on the supposed atonement through the blood of Jesus! 

 

THE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT REFUTED BY THE BIBLE ITSELF 

            Logical arguments, no matter how powerful or irrefutable, analogical examples cited to prove the absurdity of any particular doctrine, may be extremely convincing, but a believing Christian will always say that these are all man-made arguments and do not hold water with him. But what will he say if it is proved from the Bible itself that the Atonement doctrine is a mere human fabrication without any scriptural basis whatever? He will maintain that we are enemies of Christianity and are only twisting, distorting and misinterpreting verses from the Bible in order to prove our point. The true Christian, they will say, will remain steadfast in his faith and in his belief, and shall not be moved one inch form his path of faith nor be convinced by them, because all those who quote from the Bible in order to disprove Christian dogmas, are instigated by the Devil. 

            This is the hermetically sealed mind that does not admit any fresh air of reason. Even an angel would not be able to convince them that what they believe about God is wrong! 

            Nevertheless, let us present the scriptural refutations as lucidly as possible. Whether you accept or reject them, will depend entirely on what kind of mettle you are made of and whether your mental make-up is such as would acknowledge error or doggedly perpetuate an erroneous and absurd belief, maintaining and insisting that it is divinely-inspired. It depends on YOU! 

(1)         In 2 Chronicles (7:14) we read as follows:

“……….. if my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin ………..” 

In the above quotation, God lays down four conditions for the forgiveness of sins, viz.: 

i.     The people must humble themselves before God. 

ii.    They must pray. 

iii.   They must seek God’s face. 

iv.   They must turn away from their wicked ways.    

Nowhere in the above verse do we find the injunction that in order to seek His forgiveness, sinners must believe that Jesus gave his blood, and that if one does not do so, one is damned to eternal perdition. The doctrine of Atonement is thus clearly falsified by the verses quoted above. 

(2)         The doctrine of Atonement was never preached by Christ at any time. That it is an ecclesiastical invention, will become clear from the following: 

            A rich young ruler approached Jesus and asked him what he must do in order to gain eternal life. Jesus told him to keep the commandments. The young man then informed Jesus that he had kept all the commandments “from my youth up: what lack I yet?” Whereupon Christ suggested to him that “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.”  (Matthew, 19:21) 

            From this we infer that belief in Atonement was never a pre-requisite for salvation or eternal life. If this were so, Jesus would not have hesitated in telling any inquirer that: “Believe thou with all thy heart that I have come to cleanse the multitude of their sins with my blood. He that believeth in my Atonement shall have eternal life; and he who doth not, shall be damned to eternal damnation.”  

            Surely Jesus could have easily uttered the above words and could have made Atonement the most important condition for salvation! Why did he not? Why, instead, did he order his followers to observe the commandments as a means to salvation? He also said: “Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” (Matthew, 7: 13-14) 

            The narrow and the straight path, then, is the road to salvation. In other words, leading a righteous life would grant us the passport to the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus says further: “For I say unto you, That except your RIGHTEOUSNESS shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.”  (Matt. 5:20) 

            The words of Jesus, then, clearly prove that a virtuous, sound, moral, righteous life is a condition for salvation, and NOT belief in Atonement. In fact Atonement falsifies Jesus’s teachings. Atonement is thus contrary to Biblical injunctions, and as such is false, man-made and unworthy of belief and credence.

 (3)        From Matthew (12:31-32) we learn that there are two kinds of sins: those that will be forgiven and those that shall not be forgiven. “Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Gost shall not be forgiven unto men ….. neither in this world, neither in the world to come.” 

            If the doctrine of Atonement had been a true doctrine, then Christ would not have uttered the above words, because belief in Atonement is said to bring about the pardon of ALL sins alike. 

(4)        A prophet of God is recorded to have said: 

“….. let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon.”  (Isaiah, 55:7) 

In these lines the prophet Isaiah clearly says that the manner in which man can attain salvation is to relinquish his evil ways, to forsake wickedness and to return to God. If one does this then the mercy and pardon of the Lord is sure to follow. NO mention, however, is made that one must believe in Atonement in order to enjoy the mercy and forgiveness of God. This shows that the doctrine of Atonement is false. 

(5)             Christians say that the Gospels contain the actual words of Jesus. If such be the case, then it must carry greater weight with them than the words of any other prophet of the Old Testament. Let us now see what are Christ’s words on the subject of forgiveness of sins. In the sixth chapter of Matthew, Jesus teaches his disciples a prayer in which, among other things, the following is mentioned: “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” 

            Jesus taught in this prayer that we should pardon those that sin against us, as a result of which God will forgive our sins. He did not teach that for the forgiveness of sins it was necessary that one should believe in his Atonement, but enunciated clearly that a particular deed of virtue would lead to the forgiveness of sins by the Almighty. What follows, clearly falsifies the Doctrine of Atonement, for Jesus says: “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly father will also forgive you: but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” (Matthew, 6:14-15). In these words he most clearly stated that the way to have our sins forgiven is to forgive the sins of those who trespass against us so that our mercy might draw the mercy of God. 

            Where does Atonement, then, feature in all this? 

(6)         When Solomon built a house in the name of the Lord God of Israel, he stood before the altar of the Lord, spread forth his hands towards heaven in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and in the course of a lengthy prayer which he offered, he said: “Lord God of Israel …. hearken Thou to the supplication of Thy servant, and of Thy people Israel, when they shall pray toward this place and hear Thou in heaven, Thy dwelling place; and when Thou hearest, forgive; …. When Thy people Israel …. Shall turn again to Thee, and confess Thy  name and pray, and make supplication unto thee in this house; then hear Thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of Thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which Thou gavest unto their fathers. When heaven is shut up, and there is no rain, because they have sinned against Thee; if they pray toward this place, and turn from their sin, and confess Thy name, then hear Thou in heaven and forgive the sin of Thy servants …. What prayer and supplication soever be made by any man or by all Thy people Israel … then  hear Thou in heaven Thy dwelling place, and forgive.”  (1 Kings, 8:30-39) 

            Let us now see what the Lord God says in answer to Solomon’s prayer: 

            “And the Lord said unto him, I have heard thy prayer and thy supplication, that thou hast made before me: I have hallowed this house, which thou hast built, to put my name there for ever; and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually. And if thou wilt walk before me, as David thy father walked, in integrity of heart, and in uprightness, …. Then I will establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever.” (1 Kings, 9:3-5) 

            These verses clearly show that God hears and accepts the prayers of His servants. In order, therefore, to be the recipient of His favours, it is necessary, NOT that one should believe in Atonement, but that one should walk before God in INTEGRITY and UPRIGHTNESS. If the doctrine of Atonement was valid, then God would certainly have informed Solomon who repeatedly prayed for forgiveness, that He had made other arrangements for forgiveness by having His own “begotten” son crucified! His son will bear upon himself the sins of all mankind and would be their saviour. 

            It is obvious that God never informed us of this fact through any prophet of the Bible, but on the contrary He showed us what we must do in order to secure His forgiveness and actually forgave sins independently of the Christian doctrine of Atonement! 

(7)         When Abimelech, King of Gerar, took Abraham’s wife (Sarah), God appeared to him in a dream and said: “Restore the man his wife, for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live.” (Genesis, 20:7). God plainly says in this verse that the prayer of a prophet intercedes for us and brings us life. No Atonement of the type taught by Christians is at all necessary. 

(8)         In the book of Exodus, we find further Scriptural evidence against the Christian doctrine of Atonement. The Beni-Israel, seeing that Moses delayed in coming down from the mount, made themselves a golden calf and worshipped it thus provoking the wrath of the Almighty. God said to Moses: “Let me alone that I may consume them.” In order to save his people from the anger of God which threatened them, Moses did two things: 

(i)          he asked his people to kill with their own hands the perpetrators of the mischief; 

(ii)         he went to the Lord and said: “Oh, this people have sinned a great sin and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of Thy book which thou hast written.” 

            Please note that Moses makes two proposals to God for the forgiveness of the sins of his people: one is that the sins be pardoned, the other that he himself would atone for their sins – “peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.” (Exodus, 32:30) 

            The second proposal is of particular significance to us here because of the all-important doctrine of the Atonement of Christ under discussion. 

            What reply did God give to Moses’s entreaty? The Almighty answered his second request first when He said: “Whosoever hath sinned against Me, him will I blot out of my book.”  (Exodus, 32:33) 

            What can be clearer than this? Do we need further arguments to refute Atonement? In the very pages of the Bible, in the very words of the Lord Almighty Himself, we read a clear-cut refutation and rejection of the Atonement doctrine. The very idea of punishing innocent Moses for the guilt of his people is REPUGNANT to God and revolts against His sense of Justice! Although Moses was willing (more willing than Christ!) and offered himself for atonement for the sins of his followers, God rejected his request and clarified to him that each man must pay the penalty of his sin himself. God, however, accepted Moses’s intercession and did not wreak vengeance on his people as He had originally intended. 

            If the people of the world were to be salvaged from the shipwreck of sins, then God should have told Moses in no uncertain terms that his offer of atonement was unworthy and unacceptable because His own “begotten” son had taken upon himself this gargantuan task of atoning for the sins of all generations, past, present and future, and that if his people desired a remission of their sins, they should believe in His son! But God Almighty, neither through Moses nor through any other prophet, informed the world that His own son would suffer punishment on behalf of all people, and that they should believe in him so that they might be saved. 

            The Doctrine of Atonement thus stands exposed in all its naked falsehood! 

(9)         We read in Deuteronomy (9:18-19) what Moses, addressing Israel, says: “And I fell down before the Lord as at the first, forty days and forty nights: I did neither eat bread, nor drink water, because of all your sins which ye have sinned, in doing wickedly in the sight of the Lord, to provoke Him to anger. For I was afraid of the anger and hot displeasure, wherewith the Lord was wroth against you to destroy you. But the Lord hearkened unto me at that time also.” 

            Here too the people were saved from being punished for their wrongdoings by the intercession of a great prophet and NOT through atonement of the kind preached by Christians. 

(10)      Further quotations from the Bible are given hereunder to substantiate the fact that every man and woman is responsible for his or her own actions and no person will bear the burden of another. 

(i)          “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”   (Ezekiel, 18:20) 

(ii)         “But everyone shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.”  (Jeremiah, 31:30) 

(iii)        “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”  (Deuteronomy, 24:16) 

“The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.” (2 Chronicles, 25:4) 

(v)         “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers: but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”  (2 Kings, 14:6)

TEN QUESTIONS ON ATONEMENT

            Atonement is said to be the most important teaching of Christianity. It is the cornerstone of the Christian faith. If this dogma is the foundation on which the edifice of the Christian Church is constructed, then those who call themselves the followers of Christ should be absolutely clear in their minds as to what this doctrine connotes. They should be able to give perfectly sensible and logical answers to any question on this all- important dogma of the Church. They should be able to convince any doubting Thomas that this dogma is not a human fabrication but a divinely formulated doctrine that admits of no faults or loopholes that may be exploited by unbelievers in Christianity. 

            A minimum of TEN questions, therefore, are posed here to the reverend gentlemen and elders of all the Christian Churches of the world. The answers must be lucid, sensible, logical, believable, convincing, and must not be enveloped in any sort of “divine mystery.” A further point is that the author of this book expects the answers from the myriad Christian denominations to be uniform and in total agreement with one another. If there is the slightest difference in form, matter, theological significance or content of belief, this will be construed as total failure on the part of the Churches concerned to give a convincing answer and the doctrine would once again stand exposed – as it always has been to THINKING people – as utterly ridiculous and a pious fraud. Questions will also be posed at the end of the chapter on TRINITY and “SONSHIP” OF CHRIST. 

Will the Christians be punished in the Hereafter for their sins or not?

If they will be punished – even after believing in Atonement – then was Christ’s sacrifice in vain or not? 

(3)         If Christ’s sacrifice was not in vain, then has it given the Christians licence to commit sins freely? 

(4)         What exactly has Jesus’s sacrifice done for Christians? 

(5)         Has the sacrifice created a loathing for sin, or killed the tendency to commit evil, in those who believe in Christ and partake of his flesh and blood? 

(6)         If the answer to the above question is “yes”, then how does one account for the gross immorality and moral depravity prevalent in western countries professing the Christian faith? 

(7)         Jesus paid the full penalty for the original sin, the penalty for which was death to mankind (Romans, 5:12, 6:23). This being the case, why does God still continue to inflict the punishment of death on men in spite of the fact that He has taken away their guilt through Atonement? 

(8)             According to the Bible, blood is a pollution (Lamentations, 4:14), and a defilement (Numbers, 35:33). How could the blood of Christ, then, being an unclean thing, cleanse us of our sins? 

(9)         The Bible says: “The wicked shall be a ransom for the righteous, and the transgressor for the upright.” (Proverbs, 21:18). If this is so, then why did the reverse happen in the case of Christ – the innocent, righteous and upright Jesus being made a ransom for wicked, transgressing mankind? 

(10)      Jesus died that he may save ALL. Why did he not save the women as well, for it is written by Paul: “She shall be saved in CHILDBEARING, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”  (1 Timothy, 2:15)