- This topic has 91 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ April 28 2008,16:34) Thanks again for your attempt to answer my question. I wish that I could say your answer has been helpful, but I can't. I have heard the gospel message before – many, many times before – so I am not in need of a re-education on that matter. I am sepcifically interested in the very narrow question of punishment, (i.e. If Jesus was not eternally punished for “our crimes”, then why do Christians believe that individuals will be?) Again, I have been passively searching for the answer to this question for many years, so I don't expect to suddenly find it now. I just thought that I would let someone else have a go at it.
I agree. If we are to believe that God would even call for such (why does Yahweh seem to be enthralled with death?), how can Jesus pay for sins if he was only dead for 3 days? After all, the NT teaches that those who do not accept Jesus will be cast in the lake of fire, to either be tormented for a very long period — or forever — or be annihilated. The second death. Yet Jesus never faces this permanent death, so he has never really paid the price, has he?If Jesus' death was the payment for men's sins, then those who do not accept him should only have to be dead for three days, like he was. That is man paying for his own sins.
This goes hand in hand with what I've always felt: that 3 days dead to return to the glory of heaven as Yahweh's right hand man is not sacrifice at all.
Quote (kejonn @ April 29 2008,12:07) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ April 28 2008,16:34) Thanks again for your attempt to answer my question. I wish that I could say your answer has been helpful, but I can't. I have heard the gospel message before – many, many times before – so I am not in need of a re-education on that matter. I am sepcifically interested in the very narrow question of punishment, (i.e. If Jesus was not eternally punished for “our crimes”, then why do Christians believe that individuals will be?) Again, I have been passively searching for the answer to this question for many years, so I don't expect to suddenly find it now. I just thought that I would let someone else have a go at it.
I agree. If we are to believe that God would even call for such (why does Yahweh seem to be enthralled with death?), how can Jesus pay for sins if he was only dead for 3 days? After all, the NT teaches that those who do not accept Jesus will be cast in the lake of fire, to either be tormented for a very long period — or forever — or be annihilated. The second death. Yet Jesus never faces this permanent death, so he has never really paid the price, has he?If Jesus' death was the payment for men's sins, then those who do not accept him should only have to be dead for three days, like he was. That is man paying for his own sins.
This goes hand in hand with what I've always felt: that 3 days dead to return to the glory of heaven as Yahweh's right hand man is not sacrifice at all.
Well, if that is so, then I guess that you will have to go before God and plead your case on the basis of your own works.Jesus died the first death or spiritual separation from God for all of humanity. It could have been permanent, but since he did not sin, God raised him from the dead.
Quote Hbr 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Hbr 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Hbr 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;Quote Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Act 2:24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.Quote Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.Quote (942767 @ April 28 2008,21:12) Quote (kejonn @ April 29 2008,12:07) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ April 28 2008,16:34) Thanks again for your attempt to answer my question. I wish that I could say your answer has been helpful, but I can't. I have heard the gospel message before – many, many times before – so I am not in need of a re-education on that matter. I am sepcifically interested in the very narrow question of punishment, (i.e. If Jesus was not eternally punished for “our crimes”, then why do Christians believe that individuals will be?) Again, I have been passively searching for the answer to this question for many years, so I don't expect to suddenly find it now. I just thought that I would let someone else have a go at it.
I agree. If we are to believe that God would even call for such (why does Yahweh seem to be enthralled with death?), how can Jesus pay for sins if he was only dead for 3 days? After all, the NT teaches that those who do not accept Jesus will be cast in the lake of fire, to either be tormented for a very long period — or forever — or be annihilated. The second death. Yet Jesus never faces this permanent death, so he has never really paid the price, has he?If Jesus' death was the payment for men's sins, then those who do not accept him should only have to be dead for three days, like he was. That is man paying for his own sins.
This goes hand in hand with what I've always felt: that 3 days dead to return to the glory of heaven as Yahweh's right hand man is not sacrifice at all.
Well, if that is so, then I guess that you will have to go before God and plead your case on the basis of your own works.Jesus died the first death or spiritual separation from God for all of humanity. It could have been permanent, but since he did not sin, God raised him from the dead.
Quote Hbr 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Hbr 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Hbr 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;Quote Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Act 2:24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.Quote Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Then he never truly paid the price.Quote (kejonn @ April 29 2008,14:52) Quote (942767 @ April 28 2008,21:12) Quote (kejonn @ April 29 2008,12:07) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ April 28 2008,16:34) Thanks again for your attempt to answer my question. I wish that I could say your answer has been helpful, but I can't. I have heard the gospel message before – many, many times before – so I am not in need of a re-education on that matter. I am sepcifically interested in the very narrow question of punishment, (i.e. If Jesus was not eternally punished for “our crimes”, then why do Christians believe that individuals will be?) Again, I have been passively searching for the answer to this question for many years, so I don't expect to suddenly find it now. I just thought that I would let someone else have a go at it.
I agree. If we are to believe that God would even call for such (why does Yahweh seem to be enthralled with death?), how can Jesus pay for sins if he was only dead for 3 days? After all, the NT teaches that those who do not accept Jesus will be cast in the lake of fire, to either be tormented for a very long period — or forever — or be annihilated. The second death. Yet Jesus never faces this permanent death, so he has never really paid the price, has he?If Jesus' death was the payment for men's sins, then those who do not accept him should only have to be dead for three days, like he was. That is man paying for his own sins.
This goes hand in hand with what I've always felt: that 3 days dead to return to the glory of heaven as Yahweh's right hand man is not sacrifice at all.
Well, if that is so, then I guess that you will have to go before God and plead your case on the basis of your own works.Jesus died the first death or spiritual separation from God for all of humanity. It could have been permanent, but since he did not sin, God raised him from the dead.
Quote Hbr 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Hbr 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Hbr 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;Quote Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Act 2:24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.Quote Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Then he never truly paid the price.
You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God.Quote (942767 @ April 28 2008,22:39) You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God.
Haha, don't believe me, I just offer opinions. But you say you either believe me or God, how can you be certain that the death of Jesus was even the real plan of God?Why does Yahweh require death? In the OT, you had to kill animals to appease him. In the NT, his son has to be killed. Why is Yahweh so into death?
I don't know about you, but I don't need death to forgive someone. I don't even need sacrifice of any sort. If I can forgive without it, and I have less than perfect love for my fellow man, why does Yahweh require some sort of sacrifice?
Quote (942767 @ April 29 2008,15:39) You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God.
You set up a false choice it is not between KJ and God, it is between KJ and a group of anonymous authors who claim to know God's intent, not the same. Scripture does not equate with God, it is men's attempt to explain what they view as God's will and there are many other works who try and do the same as many faiths have their own scriptures and thus see God's will differently. If you were born in Pakistan you would probably be saying it's KJ or Allah and God's will is set forth in the Koran.Quote (Cato @ April 29 2008,23:52) Quote (942767 @ April 29 2008,15:39) You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God.
You set up a false choice it is not between KJ and God, it is between KJ and a group of anonymous authors who claim to know God's intent, not the same. Scripture does not equate with God, it is men's attempt to explain what they view as God's will and there are many other works who try and do the same as many faiths have their own scriptures and thus see God's will differently. If you were born in Pakistan you would probably be saying it's KJ or Allah and God's will is set forth in the Koran.
Amen to that.Sometimes I think the bible has done more harm that good? I mean, if we can put God into a little leather box like that, what kind of God is he?
I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that said, “God is too big to fit into one religion.” I think I believe it.
Quote (Not3in1 @ April 30 2008,06:42) I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that said, “God is too big to fit into one religion.” I think I believe it.
I like that.Tim
942767 wrote:
Quote Hi WhatIsTrue: Are you saying by the statement “that Christians believe that individuals will be eternally punished” that they believe that individuals will punished forever? If so, there may be some who teach this, but I believe that the wicked who die in their sins will punished according to their works. They will be destroyed, but I don't believe that they will be punished forever.
Anyway, I hope that you find the answer to your question.
God Bless
No, what I mean is that mainstream Christians believe in a permanent punishment, (i.e. once you suffer the “second death”, there is no more chance for reconciliation with God). The conundrum I see is in the fact that Jesus's replacement punishment, (i.e his “dying in my place”), was not permanent, so it is not equivalent to what the typical unbeliever will suffer, according to mainstream theology.
Put another way, even though Jesus was being punished for the sins of every man who ever lived, God was able to lighten his sentence, but God, according to mainstream theology, will not lighten this permanent sentence for a man who takes responsibility for his own sins apart from Christ.
In any case, I am beating a dead horse here. I was hoping for more responses from others who have taken up an apologetic role in this section of the forum. Absent that, I think that we have already gone around this circle enough times.
,,
Quote (kejonn @ April 29 2008,22:05) Quote (942767 @ April 28 2008,22:39) You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God.
Haha, don't believe me, I just offer opinions. But you say you either believe me or God, how can you be certain that the death of Jesus was even the real plan of God?Why does Yahweh require death? In the OT, you had to kill animals to appease him. In the NT, his son has to be killed. Why is Yahweh so into death?
I don't know about you, but I don't need death to forgive someone. I don't even need sacrifice of any sort. If I can forgive without it, and I have less than perfect love for my fellow man, why does Yahweh require some sort of sacrifice?
Hi KJ:I am not just offering opinions. I know, as I have told this forum on many occasions, by the Spirit of God dwelling within me.
And let me just answer you and all of these posts that are coming my way over this discussion with you, go ahead and throw your opinions and accusations my way, I was expectaing this as God has already warned me.
You will probably be those who are passing gifts and being joyful when the two witnesses are killed by the Anti-Christ because they loved you enough to tell you the truth.
You haven't hurt me at all. I know who I am serving. Do you?
Quote (942767 @ April 29 2008,17:43) ,, Quote (kejonn @ April 29 2008,22:05) Quote (942767 @ April 28 2008,22:39) You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God.
Haha, don't believe me, I just offer opinions. But you say you either believe me or God, how can you be certain that the death of Jesus was even the real plan of God?Why does Yahweh require death? In the OT, you had to kill animals to appease him. In the NT, his son has to be killed. Why is Yahweh so into death?
I don't know about you, but I don't need death to forgive someone. I don't even need sacrifice of any sort. If I can forgive without it, and I have less than perfect love for my fellow man, why does Yahweh require some sort of sacrifice?
Hi KJ:I am not just offering opinions. I know, as I have told this forum on many occasions, by the Spirit of God dwelling within me.
You do realize that almost every Christian who posts on this board, and many others, as well as those who speak in churches, claim to have the same spirit. Yet, for some odd reason, Christians don't agree on many things.So saying you have the spirit indwelling in you does not add any to your clam of telling us any real truth.
What it boils down to is that you have accepted what you believe as truth. That is the reality of it. But don't expect others, even other Christians, to agree with you just because you say you have the spirit.
Quote And let me just answer you and all of these posts that are coming my way over this discussion with you, go ahead and throw your opinions and accusations my way, I was expectaing this as God has already warned me.
What accusations? You sure are getting defensive.Quote You will probably be those who are passing gifts and being joyful when the two witnesses are killed by the Anti-Christ because they loved you enough to tell you the truth.
There has been predictions that this will take place since Jesus died. Here it is, almost 2000 years later and people still act as if it will be any day. I wonder if they will still be doing it 2000 years from now?Quote You haven't hurt me at all. I know who I am serving. Do you?
Do you really? It seems to me that you are serving some bronze and iron aged Hebrew men. They are the ones who wrote the bible.I may have asked you this already, but do you think God stopped talking in 100 CE? Did He speak with Mohammed? Joseph Smith? Bahá'u'lláh?
Quote (kejonn @ April 26 2008,13:33) Regardless of any explanation, please show me a single parable that uses totally false circumstances. That is, while they may be “stories”, all elements of them are possible. Extend that to the “Rich man and Lazarus”. What part becomes impossible?
Did you read any of my post? Or, did you even read the actual parable?Quote You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God. 94, based on past experience, God never being wrong, kejonn being wrong hundreds of times (just on this forum) I'd go with God.
Quote Did we ever get an answer to 'Why did Jesus have to die?', asked several months ago. Stuart
How was the death of Jesus Christ different from that of others who have become martyrs?
Jesus was a perfect human. He was born without any blemish of sin and he maintained that perfection throughout his life. “He committed no sin.” He was “undefiled, separated from the sinners.”—1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 7:26.He was the unique Son of God. God himself testified to this audibly from the heavens. (Matt. 3:17; 17:5) This Son had lived previously in heaven; through him God had brought into existence all other created persons and things in the entire universe. To carry out His will, God had miraculously transferred the life of this Son to the womb of a virgin girl so that he might be born as a human. To emphasize that he truly had become a human, Jesus referred to himself as the Son of man.—Col. 1:15-20; John 1:14; Luke 5:24.
He was not powerless before his executioners. He said: “I surrender my soul . . . No man has taken it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative.” (John 10:17, 18) He declined to appeal for angelic forces to intervene on his behalf. (Matt. 26:53, 54) Though wicked men were permitted to carry out their schemes in having him put to death, his death was truly sacrificial.
His shed blood has value to provide deliverance for others. “The Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.” (Mark 10:45)
So his death was far more than a case of martyrdom because of refusal to compromise his beliefs.Let's look at that last verse:
“The Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.”Why was it necessary for the ransom to be provided in the manner that it was in order for us to have eternal life?
Rom. 5:12: “Through one man [Adam] sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (No matter how uprightly we may live, all of us are sinners from birth. [Ps. 51:5] There is no way that we can earn the right to live forever.)
Rom. 6:23: “The wages sin pays is death.”
Ps. 49:6-9: “Those who are trusting in their means of maintenance, and who keep boasting about the abundance of their riches, not one of them can by any means redeem even a brother, nor give to God a ransom for him; (and the redemption price of their soul is so precious that it has ceased to time indefinite) that he should still live forever and not see the pit.” (No imperfect human can provide the means to deliver someone else from sin and death. His money cannot buy eternal life, and his soul laid down in death, being the wages that are to come to him anyway because of sin, has no value toward delivering anyone.)
Why did God not simply decree that, although Adam and Eve must die for their rebellion, all of their offspring who would obey God could live forever?
Because Jehovah is “a lover of righteousness and justice.” (Ps. 33:5; Deut. 32:4; Jer. 9:24) So, the way he dealt with the situation upheld his righteousness, met the demands of absolute justice, and, at the same time, magnified his love and mercy. How is that so?(1) Adam and Eve had produced no children before they sinned, so none were born perfect. All of Adam’s offspring were brought forth in sin, and sin leads to death. If Jehovah had simply ignored this, that would have been a denial of his own righteous standards. God could not do that and so become a party to unrighteousness. He did not sidestep the requirements of absolute justice; so no intelligent creature could ever legitimately find fault in this respect.—Rom. 3:21-26.
(2) Without ignoring the requirements of justice, how could provision be made to deliver those of Adam’s offspring who would demonstrate loving obedience to Jehovah? If a perfect human was to die sacrificially, justice could allow for that perfect life to provide a covering for the sins of those who would in faith accept the provision. Since one man’s sin (that of Adam) had been responsible for causing the entire human family to be sinners, the shed blood of another perfect human (in effect, a second Adam), being of corresponding value, could balance the scales of justice. Because Adam was a willful sinner, he could not benefit; but because the penalty that all mankind was due to pay for sin would in this way be paid by someone else, Adam’s offspring could be delivered. But there was no such perfect human. Humankind could never meet those demands of absolute justice. So, as an expression of marvelous love and at great personal cost, Jehovah himself made the provision. (1 Cor. 15:45; 1 Tim. 2:5, 6; John 3:16; Rom. 5:8) God’s only-begotten Son was willing to do his part. Humbly leaving behind his heavenly glory and becoming a perfect human, Jesus died on behalf of mankind.—Phil. 2:7, 8.
Illustration: A family head may become a criminal and be sentenced to death. His children may be left destitute, hopelessly in debt. Perhaps their kindly grandfather intervenes on their behalf, making provision through a son who is living with him to pay their debts and to open up for them the possibility of a new life. Of course, to benefit, the children must accept the arrangement, and the grandfather may reasonably require certain things as assurance that the children will not imitate the course of their father.
“The Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.”
A RANSOM is a price paid to buy back or to bring about release from some obligation or undesirable circumstance. The basic idea of “ransom” is a price that covers (as in payment for damages or to satisfy justice), while “redemption” emphasizes the releasing accomplished as a result of the ransom paid. The most significant ransom price is the shed blood of Jesus Christ, which made deliverance from sin and death possible for the offspring of Adam.
In the various Hebrew and Greek terms translated “ransom” and “redeem,” the inherent similarity lies in the idea of a price, or thing of value, given to effect the ransom, or redemption. The thought of exchange, as well as that of correspondency, equivalence, or substitution, is common in all. That is, one thing is given for another, satisfying the demands of justice and resulting in a balancing of matters.
A Price That Covers. The Hebrew noun ko′pher comes from the verb ka·phar′, meaning, basically, “cover,” as in Noah’s covering the ark with tar. (Ge 6:14) Ka·phar′, however, is used almost entirely to describe the satisfying of justice through the covering of or atoning for sins. The noun ko′pher refers to the thing given to accomplish this, the ransom price. (Ps 65:3; 78:38; 79:8, 9) A covering corresponds to the thing it covers, either in its form (as in a material lid, such as the “cover [kap·po′reth]” of the ark of the covenant; Ex 25:17-22), or in its value (as in a payment to cover the damages caused by an injury).
As a means for balancing justice and setting matters straight with his people Israel, Jehovah, in the Law covenant, designated various sacrifices and offerings to atone for, or cover, sins, including those of the priests and the Levites (Ex 29:33-37; Le 16:6, 11), of other individuals, or of the nation as a whole (Le 1:4; 4:20, 26, 31, 35), as well as to purify the altar and tabernacle, making atonement because of the sins of the people surrounding these. (Le 16:16-20) In effect, the life of the animal sacrificed went in place of the life of the sinner, its blood making atonement on God’s altar, that is, to the extent that it could. (Le 17:11; compare Heb 9:13, 14; 10:1-4.) The “day of atonement [yohm hak·kip·pu·rim′]” could just as properly be referred to as the “day of the ransoms.” (Le 23:26-28) These sacrifices were required if the nation and its worship were to have and maintain the acceptance and approval of the righteous God.
Well illustrating the sense of a redeeming exchange is the law regarding a bull known to gore. If the owner allowed the bull to go loose so that it killed someone, the owner was to be put to death, paying for the life of the slain person with his own life. However, since he did not deliberately or directly kill another, if the judges viewed it proper to impose upon him a “ransom [ko′pher]” instead, then he must pay that redemption price. The sum assessed and paid was viewed as taking the place of his own life and compensating for the life lost. (Ex 21:28-32; compare De 19:21.) On the other hand, no ransom could be accepted for the deliberate murderer; only his own life could cover the death of the victim. (Nu 35:31-33) Evidently because a census involved lives, at the time such was taken each male over 20 had to have a ransom (ko′pher) of half a shekel ($1.10) given for his soul to Jehovah, the same price applying whether the individual was rich or poor.—Ex 30:11-16.
Since any imbalance of justice is displeasing to God, as well as among humans, the ransom, or covering, could have the additional effect of averting or quelling anger. (Compare Jer 18:23; also Ge 32:20, where “appease” translates ka·phar′.) The husband enraged at the man committing adultery with his wife, however, refuses any “ransom [ko′pher].” (Pr 6:35) The term may also be used with regard to those who should execute justice but who instead accept a bribe or gift as “hush money [ko′pher]” to cover over the wrongdoing in their sight.—1Sa 12:3; Am 5:12.
The Redemption, or Releasing. The Hebrew verb pa·dhah′ means “redeem,” and the related noun pidh·yohn′ means “redemption price.” (Ex 21:30) These terms evidently emphasize the releasing accomplished by the redemption price, while ka·phar′ places stress on the quality or content of the price and its efficacy in balancing the scales of justice. The releasing, or redeeming (pa·dhah′), may be from slavery (Le 19:20; De 7:8), from other distressing or oppressive conditions (2Sa 4:9; Job 6:23; Ps 55:18), or from death and the grave. (Job 33:28; Ps 49:15) Frequent reference is made to Jehovah’s redeeming the nation of Israel from Egypt to be his “private property” (De 9:26; Ps 78:42) and to his redeeming them from Assyrian and Babylonian exile many centuries later. (Isa 35:10; 51:11; Jer 31:11, 12; Zec 10:8-10) Here, too, the redemption involved a price, an exchange. In redeeming Israel from Egypt, Jehovah evidently caused the price to be paid by Egypt. Israel was, in effect, God’s “firstborn,” and Jehovah warned Pharaoh that his stubborn refusal to release Israel would cause the life of Pharaoh’s firstborn and the firstborn of all Egypt, human and animals, to be exacted. (Ex 4:21-23; 11:4-8) Similarly, in return for Cyrus’ overthrow of Babylon and his liberation of the Jews from their exiled state, Jehovah gave “Egypt as a ransom [form of ko′pher] for [his people], Ethiopia and Seba” in their place. The Persian Empire thus later conquered those regions, and so ‘national groups were given in place of the Israelites’ souls.’ (Isa 43:1-4) These exchanges are in harmony with the inspired declaration that the “wicked is [or serves as] a ransom [ko′pher] for the righteous one; and the one dealing treacherously takes the place of the upright ones.”—Pr 21:18.
Another Hebrew term associated with redemption is ga·’al′, and this conveys primarily the thought of reclaiming, recovering, or repurchasing. (Jer 32:7, 8) Its similarity to pa·dhah′ is seen by its parallel use with that term at Hosea 13:14: “From the hand of Sheol I shall redeem [form of pa·dhah′] them; from death I shall recover [form of ga·’al′] them.” (Compare Ps 69:18.) Ga·’al′ gives emphasis to the right of reclaiming or repurchasing, either by a near kinsman of a person whose property or whose very person needed to be repurchased or reclaimed, or by the original owner or seller himself. A near kinsman, called a go·’el′, was thus “a repurchaser” (Ru 2:20; 3:9, 13) or, in cases where a murder was involved, a “blood avenger.”—Nu 35:12.
The Law provided that in the case of a poor Israelite whose circumstances forced him to sell his hereditary lands, his city house, or even to sell himself into servitude, “a repurchaser closely related to him,” or go·’el′, had the right to “buy back [ga·’al′] what his brother sold,” or the seller could do so himself if funds became available to him. (Le 25:23-27, 29-34, 47-49; compare Ru 4:1-15.) If a man should make a vow offering to God of a house or a field and then desire to buy it back, he had to pay the valuation placed on the property plus a fifth in addition to that estimated value. (Le 27:14-19) However, no exchange could be made for anything “devoted to destruction.”—Le 27:28, 29.
In the case of murder, the murderer was not allowed sanctuary in the appointed cities of refuge but, after the judicial hearing, was turned over by the judges to the “avenger [go·’el′] of blood,” a near kinsman of the victim, who then put the murderer to death. Since no “ransom [ko′pher]” was allowed for the murderer and since the near kinsman with right of repurchase could not reclaim or recover the
life of his dead relative, he rightfully claimed the life of the one who had taken his relative’s life by murder.—Nu 35:9-32; De 19:1-13.Not Always a Tangible Price. As has been shown, Jehovah “redeemed” (pa·dhah′) or ‘reclaimed’ (ga·’al′) Israel from Egypt. (Ex 6:6; Isa 51:10, 11) Later, because the Israelites kept “selling themselves to do what was bad” (2Ki 17:16, 17), Jehovah on several occasions ‘sold them into the hands of their enemies.’ (De 32:30; Jg 2:14; 3:8; 10:7; 1Sa 12:9) Their repentance caused him to buy them back, or reclaim them, out of distress or exile (Ps 107:2, 3; Isa 35:9, 10; Mic 4:10), thereby performing the work of a Go·’el′, a Repurchaser related to them inasmuch as he had espoused the nation to himself. (Isa 43:1, 14; 48:20; 49:26; 50:1, 2; 54:5-7) In ‘selling’ them, Jehovah was not paid some material compensation by the pagan nations. His payment was the satisfaction of his justice and the fulfillment of his purpose to have them corrected and disciplined for their rebellion and disrespect.—Compare Isa 48:17, 18.
God’s ‘repurchasing’ likewise need not involve the payment of something tangible. When Jehovah repurchased the Israelites exiled in Babylon, Cyrus willingly liberated them, without tangible compensation. However, when redeeming his people from oppressor nations that had acted with malice against Israel, Jehovah exacted the price from the oppressors themselves, making them pay with their own lives. (Compare Ps 106:10, 11; Isa 41:11-14; 49:26.) When his people were sold to pagan nations, they received “nothing” from their enslavers in the way of true benefit or relief, and Jehovah therefore needed to make no payment to their captors to balance matters out. Instead, he effected the repurchase through the power of “his holy arm.”—Isa 52:3-10; Ps 77:14, 15.
Jehovah’s role of Go·’el′ thus embraced the avenging of wrongs done to his servants and resulted in the sanctifying and vindicating of his own name against those who used Israel’s distress as an excuse to reproach him. (Ps 78:35; Isa 59:15-20; 63:3-6, 9) As the Great Kinsman and Redeemer of both the nation and its individuals, he conducted their “legal case” to effect justice.—Ps 119:153, 154; Jer 50:33, 34; La 3:58-60; compare Pr 23:10, 11.
Though living before and outside the nation of Israel, the disease-stricken Job said: “I myself well know that my redeemer is alive, and that, coming after me, he will rise up over the dust.” (Job 19:25; compare Ps 69:18; 103:4.) Following God’s own example, Israel’s king was to act as a redeemer in behalf of the lowly and poor ones of the nation.—Ps 72:1, 2, 14.
Christ Jesus’ Role as Ransomer
The foregoing information lays the basis for understanding the ransom provided for humankind through God’s Son, Christ Jesus. Mankind’s need for a ransom came about through the rebellion in Eden. Adam sold himself to do evil for the selfish pleasure of keeping continued company with his wife, now a sinful transgressor, so he shared the same condemned standing with her before God. He thereby sold himself and his descendants into slavery to sin and to death, the price that God’s justice required. (Ro 5:12-19; compare Ro 7:14-25.) Having possessed human perfection, Adam lost this valuable possession for himself and all his offspring.The Law, which had “a shadow of the good things to come,” provided for animal sacrifices as a covering for sin. This, however, was only a symbolic or token covering, since such animals were inferior to man; hence, it was “not possible for the blood of bulls and of goats [actually] to take sins away,” as the apostle points out. (Heb 10:1-4) Those pictorial animal sacrifices had to be without blemish, perfect specimens. (Le 22:21) The real ransom sacrifice, a human actually capable of removing sins, must therefore also be perfect, free from blemish. He would have to correspond to the perfect Adam and possess human perfection, if he were to pay the price of redemption that would release Adam’s offspring from the debt, disability, and enslavement into which their first father Adam had sold them. (Compare Ro 7:14; Ps 51:5.) Only thereby could he satisfy God’s perfect justice that requires like for like, a ‘soul for a soul.’—Ex 21:23-25; De 19:21.
The strictness of God’s justice made it impossible for mankind itself to provide its own redeemer. (Ps 49:6-9) However, this results in the magnifying of God’s own love and mercy in that he met his own requirements at tremendous cost to himself, giving the life of his own Son to provide the redemption price. (Ro 5:6-8) This required his Son’s becoming human to correspond to the perfect Adam. God accomplished this by transferring his Son’s life from heaven to the womb of the Jewish virgin Mary. (Lu 1:26-37; Joh 1:14) Since Jesus did not owe his life to any human father descended from the sinner Adam, and since God’s holy spirit ‘overshadowed’ Mary, evidently from the time she conceived until the time of Jesus’ birth, Jesus was born free from any inheritance of sin or imperfection, being, as it were, “an unblemished and spotless lamb,” whose blood could prove to be an acceptable sacrifice. (Lu 1:35; Joh 1:29; 1Pe 1:18, 19) He maintained that sinless state throughout his life and thus did not disqualify himself. (Heb 4:15; 7:26; 1Pe 2:22) As a ‘sharer of blood and flesh,’ he was a near kinsman of mankind and he had the thing of value, his own perfect life maintained pure through tests of integrity, with which to repurchase mankind, emancipate them.—Heb 2:14, 15.
The Christian Greek Scriptures make clear that the release from sin and death is indeed by the paying of a price. Christians are said to be “bought with a price” (1Co 6:20; 7:23), having an “owner that bought them” (2Pe 2:1), and Jesus is presented as the Lamb who ‘was slaughtered and with his blood bought persons for God out of every tribe, tongue, and nation.’ (Re 5:9) In these texts the verb a·go·ra′zo is used, meaning simply “buy at the market [a·go·ra′].” The related e·xa·go·ra′zo (release by purchase) is used by Paul in showing that Christ released “by purchase those under law” through his death on the stake. (Ga 4:5; 3:13) But the thought of redemption or ransoming is more frequently and more fully expressed by the Greek ly′tron and related terms.
Ly′tron (from the verb ly′o, meaning “loose”) was especially used by Greek writers to refer to a price paid to ransom prisoners of war or to release those under bond or in slavery. (Compare Heb 11:35.) In its two Scriptural occurrences it describes Christ’s giving “his soul a ransom in exchange for many.” (Mt 20:28; Mr 10:45) The related word an·ti′ly·tron appears at 1 Timothy 2:6. Parkhurst’s Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament says it means: “a ransom, price of redemption, or rather a correspondent ransom.” He quotes Hyperius as saying: “It properly signifies a price by which captives are redeemed from the enemy; and that kind of exchange in which the life of one is redeemed by the life of another.” He concludes by saying: “So Aristotle uses the verb [an·ti·ly·tro′o] for redeeming life by life.” (London, 1845, p. 47) Thus Christ “gave himself a corresponding ransom for all.” (1Ti 2:5, 6) Other related words are ly·tro′o·mai, “loose by ransom” (Tit 2:14; 1Pe 1:18, 19), and a·po·ly′tro·sis, “a releasing by ransom.” (Eph 1:7, 14; Col 1:14) The similarity of the usage of these words with that of the Hebrew terms considered is evident. They describe, not an ordinary purchase or releasing, but a redeeming or ransoming, a deliverance effected by payment of a corresponding price.
Though available to all, Christ’s ransom sacrifice is not accepted by all, and “the wrath of God remains” upon those not accepting it, as it also comes upon those who first accept and then turn away from that provis
ion. (Joh 3:36; Heb 10:26-29; contrast Ro 5:9, 10.) They gain no deliverance from the enslavement to Kings Sin and Death. (Ro 5:21) Under the Law the deliberate murderer could not be ransomed. Adam, by his willful course, brought death on all mankind, hence was a murderer. (Ro 5:12) Thus, the sacrificed life of Jesus is not acceptable to God as a ransom for the sinner Adam.But God is pleased to approve the application of the ransom to redeem those of Adam’s offspring who avail themselves of such a release. As Paul states, “as through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one person many will be constituted righteous.” (Ro 5:18, 19) At the time of Adam’s sin and his being sentenced to death, his offspring or race were all unborn in his loins and so all died with him. (Compare Heb 7:4-10.) Jesus as a perfect man, “the last Adam” (1Co 15:45), had a race or offspring unborn in his loins, and when he died innocently as a perfect human sacrifice this potential human race died with him. He had willingly abstained from producing a family of his own by natural procreation. Instead, Jesus uses the authority granted by Jehovah on the basis of his ransom to give life to all those who accept this provision.—1Co 15:45; compare Ro 5:15-17.
Thus, Jesus was indeed “a corresponding ransom,” not for the redemption of the one sinner, Adam, but for the redemption of all mankind descended from Adam. He repurchased them so that they could become his family, doing this by presenting the full value of his ransom sacrifice to the God of absolute justice in heaven. (Heb 9:24) He thereby gains a Bride, a heavenly congregation formed of his followers. (Compare Eph 5:23-27; Re 1:5, 6; 5:9, 10; 14:3, 4.) Messianic prophecies also show he will have “offspring” as an “Eternal Father.” (Isa 53:10-12; 9:6, 7) To be such, his ransom must embrace more than those of his “Bride.” In addition to those “bought from among mankind as firstfruits” to form that heavenly congregation, therefore, others are to benefit from his ransom sacrifice and gain everlasting life through the removal of their sins and accompanying imperfection. (Re 14:4; 1Jo 2:1, 2) Since those of the heavenly congregation serve with Christ as priests and “kings over the earth,” such other recipients of the ransom benefits must be earthly subjects of Christ’s Kingdom, and as children of an “Eternal Father” they attain everlasting life. (Re 5:10; 20:6; 21:2-4, 9, 10; 22:17; compare Ps 103:2-5.) The entire arrangement manifests Jehovah’s wisdom and his righteousness in perfectly balancing the scales of justice while showing undeserved kindness and forgiving sins.—Ro 3:21-26.
Quote (david @ April 30 2008,01:26) Quote (kejonn @ April 26 2008,13:33) Regardless of any explanation, please show me a single parable that uses totally false circumstances. That is, while they may be “stories”, all elements of them are possible. Extend that to the “Rich man and Lazarus”. What part becomes impossible?
Did you read any of my post? Or, did you even read the actual parable?
Very little and yes. I told you that your post was very unreadable because of the format of this forum.Yes, i have read the parable many times. I asked you if any of Jesus' other parables used false scenarios. That is, even if they were “ficticious” in content, the events in them could happen. A man can lose one sheep. A seed can fall on stony soil. A man could build on a sandy foundation. Now, can the same be said of this parable?
Quote (david @ April 30 2008,01:32) Question: Why do Cato and Kejonn keep calling them “anonymous” authors?
Because besides Paul and “John” in his epistles, the other books of the NT — and even some of the OT — have no certain authors. The names are based on tradition.Quote (david @ April 30 2008,01:29) Quote You know KJ. I am faced with a very tough decision. I don't know who to believe now, you or God. 94, based on past experience, God never being wrong, kejonn being wrong hundreds of times (just on this forum) I'd go with God.
Since the bible has been proven to be wrong (except in the mind of the very few), I would say it is not the word of God then.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
