I AM HERE. Luke, writer of the Third Gospel that was.
I come tonight to tell you of a Truth that is of very great
importance to you and to mankind, and I desire that you shall be
very careful in receiving what I may say. I am in a condition of
love that enables me to know whereof I write and to cause what I may
say to be accepted by you as true.
I want to tell you that the Love of which we have been writing is
the only Love that can make a spirit or man at-one with the Father.
And this is my theme: “The Atonement.”
This word, as used in the Bible and interpreted by the churches and
the commentators on the Bible, carries with it a meaning of some
price being paid by Jesus for the redemption of mankind from their
sins, and from the punishment that they would otherwise have to
undergo because of having committed sin; also, the idea that God, as
an “angry” and “insatiable” God, was waiting for the price to be
paid in order for His “wrath” to become “satisfied,” and so that man
could stand before Him acquitted of sin and the consequences of
This price, according to the teachings of the churches and the
persons named, had to be paid by one who, in his goodness and
purity, was capable of paying this price—that is, one who had in him
such inherent qualities, and, by his sacrifice, was of such inherent
worth as to satisfy the requirements of the “demands” of this
“angry” God Whose Laws had been disobeyed. And they also teach that
the only way such price could have been paid was by the death on the
cross of Jesus, who was the only person in all creation that
possessed these qualities sufficiently to meet these requirements.
And, further, that by his death and the shedding of his blood, the
sins were atoned for and God was “satisfied.” This is the orthodox
belief of the “atonement” and the “plan” of salvation.
In short, a perfect human being free from all sin, a death on the
cross and a shedding of blood, and both necessary in order that the
sins of mortals might be washed away, and their souls made clean and
fitted to become a part of the great family of God.
But this conception of the atonement is all wrong, and it is not
justified by any teaching of the Master or by any of the true
teachings of the disciples to whom he had explained the Plan of
salvation and what the True Atonement means.
In various parts of the New Testament, I know it is said that the
blood of Jesus washes away all sin, and that his death on the cross
“satisfies” the Father's “demand” for justice; and, therein, there
are many similar expressions conveying the same idea.
But these sayings of the Bible were never written by the persons to
whom they are ascribed, but rather by writers who, in their various
translations and alleged reproductions of these writings, added to,
and eliminated from, the writings of the original writers until the
Bible became filled with these false doctrines and teachings.
The writers of the Bible, as it now stands, were persons who
belonged to the church which was nationalized about the time of
Constantine.* They had imposed upon them the duty of writing such
ideas as the rulers or governors of this church conceived should be
incorporated in the Bible for the purpose of carrying out their
ideas in order to subserve the true interests of the church, and to
give it such temporal power as it never could have had under the
teachings and guidance of the pure doctrines of the Master.
This false doctrine of the atonement has been believed in for nearly
two thousand years, and has been accepted by the so-called Christian
churches and promulgated by these churches as the true doctrine of
Jesus and the one upon which the salvation of man depends. And the
consequences have been that men have believed that the only things
necessary to their salvation and reconciliation to God were the
death of Jesus and the washing away of their sins by the blood shed
If men only knew how futile his death was, and how inefficacious his
blood is to wash away sin and pay the “debt” to the Father, they
would not rest in the assurance that all they have to do is to
believe in this sacrifice and this blood. Instead, they would learn
the true Plan of salvation and make every effort in their power to
follow that Plan. And, as a consequence, they would have their souls
developed so that they would come into harmony with the Father's
Love and Laws.
ATONEMENT, IN ITS TRUE MEANING, NEVER MEANT THE PAYMENT OF A DEBT OR
THE APPEASING OF THE “WRATH” OF GOD. IT MEANT SIMPLY THE BECOMING
AT-ONE WITH HIM IN THOSE QUALITIES THAT WILL INSURE TO MEN THE
POSSESSION OF HIS LOVE AND THE IMMORTALITY THAT JESUS BROUGHT TO
LIGHT. THE SACRIFICE OF JESUS COULD HAVE NO POSSIBLE EFFECT UPON THE
CONDITION OF MAN'S SOUL QUALITIES, AND NEITHER COULD THE
BLOOD-SHEDDING MAKE A VILE AND SINFUL SOUL PURE AND FREE FROM SIN.
God's Universe is governed by laws as immutable as they are perfect
in their workings. And the great thing to be accomplished by the
Plan which He provided for the redemption of men is to have every
man come into harmony with these laws. As soon as that harmony
exists, there will be no more discord and sin will not be known to
humanity. And, so, only that which will bring man into this harmony
can possibly save him from his sins and bring about the At-onement
that Jesus and his disciples taught.
Man, when created, was endowed with what may be called a natural
love and, that love, to the extent of the quality that it possessed,
was in perfect harmony with God's Universe. And so long as it was
permitted to exist in its pure state, it was a part of the harmony
of the universe. But when it became defiled or impregnated with sin,
or anything not in accord with God's Laws, it became inharmonious
and not at-one with God. The only redemption required thereafter was
the removing of those things that caused the inharmony.
Now, the only way in which this inharmony could be removed was by
the natural love becoming again pure and free from that which
defiled it. The sacrifice on the cross could not furnish this
remedy, and neither could the blood atonement accomplish it, because
the sacrifice and the blood had no relation to the evil to be
remedied. So, I assert, if these things paid the “penalty” and
“satisfied” God, and thereby He had no further claim upon man for
any debt supposed to be due to Him from man, it necessarily implies
that He kept the souls of men in this condition of inharmony and
would not permit the same to be removed until His “demands” for
“satisfaction” and “blood” had been met. Then, when He became
“appeased,” He would presumably permit men by His mere arbitrary
declaration to again come in harmony with His Laws and the workings
of His Universe. In other words, He would be willing to let men
remain out of harmony with His Universe and the workings of His Laws
until He had His “demands” for “sacrifice” and “blood” satisfied.
This, as is apparent to any reasonable person, would be a thing so
foolish that, in matters pertaining to his earthly affairs, even a
mere man would not adopt such a plan for the redemption of those
sons of his who had been disobedient.
(I see you have a caller, and will