Okay...just why is the "ransom" so gr...

by logansrun 37 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  logansrun

  Reading the March 2003 OKM brought up a question I've had for a long time....why do Christians feel the the death of Jesus was this unbelievably loving act by both God and Christ? I mean, God knew his son would be faithful to death (because of prophecy...not much of a test on J.C. eh?) and had all the power to ressurect him. It was a sure thing. It's as if I loan someone a tousand dollars for three days and then get everything back -- what did I lose during that time?

  Another thing...Jesus death is talked about as being the greatest crime against humanity -- the murder of a perfect man. If you take the JW interpretation of it, Genesis 3:15 shows that Satan killed Jesus (the "bruising of the heel")...and yet it was supposed to be God's provision, in fact something he wanted to happen! The Jews are also blamed for Jesus death, in fact the destruction of Jerusalem was supposedly because they did this (those infamous words put into the Jews mouths: "His blood come upon us and our children!"). But how could they be blamed for something that was a gift from God? In fact, the JW interpretation is that the primary reason Jesus died was to sanctify God's name which would mean that Jehovah was the person that benefitted the most from this sacrifice -- does that sound like a gift?

  For the life of me, I just don't get it.

  Bradley
• 

  alamb

  It also makes Christianity based on human sacrifice.
• 

  Double Edge

  You're going to get many opinions on this, but here is my take on it (I've never been a jw):

  God and Man once had a one-on-one communion, meaning Man was in the presence of God (Garden of Eden)....

  Man broke one of God's laws (sinned) and because God cannot allow sin there was a separation. But even at death, we couldn't enter back into God's presence because there was no way to pay restitution for the sin. However, God prepared a way by sending His Son (a sinless man) to make restitution (ransom).

  Jesus, gave up His life willingly as it could not be taken from Him (because of the duality of His parents - God/Mary). He came to life and was tempted like any other person, yet he never succumbed to sin. Thus, a Perfect Man, who never sinned sacraficed His life paying the ransom for all that would believe in Him and try to follow His example.
• 

  Ravyn

  it is also not a corresponding ransom. no where in genesis does it ever say that if Adam and Eve ate the fruit that they would lose anything but THEIR OWN LIVES. Which did not happen the way they were told it would, not to mention the fact that if you use the 'eye for an eye' rule they would not have been killed for stealing a piece of fruit! (which is ALL they did). And if you follow the NT rule of 'turn the other cheek' YHWH would have let it go and given them more fruit. It is not until much later that any mention of father's sins visited on the sons comes up, and Paul is the one who cements the whole original sin makes us all sinners deal in Romans.

  Ravyn
• 

  logansrun

  Double edge,

  Don't take this the wrong way, but you didn't tell me a damn thing I didn't know already. I'm well aware of the theological reasoning behind the ransom. I simply cannot understand how people could possibly say the ransom was this "unbelievable" gift and the absolutely most dispicable crime in all history. The entire belief is shot through with contradictions and has been overblown beyond belief.

  Bradley
• 

  anti-absolutism

  Yeah, not to disrespect the good advice found in the Bible, (although I find some of the Old Testament's deeds done in God's name horriffic...Jericho, 185,000 Assyrians killed, etc.) but that is one thing I have always wondered about. Why it was such a great deed, when his reward from his father was guaranteed.

  What do current Christians who are ex-JW's think.... is this just a JW problem?
• 

  logansrun

  Another thing: I've heard it said by JWs and other Christians that the momentary pain Jesus suffered was itself a wrenching, painful nightmare for his father, Jah. Now, Jesus went through less than a day of suffering if we count from the moment he was betrayed in Gethsemane. If we take the notion that "a day is to God as a thousand years" (often used to explain why God is so slow in allowing suffering), well then one literal day is absolutely nothing to him -- a blink of an eye. Sorry, I just don't see how this suffering was so great on his part -- or his son's for that matter (who knew he would be ressurected).

  B
• 

  Francois

  Ransom Schmansom, as I have said before. J.C. did NOT pay any "ranson" for mankind. The Master did NOT die for me nor for my sins.

  The atonement doctrine is a perversion, an invention of man.

  The ransom sacrifice a complete misunderstanding of the life and death of The Master and of who He is.

  IMHO.

  If you are a believer in the atonement doctrine and/or the ransom sacrifice (or even of you're not), please read the following and then tell me why I'm wrong.

  The atonement doctrine imagines that the righteousness of God is irreconcilable with the selfless love of God, it presupposes absence of unity in the nature of Deity - and led men, priests, directly to the elaboration of the atonement doctrine, which is a philosophic assault upon both the unity and the free-willness of God. That is to say that the Love & Mercy of God is irreconcilable with the Justice of God and that in order to comport the two conflicting characteristics (of a perfect God no less) there must be a sacrifice of a perfect human being: an event exterior to God must take place so that within the divine nature things can be put right between He and his children on this planet.

  This is an obscene travesty upon the infinite, perfect character of God, this teaching that his fatherly heart in all its austere coldness and hardness was so untouched by the misfortunes and sorrows of his creatures on this planet, that his tender mercies were not forthcoming until he saw his blameless Son bleeding and dying upon the cross of Calvary! This teaching is hardly worthy of Jehovah'sWitnesses, much less those of us who are intelligent enough, and who can think clearly enough to, see the obscenity of it.

  Someone prove me wrong? Logansrun what say you? How does this feel to you? Does it speak to your spirit? DoubleEdge, you want to divorce yourself from superficiality and do some serious thinking on a highly philosophical level? Tell me about this, then?

  Edited by - francois on 12 February 2003 19:22:23
• 

  logansrun

  Francois,

  I agree with most everything in your post, though you confuse me. I assume you believe in the Bible and the Christian God from other posts I've read by you. How can you take the position you give when the Bible is pretty damn clear that Jesus came to earth to die horribly and pay a ransom in the form of his blood to his Father/God Jehovah for the sins of all humanity. (Okay, I don't have a Bible handy, but there are a multitude of scriptures that support this) How do you reconcile what the Bible says with your viewpoint? The entire thrust of the NT is on Jesus sacrifice. What don't I get or what aren't you saying?

  Confused,

  Bradley
• 

  Sargon

  "He who knoweth not confusion, knoweth not God; for God is confusion>" 1sargon4:8