Evolution of the Atonement Doctrine 

When primitive man felt that his friendly relations with the spirit world had been interrupted, he resorted to sacrifice of some kind in an effort to make atonement and to regain his footing with these unknown, but feared, forces.

Early man feared many things in the natural world: thunder, lightning, rain, snow, hail, and ice. But hunger was the dominant need of these people and they largely subsisted on the flesh of animals. As a result, large animals became objects of veneration and these peoples carved images of animals on cave walls and engraved their likenesses on ornaments of many kinds. Eventually, they decided to refrain from eating the flesh of their chosen tribal animal and developed reverential rituals over them when they died. Over time, these rituals evolved into sacrificial rituals involving the deliberate spilling of the animal’s blood. This is the origin of the idea of sacrifice that can appease the spirit world.

Out of necessity, our primitive ancestors did eventually have to resort to eating the meat of their sacrificed offerings, and this custom evolved into the idea of a “sacred meal,” which today is still in evidence as our communion services, where we share the bread and wine in communion with God. Some even refer to the ceremonial bread and wine as the body and blood of Jesus. This development provides echoes of the deep past, when our primitive ancestors first conceived of the need to appease the gods.

Later, when the concept of “original sin” became widespread, the idea of sacrifice as atonement for the supposed inherent sinfulness of mankind came into favor. It was a blanket “insurance policy” against the wrath of God. But this idea, and many other religious ideas that evolved over time, were the result of the primitive man’s fear of ghosts and the unknown.

The great covenant between man and God that was presented to Abraham by Melchizedek was a step forward, as it stated that there was no need for sacrifice; that God agrees to do everything for mankind and mankind agrees only to believe in God and his promises and to follow his instructions. But this covenant, while a positive development, was too advanced for the tribesmen of Abraham’s day. They eventually regressed to their rituals of blood sacrifice.

Paul was a devotee of the Greek philosopher Philo who was a great teacher in the first century after Christ. Although Paul was able to sift some of Philo’s inconsistent philosophies out of his subsequent teachings, Philo’s teachings about atonement – forgiveness through the shedding of blood – remained a mainstay of Paul’s theology. However, some of Paul’s beliefs about original sin and atonement were original with himself.

Paul’s numerous letters were unwittingly set forth in subsequent years as part of Christian dogma. He had no idea that his well-intended letters to his followers would one day be considered as the "word of God." And some of those teachings included the doctrine of the atonement – that Jesus was sacrificed in order to satisfy the supposed divine wrath of God. Paul made an effort to connect these teachings to Jewish theology. That effort was a failure, but this doctrine of atonement continued to confuse and alienate many honest, truth seeking souls, then and now.

God is not a dual personality – one of love and one of anger. The atonement doctrine confuses believers as to the true nature of God.

Jesus eliminated all ceremonial practices involving sacrifice and atonement. He dismantled the foundation of imagined guilt and the feeling of cosmic isolation by proclaiming that humanity is the offspring of God and not inherently sinful. This redefined the relationship between the created and the Creator as one akin to a parent and child. In this paradigm, God assumes the role of a compassionate Father to his human children. Rituals that do not align with this deeply personal familial connection are a vestige of earlier times and based on a misunderstanding of God..

Once you embrace the concept of God as a genuine and affectionate Father – the only idea about God that Jesus ever conveyed – you must immediately and logically discard all those primitive beliefs that portrays God as a displeased monarch, a strict and all-mighty ruler – a capricious deity who takes pleasure in uncovering his subjects' misdeeds and ensuring they receive fitting punishment, unless a being nearly equal to himself willingly steps forward to endure suffering on their behalf and to die as a substitute in their place. The entire notion of ransom and atonement clashes with the perception of God as taught and exemplified by Jesus. The boundless love of God comes first in the divine nature, surpassing all else.

Jesus' death was not a sacrifice to absolve sins, nor did it serve as an atonement for the inherent moral guilt of humanity. There is no collective guilt that humanity carries before God as a race. Guilt only arises from individual transgressions, stemming from conscious and purposeful defiance against the will of God.

The entire notion of atonement and sacrifice is rooted in self-centeredness. Jesus emphasized that the highest expression of the spiritual brotherhood lies in serving one's fellow beings. Those who believe in the divine parentage of God should naturally assume salvation. The primary concern of believers shouldn't revolve around self-serving aspirations for personal deliverance, but rather the selfless inclination to love and serve others, mirroring the way Jesus cared for and served mortal humanity.

Genuine believers do not overly fixate on the future repercussions of sin. Certainly, loving and wise fathers might discipline their children, but they do so out of love and for the purpose of correction, not out of anger or retribution. If it was true that God is a stern and legalistic ruler in a universe dominated by justice, he would not find satisfaction in the childish concept of substituting an innocent individual for a guilty wrongdoer.

Even if Jesus had died of old age, rather than on the cross of Golgotha, he would have eventually died, because the life of all humans ultimately ends in death. And God would have loved his son just as much. Jesus was a man among men, experiencing both life and death as all people do. The horrible circumstances of his death were the result of the decision of wicked men, not the demand of God for a bloody sacrifice.

The significance of Jesus' death, concerning its contribution to human growth and the broadening of the path to salvation, lies not solely in the event of his passing but in the exceptional manner and unparalleled spirit in which he faced death. Even until the last moment, Jesus was devoted to his mission and faithful in his desire to complete it.