Expert: Dean Gade - 9/12/2007

Question
QUESTION: My question is on etymology of the Greek word for "blood" in the New Testament. Sound change is not obvious at first sight, for instance, "set" is related to "sit", the former is originally a causative formation of the latter. Even less so we see "bless" is related to "blood", the former was originally a derivative with the meaning "to mark with blood", or the like.

Is there some confusion like this about the Greek word "aima", as there was with "nephesh" of the Hebrew language and "blood" of English?



ANSWER: The Greek haima has the same meaning as the Hebrew dam as is seen in their uses of the same phrase in the OT and the NT:

Zech 9:11
11 As for you, because of the blood of my covenant with you,
I will free your prisoners from the waterless pit.
(from New International Version)


Matt 26:28-29
28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
(from New International Version)  

They both have to do with the blood of man or animals as pertaining to their "life".

To bless comes from eulogia(good words) and could include an annointing but not with blood except in the case of the altar being sprinkled with blood which could be seen as a "blessing" of the altar.

No, I do not see any confusion in the use of the word blood.  It is used rather consistantly to mean the same thing.





---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Then is Matt. 25:28-29 which you've quoted mean that literal blood forgives sin, or God forgives sin. Jesus consistently went around forgiving people of sin. Did He forgive sin with literal blood?

In "church speak" one will hear said, "washed in the blood" and yet the first church council states that believers of Christ are to have nothing to do with blood.

I believe Jesus brought the blessing of life to humanity. Yet so many Christians believe that literal blood (of Jesus) forgives their sins.

While I understand the ontological implications of Jesus. Where have the churches gone wrong with this theology of "blood". As from my previous question I first thought it may  have been with the etymology of English and the word "blood".
All this relating to blood seems to be causing psychological problems for Christians.

ANSWER: The answer is in the "usus loquendi" of the word, blood.  Throughout the Bible, blood was seen as "life" and it was to be looked upon as special to God...... even the blood of birds and animals.

As you read the following Scripture, note especialy the very last line of the last passage: that there is "NO FORGIVENESS WITHOUT BLOOD".

This has ALWAYS been the teaching among God's people whether Jew or Gentile. It is nothing new or changed from what was always taught by those who honored God's Word.

The promises of God are always in effect even before we see the fact,  before the promise is fulfilled.   Thus, the promise of the Messiah as an atonement for sin was in effect for Adam and Eve as well as all the saints under the old or new covenants.

When forgiveness was announced by the priests and prophets, the blood of Jesus was the propitiation for their sins centuries before He came into the world.  And so Jesus forgave sins by His blood even though He had not shed that blood in man's time when He forgave.

Gen 4:10-11

10 The LORD said, "What have you done? Listen! Your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground. 11 Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand.
(from New International Version)


Gen 9:6

6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made man.
(from New International Version)


Ex 12:12-13
13 The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt.
(from New International Version)


Lev 4:34-35
34 Then the priest shall take some of the blood of the sin offering with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar of burnt offering and pour out the rest of the blood at the base of the altar.
(from New International Version)


Lev 7:25-27
26 And wherever you live, you must not eat the blood of any bird or animal. 27 If anyone eats blood, that person must be cut off from his people.'"
(from New International Version)


Heb 9:6-8
7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance.
(from New International Version)


Heb 9:18-22
18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep."   21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
(from New International Version)

There is NO psychological problem with the cross of Jesus and His shedding of His blood to redeem us. The use of the word is consistent from first to last in the Bible.  That consistency is that we were PURCHASED from the slavery of sin and the devil by that which is most precious to the Father, namely; the holy blood of His Son.

This tells us how horrible is our sin/disobedience to God....and how great is His grace that He would pay such a price as the innocent blood of the Christ.

Acts 20:28-29
28 Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.
(from New International Version)


Rom 5:9

9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him!
(from New International Version)


Eph 1:6-7
7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins,
(from New International Version)


Heb 9:11-12
12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption.
(from New International Version)


1 Peter 1:17-19
18 For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.
(from New International Version)


Rev 1:5-6

To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6 and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father-to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.
(from New International Version)


Rev 5:9

"You are worthy to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
because you were slain,
and with your blood you purchased men for God
(from New International Version)







---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Now it seems with your bringing out your understanding more, that you've attached 'guilt' to 'blood'(blood guilt). Doesn't that attach salvation to works and even cast it in the light of not being free by grace?

I've seen the verse of Israel leaving Egypt used for 'blood'. Are you saying that blood was for forgiveness of sin? I've always understood that to relate to the operation of faith, how it works. The act of faith, the truth believed. Likened to the NT on faith and works. The act of faith is nothing without the truth believed.

The only way I see 'purchase' in a thought connected with freedom, is in that we are all dependent on God. As in a vicarious ( experienced or realized through imaginative or sympathetic participation in the experience of another) manner, to our benefit. Humanity benefited from God made flesh, as He partook of our human condition or nature. ie. the uncreated (God) joined with the created (humanity).

Many western churches refer to the OT sacrifices when relating Jesus Christ. But upon study of those scriptures, one finds that Jesus did not even meet one requirement of those laws for a sacrifice. Which is not surprising because He is not of that priesthood. He does meet all the requirements for priesthood, but He is not of the Levitical priesthood. And He did pray the Father to forgive them (us), with a sacrifice of prayer.

Anyway, thank you for your answers. Eastern Christians don't hold such views of blood as western Christians do.  

Answer
There is a "work" necessary to propitiate sin and reconcile us with God.  However, the work was completed by Jesus, the Christ on the cross.  

Col 1:18-20
19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
(from New International Version)

He died for the sins of the whole world.

1 John 2:1-2
2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
(from New International Version)

Our faith is that which apprehends what God has done to purchase/redeem us from the effect of original sin as well as actual sins of omission and commission.

This all God's plan.  Why and how He redeemed us to Himself may not understandable to us,  but this is what He has said.   What others may teach does not change His covenant of blood atonement for sin.