Jesus Died on Passover, Not Yom Kippur

I have long believed that many Christians are woefully deficient in their knowledge of both the Hebrew Scriptures and Judaism in general. This creates problems for our interactions with Jews, often contributing to anti-Semitism, but it also hinders our own faith journeys. For example, many Christians have little knowledge about the Hebrew concepts of Sabbath, Jubilee, and shalom, to name just a few!

One aspect of Judaism that Christians are especially ignorant of are ancient Jewish festivals and holy days. There are many insights that these holidays can give us into God’s character. In 2011, I studied in East Jerusalem for five months, becoming friends with many practicing Jews. I celebrated Sabbath, Purim, and Passover, and grew so much in my own faith as I gained insights into the spiritual significance of these holidays. As I learned more, it led me to this question:

Yom Kippur is the most important Jewish holiday of the year, centered on the atonement of sins. If Jesus’ death was mainly for the forgiveness of sins, as many Christians seem to believe, then why did he die at Passover, and not Yom Kippur?

This is something I’ve thought a lot about over the past few years, and have talked through with a number of people. I believe I have a conclusion, with some big implications for Christians. Below is the argument, with four main points.

  1. God chose the time and place where Jesus would be killed
  2. Other holidays could have made sense too, but Jesus’ death is connected to Passover
  3. Passover’s significance is not about forgiveness of sins, it is about liberation from oppression and death
  4. This connection with Passover should give us a grander picture of what Jesus’ death on the cross accomplished

Thus, while Jesus’ death on the cross certainly brings forgiveness of sins, the deeper implication is that his death and resurrection brings us victory over death and the devil, and liberation from the kingdom of darkness.

Let’s run through the parts of my argument.

1. God Chose the Time and Place Where Jesus Would Be Killed

In the Gospels, Jesus faces death on numerous occasions, but miraculously dodges it each time (Matthew 2:13, Luke 4:29-30, Luke 13:31-33, John 7:1, John 7:30, John 8:59, John 10:22-39). Yet when Passover of his final year of ministry approaches, each of the Gospels make clear that he deliberately heads towards Jerusalem, the center of opposition to his ministry. Once in Jerusalem for the Passover festival, Jesus had many ways he could have once again escaped death—fleeing the city, scaring Judas away before he kisses him, gathering a mob to defend himself, arguing his innocence to Pilate, calling down a legion of angels, etc.—but God the Father allows Jesus to be crucified by the Romans at this moment, and Jesus willingly goes along with it. There seems to be some purpose behind being killed in this specific time and place: Jerusalem during Passover. Indeed, the apostle Peter says this timing was not random: “This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge” (Acts 2:23). I believe there is a reason Jesus’ death was connected to Passover, which I’ll get to below.  

“The Sacrificial Lamb” by one of the first prominent female artists in Spain, Josefa de Óbidos  (1630–1684)

2. Other holidays could have made sense too, but Jesus’ death is connected to Passover

Granted, there were many Jewish holidays that were celebrated during Jesus’ time, most of them commanded by God in the Torah. Each holiday had a specific cultural and religious significance. If Jesus wanted to connect his death and resurrection to some other culturally significant event, he would have had lots of options:

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified the start of a new era, he should have been killed at Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year.

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified the forgiveness of sins, he should have been killed at Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement of sins via killing of a bull and a scapegoat (see my blog here).

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified God’s provision, he should have been killed during Sukkot (the Feast of Tabernacles, which commemorates the Israelites’ journey in the desert and celebrates the harvest)

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified his body as a new temple or altar, he should have been killed during Shemini Atzeret (‘Eighth Day of Assembly,’ following Sukkot (see my blog here)

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified a fulfillment or replacement of the Torah, he should have been killed at Simchat Torah (which celebrates the conclusion and restarting of the annual Torah reading cycle)

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified the importance of preserving one’s ethnic and religious culture, he should have been killed at Hanukkah, which commemorates the rededication of the Temple in Jerusalem after the Maccabee rebellion against the pagan Greeks. [In fact, Jesus is in Jerusalem during Hanukkah in John 10:22, and the text explicitly says that his opponents tried to seize him to stone him, “but he escaped their grasp” (John 10:39).]

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified resisting violent rulers, he should have been killed at Purim, which celebrates the saving of the Jewish people from genocide in the Book of Esther

·       If Jesus’ death mostly signified the giving of a new law and set of commands, he should have been killed at Shavuot, which commemorates the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai

I think an argument that can be made that Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection have resonances with each of the Jewish holidays listed above. However, the holiday that is clearly associated with Jesus’ death and resurrection is Passover. That is significant, because…

3. Passover’s significance is not about forgiveness of sins, it is about liberation from oppression, slavery, and death

The full story of God’s deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt would take too long to summarize here, but I want to make one main point clear. When the Israelites sacrificed lambs on the night of Passover, the reason was not merely to survive the plague of the death of the firstborn, though that was the immediate result. The real reason they sacrificed lambs was so that they might be delivered from slavery in Egypt!

If we line up the Exodus story with the story of Jesus, we can see some fascinating correlations. This chart–which is not exhaustive by any means– is based on my notes from studying the Gospel of Mark and comparing it to the Passover narrative in Exodus:

As you can see here, there are remarkable connections between the story of Passover and the story of Jesus, and there are more that I could have listed but left out to save room. All this is to reiterate: Jesus’ death on the cross certainly brings forgiveness of sins. But the deeper implication is that his death and resurrection bring us victory over death and the devil, and liberation from the kingdom of darkness.

4. This connection with Passover should give us a grander picture of what Jesus’ death on the cross accomplished

Some Christians argue viciously about the various theories of atonement; i.e., what did Jesus’ death on the cross actually accomplish? Those who hold to Penal Substitutionary Theory or Anselm’s Satisfaction Theory generally argue that Jesus’ death was solely to forgive our sins by being a sacrifice to God in our place. If that were true, then the holiday that would best correspond to Jesus’ death would have been Yom Kippur. In Yom Kippur, a bull would be slaughtered and a scapegoat would be driven away to take away the sins of the people. But as we’ve seen, Jesus did not choose to die at Yom Kippur. To put it more bluntly, Jesus was not the bull of God or the goat of God, he was the lamb of God (John 1:29)!

So, if we look at the cross with Passover in mind, Jesus’ death is not a payment to God to satisfy a desire for justice. Instead, it is how God’s people are liberated from their true enemies: sin, death, and the devil. Instead of an exodus of people out of Egypt, Jesus’ death on the cross brings an exodus of people out of the kingdom of darkness (Ephesians 4:8, 2 Corinthians 2:14). Thus, this strengthens the Christus Victor Theory of atonement, wherein the death of Jesus represents a total victory over the powers of evil.

Now, please hear me: I’m not saying that Jesus’ death doesn’t bring forgiveness of sins. What I am saying is that forgiveness is merely the vehicle to bring humans out of our captivity to the kingdom of darkness and into a new kingdom to be his people. Forgiveness itself is not the end-all be-all, any more than the sacrifice of the lambs was the end-all-be-all of Passover. Each of those things is in service of a bigger picture.

I want to close by noting that for the Jewish people, Passover is the foundational narrative. It all goes back to being liberated from captivity in Egypt. Other Jewish holidays matter, but for them that’s the main origin story of their entire people group (even more prominent than God’s calling of Abraham in Genesis 12). So for Christians, I believe we would have a much different perspective of God if we saw Jesus’ death and resurrection not as a “get out of jail free card,” but instead as the foundational turning point wherein he deals a fatal blow against the powers of darkness in order to liberate his people. And I think the connection to Passover helps to make that very clear.

Through Jesus’ death and resurrection, he utterly conquers our arch-nemesis and liberates us out of slavery and into glorious freedom. That’s the meaning of Passover, and that’s the meaning of the cross.

Free Resource: Politics Bible Study Guide

Christians need to know and be able to discuss what Scripture teaches about politics. The word “politics,” after all, comes from the Greek word “polis,” meaning “city-state.” Politics simply refers to the way that people living in a large community (such as a city, state, or country) make decisions about power and resources. And since Jesus calls his followers to love our neighbors, obedience to Jesus will necessarily mean every Christian is involved in “politics”—broadly speaking—in one way or another. While the particulars may vary from place to place, and person to person, no one who follows Jesus’ commands can be fully exempt from political life.  

In this 10-week guide (link at bottom), I introduce 10 different passages of Scripture throughout the Bible that engage with the idea of politics (plus a bonus passage at the end). These are not an exhaustive list of passages that deal with politics; in fact, it would be difficult to find a single page of the Bible that doesn’t have some reference to rulers, justice, laws, wars, or another political topic! Instead, I tried to choose a variety of passages from both Old and New Testaments that take different looks at how God’s people are meant to engage with politics. Additionally, this is NOT a partisan guide that is attempting to sway people to support one single American political party in 2024. My goal was to create a guide that would be broadly applicable no matter when it is used or the political context.

But first, let me give you a warning: This is NOT a Bible study series meant to confirm everything you already believe about politics. In fact, if you read the Bible with an open mind and expect it to align perfectly with a specific political platform, you will be sorely disappointed. Instead, this guide is designed to zoom out to take a broader look at how God’s people are meant to engage with issues of power, justice, and political organization.

Written thousands of years ago, these passages may feel challenging to you, or distant from the political questions we face today. It may be tempting to try to fit the Bible into your pre-existing beliefs. But if instead you are willing to engage with Scripture thoughtfully, wrestling with the text in small group discussion and seeking to observe, interpret, and apply God’s Word, you will be surprised by how relevant and timely these ancient words are. It is possible that some of your political views may be reinforced, but it’s also possible that they will be challenged.

Are you willing to let your views of politics be conformed to Scripture, rather than the other way around? Are you willing to allow God-breathed Scripture to blow into your life, even if it messes with your pre-existing categories? My hope and prayer is that you are, and that in community you are able to experience a fresh vision of God’s approach to politics.

(These passages are designed to be studied using the “inductive manuscript method” utilized by InterVarsity Christian Fellowship. For more on how to lead an inductive manuscript Bible study, visit howto.bible ).

To download my Politics Bible Study Series, click here:

PS: if you’re curious, here are the passages I go through in my guide: 

Session 1: Genesis 1:26-2:3. The Image of God 

Session 2: Genesis 11:1-9. The First Empire 

Session 3: Genesis 41:25-57. Joseph’s Diligent Use of Political Power 

Session 4: Leviticus 25:1-42. The Year of Jubilee, a Reset Button for Society 

Session 5: 1 Samuel 8:1-22. The Israelites Demand a King 

Session 6: Jeremiah 29:4-14. Seek God’s Shalom Even in Exile 

Session 7: Nehemiah 1:1-2:8. Nehemiah Advocates for His People 

Session 8: Luke 4:1-13. The Temptations of Jesus 

Session 9: John 18:28-19:16. The ‘King of the Jews’ 

Session 10: Romans 12:9-13:8. Loving Those in Authority 

Bonus Session: Revelation 18:1-13, 21:1-4, 21:23-22:2. A Tale of Two Cities

Questions? Comments? Let me know!

New Trump Campaign Ad: “God Made Trump”

Last week, former President Donald Trump shared a new 3-minute campaign ad on Truth Social titled “God Made Trump.” This video has also aired at his official campaign rallies, with some attendees reportedly stretching out their hands in a posture of worship. With stirring music and images (and based on the famous “God made a farmer” ad), the video is worth watching in full to give you insights into Trump, his campaign, and his supporters. Here’s the transcript of the ad:

On June 14 1946, God looked down on his planned paradise and said, I need a caretaker. So God gave us Trump.

God said, ‘I need somebody willing to get up before dawn, fix this country, work all day, fight the Marxists, eat supper, then go to the Oval Office and stay past midnight at a meeting of the heads of state.’ So God made Trump.

‘I need somebody with arms strong enough to wrestle the Deep State and yet gentle enough to deliver his own grandchild. Somebody to ruffle the feathers, tame the cantankerous World Economic Forum, come home hungry, have to wait until the First Lady is done with lunch with friends. Then to tell the ladies to be sure and come back real soon. And mean it.’ So God gave us Trump.

I need somebody who can shape an axe, but wield a sword. Who had the courage to step foot in North Korea. Who can make money from the tar of the sand, turn liquid to gold, who understands the difference between tariffs and inflation. Will finish his 40 hour week by Tuesday noon, but then put in another 72 hours.’ So God made Trump.

God had to have somebody willing to go into the den of vipers, call out the fake news where their tongues are as sharp as a serpents–the poison of vipers is on their lips–and yet stop. So God made Trump.

God said, ‘I need someone strong and courageous. who will not be afraid or terrified of the wolves when they attack. A man who cares for the flock. A shepherd to mankind who will never leave nor forsake them. I need the most diligent worker to follow the path, and remain strong in faith and know the belief of God and country. Somebody who’s willing to drill, bring back manufacturing and American jobs, farm the lands, secure our borders, build our military, fight the system all day and finish a hard week’s work by attending church on Sunday.’

And then his oldest son turns and says, ‘Dad, let’s make America great again. Dad, let’s build back a country to be the envy of the world again.’

So God made Trump.


As an evangelical Christian who has been very critical of Trump and his Christian supporters, you might think I would deny the very premise of the ad. And to be fair, I could of course argue that God didn’t send Trump, it’s just that enough Americans voted for him that he was elected–our own free will brought him into office.1 Or I could hypothetically argue, as I did satirically here, that it was Satan who brought Trump into power. Or I could simply focus on how Trump is flirting with blasphemy, since he is saying that he–not Jesus–is a shepherd who will never leave nor forsake us.

I won’t argue either of those today. Instead I’ll just hypothetically wonder: what if God did indeed give us Trump?

In the Hebrew Scriptures (1 Samuel 8), the Israelites ask for a king so that they may be like the other nations. They want a powerful leader, a strongman, to fight for them and defeat their enemies. God names this desire as idolatry, and warns the Israelites of the disastrous outcomes that will follow from having a strongman king. But they persist in demanding it, so he ultimately lets the people have what they want. Sometimes God gives us the thing that we desperately demand, even if He knows it will be bad for us.

Obviously, not everyone in America wanted Trump to be elected president, least of all me. But I wonder if Trump is indeed the incarnation of who we are collectively as a nation. America, like Trump, is:

Sexually impure, adulterous

Self-absorbed, longing to be a celebrity

Addicted to social media and television

Practices unhealthy eating and sleeping habits

Petty, flippant, and impulsive, yet with the ability to hold grudges for a long time

Cynically using religion as a weapon to win earthly battles

Greedy

Dismissive of the cares of the downtrodden and lowly

So, what if God did give us Trump, to be a judgment on America and reveal what this nation truly is?

Lord, have mercy.

“And on that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you on that day.” -1 Samuel 8:18


  1. This is my actual view. I think God gives humans lots of freedom and free will, for better or worse. Sometimes we make good decisions, but sometimes we make bad ones. In other words, ultimately I don’t think God gave us Trump. We did. ↩︎

What Critics Often Get Wrong About Christian Nationalism

Last month I enjoyed a fun Memorial Day parade in my hometown of Newburgh, NY. I expected the procession to include a lot of flags, police cars, marching bands, and fire engines—and it did. More surprising to me however, were the large number of Latino evangelicals present in the parade, and particularly the prominent blending of Christianity and American patriotism. There was a Spanish-speaking church with multiple parade floats, led by a trio of  Hispanic men blowing shofars, followed by an Israeli flag, the Christian flag, and dozens of American flags. As the lead pastor rode by, dressed in a suit and waving to the crowd, I could read “One Nation Under God” and “In God we trust” written across the side of his van, which was decked out with more American flags. Spanish worship music blared from the speakers.

Photo from Hudson Valley Press

Seeing this blend of Christianity and patriotism made me reflect on the nature of Christian nationalism. Political science theorist Paul Miller writes: “Christian nationalism is the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way.” Christian nationalism has been in the news a lot recently, as it becomes increasingly apparent that many Trump supporters—particularly those who attempted the coup on January 6, 2021—are fervent believers in this ideology. While Christian nationalism has often seemed to the domain of white evangelicals, who form the bedrock of Trump’s support and supported him in record numbers in 2016 and 2020, there are a growing number of Christians of other ethnicities who have also embraced Christian nationalism, including Christians of Spanish descent. Political journalists have noted the massive swing towards Trump that occurred in these communities (especially in Texas and Florida) in the 2020 elections as compared to 2016. While I didn’t see any Trump signs at the Memorial Day parade, I would guess that many of these Latino evangelicals might also fit into that category.

And that brings me to the main point of my blog today. Watching the Memorial Day parade, while fun, brought up some uncomfortable reminders of Christian nationalism, and the dangers that can arise when Christians attempt to coerce others into our faith through political power. I could go on and on about the problems with nationalism generally, and have blogged about it in the past. However, most recent critiques of Christian nationalism in America that I have come across—particularly by those who aren’t Christian— typically focus on three problematic aspects: 1. its connections to white supremacy, 2. the focus on America First, and 3. a centering of Protestant Christianity. All of these critiques are of course valid to a certain extent in the United States, but I want to highlight what I saw in the Newburgh Memorial Day parade as a caution: if your main critique of Christian Nationalism is that it is too centered on whiteness, America, and/or Protestantism, then your critique simply will not apply to many versions of Christian nationalism in our world today. 

As the Latino parade marchers illustrate, more and more, Christian Nationalism is NOT a domain of European whiteness- nor even of America. One can look more broadly at the rise of Christian nationalism in Brazil, or African nations like Uganda. There are attempts by more and more non-white peoples around the world to inscribe Christian values into their countries’ laws through legislation and political power. And lest one think that Christian nationalism is a fundamentally evangelical or Protestant phenomenon, one only has to look at the twisted version of Russian Orthodoxy that Putin has mobilized and militarized alongside Russian Archbishop Kirill in order to justify his imperialistic endeavors. Even in America, more and more Catholics are building alliances with their former Protestant rivals in order to fight what they see as rising “wokeness.” Contrary to what one might have heard, Christian nationalism is not a solely white, American, or Protestant phenomenon. 

Moreover, these narrow secular critiques of Christian nationalism remind me of the argument that philosopher Susan Sontag had with the poet Adrienne Rich regarding the nature of German Nazis’ ideology. Adrienne Rich had argued that the best way to understand Nazism was solely through the lens of misogyny–she wrote that Nazism was “patriarchy at its purest, most elemental form.” Sontag rebutted that while misogyny was certainly present, to focus on patriarchy over and above other aspects of Nazism (such as racism, anti-Semitism, violence, capitalism, imperialism, etc) is to deny the complexity of the problem. Similarly, to simply denounce Christian Nationalism solely for being too white, or too American, is dangerously myopic, and leaves one open to counter-arguments like this: “Well, we can’t be Christian nationalists because we aren’t white and we aren’t American!” They fail to comprehend the real appeal of Christian nationalism, which is the same appeal it has held for millennia, ever since the Roman Emperor Constantine co-opted the faith in 313 CE and began using it to justify his rule and reign. Christian nationalism is appealing because it is a form of idolatry, of using the name of God to bless one’s empire and defeat one’s enemies (domestic or foreign).

If Christian nationalism is only really wrong because America does it, then your critique can’t go back further than 1776; if it’s only wrong because it’s too Protestant, it can’t go back further than 1517; if it’s only wrong because it’s too white, then you can’t go back further than the 1400s (when the concept of “whiteness” originated). We need to go back further than that.

Thus, to lay my cards not he table, I believe the fundamental weakness of critiquing Christian Nationalism for being too racist, too American, or too Protestant is that it simply does not go deep enough; it fails to address the root of the problem. (And to be clear, the problem is not that Christians are acting voting and acting according to their moral beliefs about what is right or wrong—because that is hopefully true for EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON.) The core problem at the heart of Christian nationalism is this–should Christians be attempting to establish Christianity as the pre-eminent religion? Should Christians ever use political power to coerce people to follow Jesus? 

Admittedly, some Christians, particularly those who have a dim view of free will, have no problem with this. They might argue that other religions—notably Islam—spread through the sword, and if governmental power helps people to make other wise decisions (like wearing a seatbelt), then why not use coercion to force people to become Christian? For me and other Anabaptists, however, it is clear from the New Testament that Jesus’ Kingdom is not of this world, and as such he forbids his followers from using the sword to advance their interests. The earliest Christians refused to fight in wars, and would not use force to make others believe. We Anabaptists do not even baptize infants, insisting that they be able to make a free choice to be baptized when they are mature enough to decide for themselves. Thus Anabaptists such as myself would argue that Christianity is always wrong when it uses violence to coerce others into following Jesus, and our critique can go back all the way to the “Christianization” of the Roman Empire in 313 CE, would apply all the way through the Crusades, Inquisition, and European conquests, and will keep on applying going forward regardless what form Christian nationalism takes next. 

For example, I think there is a chance, however small, that within the next century China will hit a tipping point where the number of Christians becomes too large for the government to keep repressing. Imagine then a Chinese version of Roman Emperor Constantine, who decides that it is easier to co-opt Christianity to serve his regime rather than to keep fighting it. Imagine that then we see a new version of Christian nationalism that uses the cross to justify Chinese persecution of the Muslim Uighurs, Chinese expansionism in Asia, and even a war against the increasingly non-Christian West. If your critique of Christian nationalism is that it is too white, or too centered on American Christianity or Protestantism, then you would have little to say against a uniquely Chinese Christian nationalism. (Or Brazilian Christian nationalism, or Ugandan Christian nationalism… etc). 

However, if instead you have been critiquing Christian nationalism all along because Jesus’ followers are called to never use violence against their opponents, then you actually have a worthwhile—and consistent!—counter-philosophy to offer. That is why I think it is so crucial in this time for Anabaptist Christians to offer up their theology of pacifism (and our connected critiques of Christian nationalism) and spread it far and wide. Lord knows that Western Christians need to understand that Christian nationalism is flawed; but the center of the Church is no longer in the West. Now is the time for Christians around the entire globe to learn from Western Christianity’s mistakes and to reject the temptation to pick up the sword. Otherwise, we will see the heartbreaking cycle of violence continue in a new generation, staining the name of Jesus once more as rising powers in the Global East and South flex their muscles and attempt to build their own Christian Empires. 

The sword is a lot easier to carry than the cross. Every generation since Peter sliced off the servants’ ear in the garden of Gethsemane will be tempted to establish God’s Kingdom through violence. But that’s not the way of Jesus. And Christians of every tribe, nation, and tongue need to be reminded of that. 


[For a book that does a great job of critiquing Christian nationalism both in principle and as it has been practiced in America, I recommend Paul Miller’s The Religion of American Greatness: What’s Wrong with Christian Nationalism. Paul Miller is himself a practicing Christian so this book is an insider’s view at the philosophical and theological issues with Christian nationalism.]

[For another book that is a bit shorter and less academic, but was written 18 years ago so it’s a bit out of date, I’d recommend Greg Boyd’s Myth of a Christian Nation. This book was one of the biggest influences on how I shifted in my political and religious views away from Christian nationalism and to my current views.]