Did Jesus Redeem Mankind? — Page 92
? 85 85 acts like perjury, theft and brigandage. One may indulge in misappropriating other people's property taking it as a normal thing but when another person lifts his property, he calls him a crook. This goes to show that, in his heart of hearts, he knows that misappropriation is an act of dishonesty. It is true that such a one cannot be called a sinner in terms of the Shariat law, but, he will be guilty in terms of natural impulses and will meet his deserts. But the point is, if this is a correct stand, where does then the need for atonement arise? LAW AND SALVATION If the New Testament had asserted that human nature was a curse in itself, this would be a tenable theory. But it says, the law is curse (Galatians, Ch, 3:13). In other words, the New Testament does not find fault with the judgment of human nature condemning a particular act as sinful; but it says that law is a curse, in that it bears such commands as people do not find practicable, and it claims that Jesus, therefore, scrapped it. But the question here arises that the law was in abeyance even before the advent of Moses (peace be on him) and man needed no atonement for salvation; he could either attain salvation by acting according to his nature or incur punishment by acting against it. Where is the need then for a vicarious atonement under the circumstances?