What do you think of the ransom as proof of Jehovah's love? (page 4)

EverApostate

Killing some innocent man for the crime of another is immoral , illegal and insane.

Hebrews 9:27 says that "it is appointed unto man once to die and then judgment". According to scripture, those that reject Jesus' vicarious punishment on their behalf, will be judged based upon their own works, not someone else's.

Rev. 20: 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God ... And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books.

People have the right, which is rooted in their God-given Free Will to use their life any way they choose. Jesus was no different, he was not murdered:

No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself - John 10: 18

Finkelstein

You know some knowingly lying corrupt men who propagated false doctrines to promote and sell their published literature might very well behind having a personal savior for their own inherent sins.

Can you think of any men or people like that ?

Incognito

Wouldn't the true value of sacrifice be from the permanent loss of a valuable item or person?

While the bible accounts indicate Jesus experienced a torturous death that no man should be forced to endure, as mentioned, the value of any sacrifice he represented was not a result of torture but the value was from his death. Any value obtained from his torture was only to show why he was being put to death. Dying from being struck by an oxcart or other accident would not illustrate his purpose.

As implied in some of the earlier comments, the value of God sacrificing his son was diminished by the fact that God planned to resurrect Jesus after he died as a man. While it would have been painful for God to watch his favoured son treated in the manner he was, there was no true sacrifice by either God or Jesus as neither lost anything permanently.

caves

This question is worded awkwardly. Its like when I try to answer I'm almost forced to have to use the jw version of things to answer. Almost.

So I'll say this. Jesus, if according to jws teachings and to be fair other religions, actually lived and was a ransom as proof of jehovahs love would prove to me that they were both wussy's. Jesus lasted to 33 1/2 years old? Please! Let him actually live long enough to start to age on into his 60s and beyond and I wonder how resilient he would have been. I guess we will never know.

And personally I would never ask my son, my only son at that, to die to prove ANYTHING that were due to my own stupid screw ups. Aka, I mean after a 1000 or so years, that's like 12 or so generations living to 80, I would have simply made satan disappear as the point would have no doubt been proven, by even the most idiotic of thinking.

Also, off topic, yet overlapping. What about when during the 1000 yr reign people grow to perfection (that whole sentence made me want to gag). Then satan is let loose and those that follow him would be in the numbers as 'the grains of sand'. Who's going to be the ransom for those new 'sins' then? Is each individual going to be their own private 'ransom' that is rejected? Idiocy.

All that work to make the earth a paradise only to have the same crap play out? Again? !

Its just one big loop of bloody carnage. I cannot oblige.

Anders Andersen

As far as I can read from the Bible, Christians are expected to be forgiving, because that's loving. If they would make people jump through hoops before they would forgive them, or if they would demand retribution or repayment, that would not be ok behavior. Being forgiving without hesitation is seen as a virtue. The whole ransom idea makes it appear to me God isn't really forgiving in the way he expects his worshippers to be forgiving? He demands violent repayment from us for something that we didn't even cause. He is unable of refuses to amend his own rules and let love trump legalism. Such a god seems inferior to humans in this regard.

And according to the Bible, death is the proper punishment for being a sinner. That means that after a person died, God could simply resurrect that person as (another) gift of life. After all, the dead have already paid their dues. They are no more in debt than they were before they were born. God wouldn't need really need a ransom to do gift them life again, right?

Here's an interesting scenario that just popped into my mind: what if God would resurrect everyone who died, as a perfect human? No ransom would be needed, nor any kind of Armageddon. Those of the resurrected who would sin on purpose could simply be executed (like, according to JW theology, they will in Paradise).

After a few generations only perfect, God loving people would remain.

I don't see how something that wasn't really that costly to God (except for a bruise on his ego), could be avoided by choosing a more reasonable strategy, and shows an inferior way of 'forgiving' can be called 'the greatest gift'.

(Disclaimer: I answered this with JW theology in mind)

AlainAlam

cofty, in order to satisfy Bible requirements, blood would have to be shed and he would have to be hung on a tree. But these are not requirements of "righteousness", if you understand what I mean. Jehovah could omitted any mention of trees, and Jesus could die painlessly, and still be resurrected and appear before his god to intercede for us. So no real need for him to suffer to offer the ransom.

Sea Breeze, I understand your argument. You're stating Jesus should suffer all the crimes we have committed for the ransom to be valid. But:

1) I never read this thought in the Bible.

2) If "Let's take the common practice of abortion where an innocent baby has his body shredded into pieces. According to the Justice of God, I should have my own body treated the SAME way, since I am guilty of this crime", then Jesus should also be left to die of hunger because some people did, left to die of AIDS because some people did, and so on. That obviously was never the case.

3) The verses still say that the great proof of love was that he ~~"suffered"~~ "died" for our sins. So even if your argument is correct, these verses aren't.

AlainAlam

Incognito, thanks for your input. I appreciate the added value you brought when you mentioned his suffering served to show why he was dying.

caves I understand, thanks for your input. I agree with the basic thought. It doesn't make sense. And sorry for the wording :)

AlainAlam

Anders, I understand what you're saying. I don't believe in the Bible, but if I did, I would argue as follows:

There's a difference between my forgiving you and Jehovah forgiving you. They're the same word but they don't mean the same thing. When I forgive you, first of all, it implies that you made a mistake against me. And second of all, it implies that I don't bear a grudge against you because of what you did against me. When God forgives you, it has a whole different meaning. First, he holds you accountable to standards of righteousness - it's not just about you hurting him. Second, his "forgiving you" means viewing you as a righteous person, recognizing your status as blameless.
The difference between these two is illustrated by what happened when Jesus "forgave" people's sins, the Pharisees went all crazy, "what authority does he have to forgive sins?!" Obviously they knew that anyone could forgive anyone for offenses committed against them. But Jesus was forgiving in the larger sense, and that was tantamount to blasphemy in their eyes.

When we keep in mind this second, larger sense, we can better understand why the Bible mentions the needs for a ransom. Again, I'm not saying I believe it :)

Anony Mous

What I've always struggled with is this: If death is only temporary, as Jesus demonstrated and we'll all be resurrected anyway (or you go to heaven after death), why are we emotionally wrecked if a loved one dies?

Sure the temporary loss of anyone can be painful, but our natural reactions (the animal brain) seems to indicate we are wired to understand that death is permanent even if we tell ourselves (through religion or other ways) that the change is temporary.

Simple test: if you have a small child, someone they love leaves them after a few hours of play, they can be sad or even devastated. If you explain they'll be back, the child often becomes happy again awaiting when they come back. When someone dies, you can tell them about heaven or paradise, the child has the same reaction. When you go to an open casket funeral or bring children to the burial however, those same children (I've seen it in JW-land, I've seen it with Presbyterians and Catholics), the child intuitively seems to know that they won't be back, they can repeat to you the 'fact' they're in heaven alive or that they'll come back in paradise, but at no point do those children believe it. Children that don't see the burial or open casket, will often continue being happy until a few weeks later they realize it's all been a lie and then fall deeper into a depressed state.

I've gone through the same emotional roller coaster as a child, we had a lot of death during my formative years, we had an elderly person in the Kingdom Hall that gave all the kids candy every meeting, we were told about paradise, we treated the funeral as a regular meeting but then later it dawned on us, a few meetings later, that person wasn't going to come back and that paradise is not 'the current life' and ever since I've struggled with "why". If paradise isn't going to be any time soon, sure Jehovah has some other way of resurrecting or communicating with that person.

Funny anecdote: my wife's grandmother recently died, we went to the service with open casket. A 7 year old nephew in front of us: Dad, I thought you said grandma was in heaven. Whisper: Yes, she is. Nephew: She's right there!

What do you think of the ransom as proof of Jehovah's love?

Share this