PDA

View Full Version : Please Help Mosaic Law & Eternal Life



LookingUp
Feb 10th 2011, 02:02 AM
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?

keck553
Feb 10th 2011, 03:52 AM
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?

The more I think about your question, the more I have trouble answering it.

dagar
Feb 10th 2011, 06:29 AM
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?In order to have a nation through which Christ would come through in the flesh (Rom 9:4-5), there needed to be law. No law/no nation. Also, man had become exceedingly sinful and he naturally turns to religion (law) for 'righteousness'. The Law of God/conscience testifies against righteousness through religion because all fail to fulfill it. There must be another way.

Fenris
Feb 10th 2011, 03:04 PM
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?

Who said that was the law's intent?

LookingUp
Feb 10th 2011, 05:47 PM
Who said that was the law's intent?Many Christians believe that the main reason Christ came was to live out the Mosaic Law in perfect, flawless obedience (i.e. consistently upright heart and the actions to go with it) so that he could redeem mankind from death (raise man from the dead at the end of this age and and give him eternal life). I want to know where this idea comes from in Scripture.

Theoretically, IF the reason Jesus has authority to redeem mankind is related to this idea that death could not hold him since he lived a perfectly moral and just life, couldn’t God have sent Jesus into the world long before the implementation of the Mosaic Law?

Fenris
Feb 10th 2011, 06:00 PM
Many Christians believe that the main reason Christ came was to live out the Mosaic Law in perfect, flawless obedience (i.e. consistently upright heart and the actions to go with it) so that he could redeem mankind from death (raise man from the dead at the end of this age and and give him eternal life). Ah. Well I suppose if that is one's perspective then it follows from there.

LookingUp
Feb 10th 2011, 06:09 PM
Ah. Well I suppose if that is one's perspective then it follows from there.How does it follow from there? A man didn't need the Mosaic Law to know how to live a perfectly moral life.

Fenris
Feb 10th 2011, 06:17 PM
How does it follow from there? A man didn't need the Mosaic Law to know how to live a perfectly moral life.

If you start with the premise that Jesus came to "fulfill" the law, where does that lead?

LookingUp
Feb 10th 2011, 06:30 PM
If you start with the premise that Jesus came to "fulfill" the law, where does that lead?There’s a lot of controversy around the one scripture that says Jesus came to fulfill the “law and prophets”. If we can’t even be united on what that means, how can we say that this “fulfillment” has anything to do with redeeming mankind?

Again, if the whole reason Jesus is able to redeem mankind is because he conquered death due to living a perfect life, why couldn’t this have been done long before the implementation of the Mosaic Covenant? How did the Mosaic Covenant advance this goal at all?

Fenris
Feb 10th 2011, 06:37 PM
Again, if the whole reason Jesus is able to redeem mankind is because he conquered death due to living a perfect life, why couldn’t this have been done long before the implementation of the Mosaic Covenant? How did the Mosaic Covenant advance this goal at all?

Don't know. I don't think the law needs to be "fulfilled". I think it needs to be followed. But I'm the token Jewish guy. :)

LookingUp
Feb 10th 2011, 07:00 PM
Don't know. I don't think the law needs to be "fulfilled". I think it needs to be followed.Well, I think that’s what a lot of Christians mean when they say Jesus “fulfilled” the law. They mean he followed it perfectly without flaw. Although I believe this is true, I’m not so sure that’s what Jesus meant when he said he came to “fulfill” the law and the prophets. I think it’s more along the lines that he came to bring forth its fullness.


But I'm the token Jewish guy. :)Yeah, it's nice to have you here. Can't you get some Jewish friends to join this board? It’d be fantastic to get some more “Jewish” input.

Fenris
Feb 10th 2011, 07:09 PM
Well, I think that’s what a lot of Christians mean when they say Jesus “fulfilled” the law. They mean he followed it perfectly without flaw. Although I believe this is true, I’m not so sure that’s what Jesus meant when he said he came to “fulfill” the law and the prophets. I think it’s more along the lines that he came to bring forth its fullness.What does that mean, bring it to "fullness"?


Yeah, it's nice to have you here. Can't you get some Jewish friends to join this board? It’d be fantastic to get some more “Jewish” input.I'm considered rather...eccentric... for being here. :lol:

RollTide21
Feb 10th 2011, 08:04 PM
Well, I think that’s what a lot of Christians mean when they say Jesus “fulfilled” the law. They mean he followed it perfectly without flaw. Although I believe this is true, I’m not so sure that’s what Jesus meant when he said he came to “fulfill” the law and the prophets. I think it’s more along the lines that he came to bring forth its fullness.

Yeah, it's nice to have you here. Can't you get some Jewish friends to join this board? It’d be fantastic to get some more “Jewish” input.I always took Jesus fulfilling the Law to mean that His Death and Resurrection offered the righteousness that God's idea of perfect adherence to the Law would provide. I never understood it to mean that He adhered perfectly to the Law. He obviously didn't, seeing His various run-ins with the Pharisees over not strictly adhering to the Letter of the Law.

Butch5
Feb 10th 2011, 08:21 PM
Well, I think that’s what a lot of Christians mean when they say Jesus “fulfilled” the law. They mean he followed it perfectly without flaw. Although I believe this is true, I’m not so sure that’s what Jesus meant when he said he came to “fulfill” the law and the prophets. I think it’s more along the lines that he came to bring forth its fullness.


Hi Julie,

Notice Jesus said, the Law and prophets. I don't bellieve He is saying He lived without sin (although He did). I believe when He says He came to fulfill the Law and the prophers He means He came to fulfill what was written about Him in the law (OT books not Mosaic Law) and the prophets.

Butch5
Feb 10th 2011, 08:25 PM
Many Christians believe that the main reason Christ came was to live out the Mosaic Law in perfect, flawless obedience (i.e. consistently upright heart and the actions to go with it) so that he could redeem mankind from death (raise man from the dead at the end of this age and and give him eternal life). I want to know where this idea comes from in Scripture.

Theoretically, IF the reason Jesus has authority to redeem mankind is related to this idea that death could not hold him since he lived a perfectly moral and just life, couldn’t God have sent Jesus into the world long before the implementation of the Mosaic Law?

The Law was given as a method of separating the jewish people from the rest of the world. Christ redeemed mankind by being the ransom payment himself, thus buying back mankind from Satan.

Fenris
Feb 10th 2011, 08:33 PM
The Law was given as a method of separating the jewish people from the rest of the world.
Hmm interesting. What would you make of Numbers 23:9 Lo, it is a people that dwell alone, And shall not be reckoned among the nations. Same concept?

keck553
Feb 10th 2011, 08:48 PM
Paul teaches the Law is good and the Law is holy. What is so difficult about understanding this simple statement? Application, well that's something everyone will have to work out for themselves, unless someone wants to become legaistic of course.

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 12:13 AM
What does that mean, bring it to "fullness"?
I'm considered rather...eccentric... for being here. :lol:When I say “bring forth its fullness,” I mean bring forth its heartfelt intent. As we see with the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus digs more deeply into the Torah to bring forth its heartfelt intent. He teaches and demonstrates how to transcend the legal interpretation of the commandments within the law and invites us to join him to live at this level.

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 12:17 AM
I always took Jesus fulfilling the Law to mean that His Death and Resurrection offered the righteousness that God's idea of perfect adherence to the Law would provide. I never understood it to mean that He adhered perfectly to the Law. He obviously didn't, seeing His various run-ins with the Pharisees over not strictly adhering to the Letter of the Law.No one could possibly live righteously before the law was given?

Again, if the whole reason Jesus is able to redeem mankind is because he conquered death due to living a perfect life, why couldn’t this have been done long before the implementation of the Mosaic Covenant? How did the Mosaic Covenant advance this goal at all?

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 12:23 AM
The Law was given as a method of separating the jewish people from the rest of the world. Christ redeemed mankind by being the ransom payment himself, thus buying back mankind from Satan.I’m glad you responded to this thread, because you and I have a similar idea of atonement. Now, think about this for a minute and maybe you can help me see something I’m forgetting or simply not seeing. I agree with both of your statements, but what does one have to do with the other? Christ could have redeemed mankind by being the ransom payment himself buying back mankind from Satan long before the implementation of the Mosaic Law. So, how does the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?

Butch5
Feb 11th 2011, 01:05 AM
Hmm interesting. What would you make of Numbers 23:9 Lo, it is a people that dwell alone, And shall not be reckoned among the nations. Same concept?

I think so. I believe that is one reasons for the cleansing rituals, such as touching a dead body,

Butch5
Feb 11th 2011, 01:19 AM
I’m glad you responded to this thread, because you and I have a similar idea of atonement. Now, think about this for a minute and maybe you can help me see something I’m forgetting or simply not seeing. I agree with both of your statements, but what does one have to do with the other? Christ could have redeemed mankind by being the ransom payment himself buying back mankind from Satan long before the implementation of the Mosaic Law. So, how does the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?

Hi Julie,

Yes, Christ could have redeemed man at anytime if it was simply the ransom. However, Paul said that when the fullness of the time had come, God sent His Son. He also said that the law was given until the Seed should come. What the Law did was separate the Jewish people from the rest of the world. The Law in and of it self did not lead to eternal life it simply was schoolmaster to lead the Jewish people to Christ as Paul said. The Law pointed to Christ. Many of the feasts likewise pointed to Christ. Paul said that Christ was our passover. At the feast of first fruits the Jewish people would bring a small offering from the the harvest that would soon take place. Christ is also a first fruit, He is the first to be resurrected from the dead. He is that initial offering that precedes the harvest that will take place. Remember in the Jewish law the scape goat? One goat bore the sins of the people and the other goat went free. Christ bore the sins of the people and the people were set free. He died in the place of mankind and mankind was set free. There are so many things like this in the Scriptures it is amazing.

dagar
Feb 11th 2011, 01:28 AM
Christ could have redeemed mankind by being the ransom payment himself buying back mankind from Satan long before the implementation of the Mosaic Law.What a small population in eternity that would be.
In order for Christ to be "the ransom payment himself buying back mankind from Satan" Satan would have to own mankind. If Satan owned mankind who was God to think He could intervene?

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 02:20 AM
Hi Julie,

Yes, Christ could have redeemed man at anytime if it was simply the ransom. However, Paul said that when the fullness of the time had come, God sent His Son. He also said that the law was given until the Seed should come. What the Law did was separate the Jewish people from the rest of the world. The Law in and of it self did not lead to eternal life it simply was schoolmaster to lead the Jewish people to Christ as Paul said. The Law pointed to Christ. Many of the feasts likewise pointed to Christ. Paul said that Christ was our passover. At the feast of first fruits the Jewish people would bring a small offering from the the harvest that would soon take place. Christ is also a first fruit, He is the first to be resurrected from the dead. He is that initial offering that precedes the harvest that will take place. Remember in the Jewish law the scape goat? One goat bore the sins of hate people and the other goat went free. Christ bore the sins of the people and the people were set free. He died in the place of mankind and mankind was set free. There are so many things like this in the Scriptures it is amazing.Thanks Butch. I think I’ve been trying to find something more…direct, I guess. But I do see what you mean. Even though Christ could have theoretically come at any time, God chose to write His story in this way. By doing so, He has intentionally placed shadows of Christ all over the Torah.

Do you believe in a literal millennial kingdom?

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 02:28 AM
What a small population in eternity that would be.
In order for Christ to be "the ransom payment himself buying back mankind from Satan" Satan would have to own mankind. If Satan owned mankind who was God to think He could intervene?I'm not sure what you're saying.

dagar
Feb 11th 2011, 03:12 AM
I'm not sure what you're saying.That the two points you made are not correct or possible.

dagar
Feb 11th 2011, 03:34 AM
So, how does the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?
Thanks Butch. I think I’ve been trying to find something more…direct, I guess.In post #3 I said
In order to have a nation through which Christ would come through in the flesh (Rom 9:4-5), there needed to be law. No law/no nation. Also, man had become exceedingly sinful and he naturally turns to religion (law) for 'righteousness'. The Law of God/conscience testifies against righteousness through religion because all fail to fulfill it. There must be another way.Is that not direct? You don't understand what I said? You don't agree? :)

How did man 'worship God' in those days and throughout history?
What did Israel do when Moses went into the mountain and came down with the ten commandments?
What would they have done if God did not give them a religion to follow?
"sinful man naturally turns to religion (law) for 'righteousness'"
So God gave them a religion to follow that shadowed Christ for until Christ.
What else would they have done for 'religion' for 1500 years?
When Gentiles did come in they said 'we will not trouble and burden you with the law, only these necessary things'.

Butch5
Feb 11th 2011, 01:49 PM
What a small population in eternity that would be.
In order for Christ to be "the ransom payment himself buying back mankind from Satan" Satan would have to own mankind. If Satan owned mankind who was God to think He could intervene?

The understanding is that God owned mankind, He created them. Adam and Eve, however, chose to obey Satan in the garden rather than God, thereby falling under Satan's' control. God being all powerful could easily have destroyed Satan and taken mankind back. However, God, being the gentleman, did not force man to obey Him. Instead, He paid the ransom to by back what was originally His. Once ransomed and again in His ownership, God now gives man the choice of whom he will serve.

RollTide21
Feb 11th 2011, 03:31 PM
No one could possibly live righteously before the law was given?

Again, if the whole reason Jesus is able to redeem mankind is because he conquered death due to living a perfect life, why couldn’t this have been done long before the implementation of the Mosaic Covenant? How did the Mosaic Covenant advance this goal at all?Not sure where your argument is with my post. Sure they could. See Abraham. He was before the implementation of the Mosaic Law. My whole point was that Jesus didn't live a sinless life because he lived perfectly according to the written Law. (Nor did Abraham...or Noah...or David...or any number of "righteous" patriarchs) He lived a sinless life and fulfilled the law because He lived in perfect accordance with God's intention of the Law. He loved God and He loved His fellow man. His perfect righteousness followed.

As to your original question (which I didn't answer in my first post), I don't think Jesus conquered death DUE to living a perfect life. I think Jesus conquered death due to the fact that He was Resurrected from the Dead. I think He conquered sin by living a perfect life. The Mosaic Covenant was necessary to reveal what is sin.

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 06:18 PM
The understanding is that God owned mankind, He created them. Adam and Eve, however, chose to obey Satan in the garden rather than God, thereby falling under Satan's' control. God being all powerful could easily have destroyed Satan and taken mankind back. However, God, being the gentleman, did not force man to obey Him. Instead, He paid the ransom to by back what was originally His. Once ransomed and again in His ownership, God now gives man the choice of whom he will serve.I agree. A God who uses His love rather than His power.

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 06:36 PM
Not sure where your argument is with my post. Sure they could. See Abraham. He was before the implementation of the Mosaic Law. My whole point was that Jesus didn't live a sinless life because he lived perfectly according to the written Law. (Nor did Abraham...or Noah...or David...or any number of "righteous" patriarchs) He lived a sinless life and fulfilled the law because He lived in perfect accordance with God's intention of the Law. He loved God and He loved His fellow man. His perfect righteousness followed.I’m sorry, RollTide21, I did misunderstand you. I agree with what you’ve written here.


As to your original question (which I didn't answer in my first post), I don't think Jesus conquered death DUE to living a perfect life. I think Jesus conquered death due to the fact that He was Resurrected from the Dead. I think He conquered sin by living a perfect life. The Mosaic Covenant was necessary to reveal what is sin.So, would you say that since death is the wages of sin, death couldn’t hold him?

It seems that by overcoming the very thing that leads to death, he conquered death. Scripture speaks of death as an entity seeking victory. “I looked, and behold, an ashen horse, and he who sat on it had the name Death; and Hades was following with him” (Rev. 6:8).

“O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?”

The sting of sin is the poison leading to death. By disabling death’s weapon, sin, death is conquered.

LookingUp
Feb 11th 2011, 10:01 PM
In post #3 I saidIs that not direct? You don't understand what I said? You don't agree? :)

How did man 'worship God' in those days and throughout history?
What did Israel do when Moses went into the mountain and came down with the ten commandments?
What would they have done if God did not give them a religion to follow?
"sinful man naturally turns to religion (law) for 'righteousness'"
So God gave them a religion to follow that shadowed Christ for until Christ.
What else would they have done for 'religion' for 1500 years?
When Gentiles did come in they said 'we will not trouble and burden you with the law, only these necessary things'.It's not that I didn't agree, dagar, I don't think I totally understood what you were saying. I'm not sure I understand everything you're trying to say now. And when I said "more direct" I didn't mean "more to the point," I meant that I was trying to find more of an intimate connection between eternal life and the Law. But I don't think there is one (at least, not one that I was thinking there could have been).

BroRog
Feb 12th 2011, 12:18 AM
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?The Mosaic Law presented Israel, and through them to us, the context into which the idea of salvation and redemption makes sense. A moral imperative presents us with a challenge. It's easy for us to travel through life, thinking that we would have no problem living according to God's moral standard. But until we actually attempt it, we never realize how far short of God's moral vision we are.



Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "You shall not covet." But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. Romans 7:7-8

We can imagine a person like Paul saying to himself, "I can stop coveting any time I want." And God would say, "Okay, give it a try." In the face of such a challenge, Paul said, he found himself coveting all over the place. It isn't as if his coveting increased; it didn't increase. But his awareness of it grew as he attempted to avoid it. It isn't until we face this challenge that we go looking for a way to solve our problem.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Feb 12th 2011, 12:22 AM
It's not that I didn't agree, dagar, I don't think I totally understood what you were saying. I'm not sure I understand everything you're trying to say now. And when I said "more direct" I didn't mean "more to the point," I meant that I was trying to find more of an intimate connection between eternal life and the Law. But I don't think there is one (at least, not one that I was thinking there could have been).

There is.........

BroRog
Feb 12th 2011, 12:28 AM
The Law was given as a method of separating the jewish people from the rest of the world. Christ redeemed mankind by being the ransom payment himself, thus buying back mankind from Satan.I don't see any Biblical evidence that we needed to be bought back from Satan, or that Satan owned us, or that the ransom was due to a kidnapping of some kind or any such theory.

LookingUp
Feb 12th 2011, 12:30 AM
I don't see any Biblical evidence that we needed to be bought back from Satan, or that Satan owned us, or that the ransom was due to a kidnapping of some kind or any such theory.What is your atonement theory? You still "owe" me one, you know. :)

LookingUp
Feb 12th 2011, 12:31 AM
There is.........I'm listening, but keep it simple. :P

BroRog
Feb 12th 2011, 01:23 AM
What is your atonement theory? You still "owe" me one, you know. :)It goes something like this. A little girl was running through the house, when she knocked over a very valuable vase and broke it to pieces. Her mother was very angry and the daughter felt very guilty. The daughter goes out into the yard, picks some fresh daisys, and offers them to her mother. Her mother is deeply touched and forgives her daughter.

The daisys were a propitiatory offering, and her gesture was atonement.

LookingUp
Feb 12th 2011, 02:17 AM
It goes something like this. A little girl was running through the house, when she knocked over a very valuable vase and broke it to pieces. Her mother was very angry and the daughter felt very guilty. The daughter goes out into the yard, picks some fresh daisys, and offers them to her mother. Her mother is deeply touched and forgives her daughter.

The daisys were a propitiatory offering, and her gesture was atonement.Does that work for your wife? It’s kinda funny, although I really don’t “need” the flowers, the “sorry” doesn’t quite mean the same without them.

So Jesus is the daisies and his gesture is the atonement? I’m not sure how this works for us as him in our place. We didn’t pick anything and we didn’t make any gesture. Also, how does all this tie in with all the scripture that indicates that we are in bondage to sin and Satan?

dagar
Feb 12th 2011, 03:07 AM
The understanding is that God owned mankind, He created them. Adam and Eve, however, chose to obey Satan in the garden rather than God, thereby falling under Satan's' control. God being all powerful could easily have destroyed Satan and taken mankind back. However, God, being the gentleman, did not force man to obey Him. Instead, He paid the ransom to by back what was originally His. Once ransomed and again in His ownership, God now gives man the choice of whom he will serve.So now it's control and not owned? Then it's owned again. No one buys again, something they already own. Then, instead of 'controlled' you revert to owned -"what was originally His"-, as if man was no longer God's but Satan's. Which is it? How would Satan gain either ownership or control of mankind because someone sinned? Where's scripture for this concept? I know 'slave to sin', but sin is not a thing and sin is not Satans, he did not create sin. No one did. God created the possibility and gave creatures choice. Again, if Satan owned mankind "who was God to think He could intervene"? Since when did man not have a choice pre-cross? No choice no sin. God did not pay Satan anything.

dagar
Feb 12th 2011, 03:12 AM
I agree. A God who uses His love rather than His power.Ultimately it was because of His righteousness that death could not hold him. Certainly love is included in righteousness, and love was a motivation for becoming a man, but once a man if he was not righteous he would not have loved as such. Righteousness made the man Christ Jesus Judge.

Butch5
Feb 12th 2011, 05:00 PM
I don't see any Biblical evidence that we needed to be bought back from Satan, or that Satan owned us, or that the ransom was due to a kidnapping of some kind or any such theory.

Then you may want to look harder.


Acts 26:12-18 ( KJV )
Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,
At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.
And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.


Colossians 1:12-13 ( KJV )
Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.


1 John 3:8 ( KJV )
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

There really is no point in going here, I think we both know where this is Headed. In the end this will be a challenge of the Ante-Nicene writers correct??? If that is the case, I'm not interested in defending them or their writings against modern day skeptics or those who think they know more. The writings are there and the evidence is there. Those who are seeking truth can find, those who aren't will find what they want to find.

Butch5
Feb 12th 2011, 05:04 PM
So now it's control and not owned? Then it's owned again. No one buys again, something they already own. Then, instead of 'controlled' you revert to owned -"what was originally His"-, as if man was no longer God's but Satan's. Which is it? How would Satan gain either ownership or control of mankind because someone sinned? Where's scripture for this concept? I know 'slave to sin', but sin is not a thing and sin is not Satans, he did not create sin. No one did. God created the possibility and gave creatures choice. Again, if Satan owned mankind "who was God to think He could intervene"? Since when did man not have a choice pre-cross? No choice no sin. God did not pay Satan anything.

My friend,

Are you familiar with the Classic view?

Also see the Scripture passages in the post above to BroRog, it should be clear that man was uner Satan's power, unless of course you don't accept Jesus' words.

BroRog
Feb 12th 2011, 05:05 PM
Does that work for your wife? It’s kinda funny, although I really don’t “need” the flowers, the “sorry” doesn’t quite mean the same without them.The analogy I gave also helps bring out the difference between actual propitiation and the satisfaction theories of the atonement, which are based on a forensic, ajudication model. When the daughter brings her daisies, appealing to her mother for forgiveness, her appeal is based on a good will gesture. Had she been appealing to her mother according to some kind of forensic model, she would have offered her mother a new vase of the same value or the cash equivalent.


So Jesus is the daisies and his gesture is the atonement? I’m not sure how this works for us as him in our place. We didn’t pick anything and we didn’t make any gesture. Also, how does all this tie in with all the scripture that indicates that we are in bondage to sin and Satan?The author of Hebrews says that Jesus is the mediator that makes the appeal for mercy on our behalf.

To carry the analogy further along, we imagine that the daughter is unable to talk to her mother since she has gone into the bedroom and does not want to be disturbed. For this reason, the daughter asks her brother to take mother the flowers. "Please take these flowers to mother on my behalf," she says to brother. Her brother is allowed to enter the bedroom because mother is not angry with brother. And once brother enters the bedroom on behalf of sister, asking mother for forgiveness and reconciliation, mother's anger melts away.

Jesus is like brother, allowed to enter heaven and speak to God, since God is not angry with Jesus. Jesus goes before God to intercede on behalf of those whom Jesus wants in his kingdom. He might say for example, "Father, I want BroRog to be in my kingdom. Will you accept him and have mercy on him and forgive his sins?" My sinful behavior had caused God and me to remain estranged with each other, and therefore I couldn't enter heaven myself to make the appeal myself due to the fact that God was angry with me. But since I believe that Jesus is indeed the messiah sent from God, and that he is indeed the one who can make such an appeal on my behalf, I trust Jesus to make that appeal for me.

BroRog
Feb 12th 2011, 05:18 PM
Then you may want to look harder.You may want to pick passages that actually make the point. The issue is whether Satan was paid a ransom to release mankind. Whether you want to believe that Satan is culpable for putting mankind in chains of darkness or whether mankind submitted to darkness voluntarily to follow wickedness and pleasure wherever it may lead is debateable. But what is not debateable is the fact that Satan is not accepting compensation for the release of mankind from darkness, but the strong man has broken into his house. Jesus didn't pay Satan a ransom, he broke into his house and plundered his stuff.


There really is no point in going here, I think we both know where this is Headed. In the end this will be a challenge of the Ante-Nicene writers correct??? If that is the case, I'm not interested in defending them or their writings against modern day skeptics or those who think they know more. The writings are there and the evidence is there. Those who are seeking truth can find, those who aren't will find what they want to find.Dude, you need to hear yourself.

janitor
Feb 12th 2011, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by LookingUp
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?
The NT says the Law was implemented to show us that all have sinned.

"God’s law was given so that all people could see how sinful they were." Rom.5:20

The law teaches us that without the messiah, it is impossible to be saved.

"Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith." Gal.3:24

In this way, the law advances the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life and nothing in the OT disagrees with the NT's interpretation. But then, why would it, as Gods servants (the Jews) have plainly explained it for us.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2011, 11:34 PM
Many Christians believe that the main reason Christ came was to live out the Mosaic Law in perfect, flawless obedience (i.e. consistently upright heart and the actions to go with it) so that he could redeem mankind from death (raise man from the dead at the end of this age and and give him eternal life). I want to know where this idea comes from in Scripture.

Theoretically, IF the reason Jesus has authority to redeem mankind is related to this idea that death could not hold him since he lived a perfectly moral and just life, couldn’t God have sent Jesus into the world long before the implementation of the Mosaic Law?
It doesn't... been trying to tell folks that for a long time on here. :lol:

LookingUp
Feb 12th 2011, 11:47 PM
It doesn't... been trying to tell folks that for a long time on here. :lol:How would you describe the purpose of the Mosaic Law?

Butch5
Feb 12th 2011, 11:47 PM
You may want to pick passages that actually make the point. The issue is whether Satan was paid a ransom to release mankind. Whether you want to believe that Satan is culpable for putting mankind in chains of darkness or whether mankind submitted to darkness voluntarily to follow wickedness and pleasure wherever it may lead is debateable. But what is not debateable is the fact that Satan is not accepting compensation for the release of mankind from darkness, but the strong man has broken into his house. Jesus didn't pay Satan a ransom, he broke into his house and plundered his stuff.

A Christian contradicting Scripture, who'd a thought it.


Dude, you need to hear yourself.

Why Rog? The fact is, whether you want to accept it or not, your view is not the original. I don't really think it is necessary to spend time defending the evidence. I have finally and reluctantly accepted the conclusion that I came to sometime ago. That is, that many Christians simply don't want to know what the Scriptures really say. That is apparent when we look at the evidence that gets ignored, the Scriptures that get twisted or swept under the rug, or the diverting of conversations to avoid dealing with the issue at hand. This became more than abundantly clear when Project Peter repeatedly posted passage, after passage after, passage of Scripture that disagreed with the theology of many. What was done to those passages was obscene. The extremes Christians went to to deny the clear and obvious meaning of those passages was, in my opinion, for one claiming to be seeking the truth, shameful. It really shouldn't matter how much one likes or dislikes a doctrine, the Scriptures should be the final authority, but for many they are not, they simply post their favorite passages again those passages that they cannot reconcile.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2011, 11:56 PM
How would you describe the purpose of the Mosaic Law?
It was the Law for Israel to follow when they crossed over into the Promised Land. Moses spent 40 years in the Wilderness writing that out... much of it simply based on judgments that he made when stuff was brought to him to judge. Lot of folks think the children of Israel started following it while in the Wilderness but Moses didn't even finish it until his end. Had it been 50 years then I suspect it would have been more like 813 laws they would have had to follow as opposed to the 613.

Many of the precepts and ordinances were given to the children of Israel simply because they ticked God off... seems they couldn't even follow Ten for more than 40 days. Then they kept on over and over and over and over until they found God's reserve nerve. He gave them those... they couldn't follow all that stuff. It was no mystery to God that they failed in that regard.

Jesus didn't follow it as written either as the gospels clearly point out. It wasn't intended to be followed in such a way either... I know a lot of folks love quoting "line upon line and precept upon precept" and they say that as if it is and was a good thing. It wasn't. That was the problem with the children of Israel. It was line upon line and precept upon precept... even to the point of "show no mercy."

LookingUp
Feb 13th 2011, 12:36 AM
You may want to pick passages that actually make the point. The issue is whether Satan was paid a ransom to release mankind. Whether you want to believe that Satan is culpable for putting mankind in chains of darkness or whether mankind submitted to darkness voluntarily to follow wickedness and pleasure wherever it may lead is debateable. But what is not debateable is the fact that Satan is not accepting compensation for the release of mankind from darkness, but the strong man has broken into his house. Jesus didn't pay Satan a ransom, he broke into his house and plundered his stuff.Huh…I always thought of it differently than that. The picture I have in my head is that Satan attained mastery over Adam and Eve through deceit. As master, the only way he “owns” anyone is the sense of satisfaction he gets in knowing that death awaits the one who sins. If anyone “owns” anyone, it’s death. If “anyone” was paid a ransom, it’s death.

The strong man came to drive out the ruler of this world (Jn 12:31), destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8), and destroy the one who has the power of death in order to free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death (Heb 2:14-15). Jesus came to vanquish the thief. Notice that there are those alive who are held captive (“fear of death”) and those dead who are held captive by death itself. The strong man was stronger than the thief, but the strong man also became the sacrificial lamb who paid the ransom price to death.

LookingUp
Feb 13th 2011, 12:38 AM
It was the Law for Israel to follow when they crossed over into the Promised Land. Moses spent 40 years in the Wilderness writing that out... much of it simply based on judgments that he made when stuff was brought to him to judge. Lot of folks think the children of Israel started following it while in the Wilderness but Moses didn't even finish it until his end. Had it been 50 years then I suspect it would have been more like 813 laws they would have had to follow as opposed to the 613.

Many of the precepts and ordinances were given to the children of Israel simply because they ticked God off... seems they couldn't even follow Ten for more than 40 days. Then they kept on over and over and over and over until they found God's reserve nerve. He gave them those... they couldn't follow all that stuff. It was no mystery to God that they failed in that regard.

Jesus didn't follow it as written either as the gospels clearly point out. It wasn't intended to be followed in such a way either... I know a lot of folks love quoting "line upon line and precept upon precept" and they say that as if it is and was a good thing. It wasn't. That was the problem with the children of Israel. It was line upon line and precept upon precept... even to the point of "show no mercy."Thanks for your input. I appreciate it.

dagar
Feb 13th 2011, 02:02 AM
My friend,

Are you familiar with the Classic view?Of course.


Also see the Scripture passages in the post above to BroRog, it should be clear that man was uner Satan's power, unless of course you don't accept Jesus' words.Yes, as scripture says and you quoted, Satan had the power of death. Got it. What does that have to do with your claim that until the cross man had no choice and was owned by Satan?

dagar
Feb 13th 2011, 02:19 AM
Why Rog? The fact is, whether you want to accept it or not, your view is not the original. I don't really think it is necessary to spend time defending the evidence. I have finally and reluctantly accepted the conclusion that I came to sometime ago. That is, that many Christians simply don't want to know what the Scriptures really say. That is apparent when we look at the evidence that gets ignored, the Scriptures that get twisted or swept under the rug, or the diverting of conversations to avoid dealing with the issue at hand. This became more than abundantly clear when Project Peter repeatedly post passage, after passage after, passage of Scripture that disagreed with the theology of many. What was done to those passages was obscene. The extremes Christians went to to deny the clear and obvious meaning of those passages was, in my opinion, for one claiming to be seeking the truth, shameful. It really shouldn't matter how much one likes or dislikes a doctrine, the Scriptures should be the final authority, but for many they are not, they simply post their favorite passages again those passages that they cannot reconcile.How'd you jump from the Ante Nicene fathers to Scripture? Look, if Satan owned us why the need to go to God for permission to effect Job? Why did Jesus say to Peter, Satan has desired to have you, if Satan owned Peter? Anyone that thinks this and that it is possible the devil could think Christ would remain dead needs to go way back and start over again with the obvious basics.

rejoice44
Feb 13th 2011, 04:08 AM
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?

How else would we understand how our redemption would take place if it were not for the law?

The penalty for Adam for disobedience was death, therefore all men were condemned to death. When God said to Adam you shall surely die, God was talking to all mankind, for there was no other man.

The law is righteousness; therefore in order for us to be made righteous we have to follow the law. What was God’s penalty for disobedience? For man (Adam) it was death.

The law teaches that even cursing your mother or father is worthy of death, how much more disobeying God?

Exodus 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
God tells us that we are condemned in Genesis when he condemned Adam, but God gave us the law that we might understand how we can be redeemed.

The law taught us that there is no satisfaction for the penalty of death.

Numbers 35:31 Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also teaches that a life for a life is required.

Exodus 21:23-25 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for
stripe.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also teaches that a lamb without blemish is required for offering and atonement.

Numbers 6:14 And he shall offer his offering unto the LORD, one he lamb of the first year without blemish for a burnt offering, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish for a sin offering, and one ram without blemish for peace offerings, (Lamb without blemish, or ram without blemish is found in some 36 verses in the law.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some might say that this was just to keep the one making the offering honest, for many would give to God the least valuable, but is one man less valuable than another, for even the priest had to be without blemish in order to come before God.

Leviticus 21:21 No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also taught that a ransom could be paid for the soul. While some may interpret this to say you can buy your soul, it clearly states that it is to stay a plague when they were numbered.

Exodus 30:12 When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Exodus 21:30 there is a ransom for a life only if the owner decides there is to be one, and then he decides the amount.

Exodus 21:30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Job says that man can be kept from the pit by a ransom.

Job 33:24 Then he is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Psalm 49:7 says that you can’t give to God a ransom to redeem a man.

Psalm 49:7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Psalm 49:15 says that God will do the redeeming.

Psalm 49:15 But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the conclusion? For the answer you have to examine the New Testament.

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Romans 9:31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

Israel could not come up to the measure of the law, they were found wanting. Because they could not keep the law, the law condemned them.

Romans 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And then consider the blemished lamb for atonement for the Jews.

1 Peter 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except the law said there was a ransom for a man’s life how would we know it?

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

1 Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except the law had said we were to be righteous, sanctified, and redeemed, how would we know it.

1Corinthians 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it were not for the New Testament, we would not know the purpose of the law.

1 Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

If it were not for the Jews implementing the law, we all would be without knowledge, and without hope. Surely they are a blessing to all mankind.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2011, 05:24 AM
How else would we understand how our redemption would take place if it were not for the law?

The penalty for Adam for disobedience was death, therefore all men were condemned to death. When God said to Adam you shall surely die, God was talking to all mankind, for there was no other man.

The law is righteousness; therefore in order for us to be made righteous we have to follow the law. What was God’s penalty for disobedience? For man (Adam) it was death.

The law teaches that even cursing your mother or father is worthy of death, how much more disobeying God?

Exodus 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
God tells us that we are condemned in Genesis when he condemned Adam, but God gave us the law that we might understand how we can be redeemed.

The law taught us that there is no satisfaction for the penalty of death.

Numbers 35:31 Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also teaches that a life for a life is required.

Exodus 21:23-25 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for
stripe.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also teaches that a lamb without blemish is required for offering and atonement.

Numbers 6:14 And he shall offer his offering unto the LORD, one he lamb of the first year without blemish for a burnt offering, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish for a sin offering, and one ram without blemish for peace offerings, (Lamb without blemish, or ram without blemish is found in some 36 verses in the law.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some might say that this was just to keep the one making the offering honest, for many would give to God the least valuable, but is one man less valuable than another, for even the priest had to be without blemish in order to come before God.

Leviticus 21:21 No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also taught that a ransom could be paid for the soul. While some may interpret this to say you can buy your soul, it clearly states that it is to stay a plague when they were numbered.

Exodus 30:12 When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Exodus 21:30 there is a ransom for a life only if the owner decides there is to be one, and then he decides the amount.

Exodus 21:30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Job says that man can be kept from the pit by a ransom.

Job 33:24 Then he is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Psalm 49:7 says that you can’t give to God a ransom to redeem a man.

Psalm 49:7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Psalm 49:15 says that God will do the redeeming.

Psalm 49:15 But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the conclusion? For the answer you have to examine the New Testament.

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Romans 9:31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

Israel could not come up to the measure of the law, they were found wanting. Because they could not keep the law, the law condemned them.

Romans 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And then consider the blemished lamb for atonement for the Jews.

1 Peter 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except the law said there was a ransom for a man’s life how would we know it?

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

1 Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except the law had said we were to be righteous, sanctified, and redeemed, how would we know it.

1Corinthians 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it were not for the New Testament, we would not know the purpose of the law.

1 Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

If it were not for the Jews implementing the law, we all would be without knowledge, and without hope. Surely they are a blessing to all mankind.

That's all nice and stuff... but the point he made about it not being in there is still not shown in what you said. Actually your whole thing falls apart with Adam and the Law... there was no Law of Moses in the garden. So you're going to have to try that again. ;)

rejoice44
Feb 13th 2011, 01:01 PM
That's all nice and stuff... but the point he made about it not being in there is still not shown in what you said. Actually your whole thing falls apart with Adam and the Law... there was no Law of Moses in the garden. So you're going to have to try that again. ;)

Sorry, but I do not understand when you say, "it not being in there is still not shown".

Of course there was no written law in Adam's day, but it was written in their hearts.

When we speak of the law it basically refers to loving the Lord with all your heart, mind, and soul, and your neighbor as yourself, which is embodied in the 10 commandments.

The law had manifold purposes, and not one single one. One reason was to burden Israel so that they would have to look up. God was very disappointed in their disobedience. Most of the laws, if not all of them pointed to their way of salvation, which is only found in the Messiah.

There would be no Israel if it were not for the fact that God needed a nation through which he could introduce the last Adam. God choose Abraham, and then Isaac, and then Jacob, and then David, most of the rest of Israel, but not all, came along for the ride, so to speak. The chosen ones are Israel, the un-chosen are not Israel. If Israel had not rejected hearing God on the Mount, perhaps their would have been no written law, but they would not hear.

The law was necessary, written, or unwritten, so that man would be without excuse in the day that he meets God at the judgment seat. No man will be justified by that law, for only the last Adam kept it, an only he is worthy of being our redeemer.

Butch5
Feb 13th 2011, 02:38 PM
Of course.

Yes, as scripture says and you quoted, Satan had the power of death. Got it. What does that have to do with your claim that until the cross man had no choice and was owned by Satan?

Where did I say man had no choice? I didn't, you assumed that. Man could choose whatever he wanted, however, being under the control of another that choice really doesn't mean much. The Scriptures I quoted also say that Paul was sent to turn the Gentiles from the power of Satan. If they were not under his power why exactly would they need to be turned from his power?

Butch5
Feb 13th 2011, 02:46 PM
How'd you jump from the Ante Nicene fathers to Scripture? Look, if Satan owned us why the need to go to God for permission to effect Job? Why did Jesus say to Peter, Satan has desired to have you, if Satan owned Peter? Anyone that thinks this and that it is possible the devil could think Christ would remain dead needs to go way back and start over again with the obvious basics.

First of all, the post was to BroRog, and goes well beyond this thread, which should have been obvious by the wording in the thread itself. Concerning your statement about going back to the beginning and starting over, maybe it's not I that needs to start over. It should be pretty clear from the Scriptures, Adam and Eve chose to listen Satan in the garden regarding the tree of life. Thus they fell into sin and under his power. Satan did not own them as we own a piece of property. He did, however, have control over them, which is clear from Jesus statement. That is if you accept the words of Jesus (Do you?).

The scriptures are clear that say Jesus was a ransom, to whom is a ransom paid?

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2011, 04:07 PM
Sorry, but I do not understand when you say, "it not being in there is still not shown".

Of course there was no written law in Adam's day, but it was written in their hearts.

When we speak of the law it basically refers to loving the Lord with all your heart, mind, and soul, and your neighbor as yourself, which is embodied in the 10 commandments.

The law had manifold purposes, and not one single one. One reason was to burden Israel so that they would have to look up. God was very disappointed in their disobedience. Most of the laws, if not all of them pointed to their way of salvation, which is only found in the Messiah.

There would be no Israel if it were not for the fact that God needed a nation through which he could introduce the last Adam. God choose Abraham, and then Isaac, and then Jacob, and then David, most of the rest of Israel, but not all, came along for the ride, so to speak. The chosen ones are Israel, the un-chosen are not Israel. If Israel had not rejected hearing God on the Mount, perhaps their would have been no written law, but they would not hear.

The law was necessary, written, or unwritten, so that man would be without excuse in the day that he meets God at the judgment seat. No man will be justified by that law, for only the last Adam kept it, an only he is worthy of being our redeemer.He's not speaking of what was written in their hearts. The thread is about the Law of Moses. Those laws were deemed laws by Moses while in the Wilderness. God didn't put it in a man's heart not to wear clothes blended with cotton and silk etc. That was written by Moses. "Moral Laws" you can certainly show were in man's heart... but not many of the ordinances and precepts found in the law of Moses.

BroRog
Feb 13th 2011, 05:56 PM
Huh…I always thought of it differently than that. The picture I have in my head is that Satan attained mastery over Adam and Eve through deceit. As master, the only way he “owns” anyone is the sense of satisfaction he gets in knowing that death awaits the one who sins. If anyone “owns” anyone, it’s death. If “anyone” was paid a ransom, it’s death.

The strong man came to drive out the ruler of this world (Jn 12:31), destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8), and destroy the one who has the power of death in order to free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death (Heb 2:14-15). Jesus came to vanquish the thief. Notice that there are those alive who are held captive (“fear of death”) and those dead who are held captive by death itself. The strong man was stronger than the thief, but the strong man also became the sacrificial lamb who paid the ransom price to death.Was the "ransom price" paid to Satan or to God?

BroRog
Feb 13th 2011, 06:11 PM
A Christian contradicting Scripture, who'd a thought it. It doesn't bless anyone for us to enter sarcasm mode. Just show us the scriptures were it says that Satan was compensated.


Why Rog? The fact is, whether you want to accept it or not, your view is not the original. I don't really think it is necessary to spend time defending the evidence. I have finally and reluctantly accepted the conclusion that I came to sometime ago. That is, that many Christians simply don't want to know what the Scriptures really say. That is apparent when we look at the evidence that gets ignored, the Scriptures that get twisted or swept under the rug, or the diverting of conversations to avoid dealing with the issue at hand. This became more than abundantly clear when Project Peter repeatedly posted passage, after passage after, passage of Scripture that disagreed with the theology of many. What was done to those passages was obscene. The extremes Christians went to to deny the clear and obvious meaning of those passages was, in my opinion, for one claiming to be seeking the truth, shameful. It really shouldn't matter how much one likes or dislikes a doctrine, the Scriptures should be the final authority, but for many they are not, they simply post their favorite passages again those passages that they cannot reconcile.I agree that many Christians verbally subscribe to Sola Scriptura but in really they give equal weight and authority to other writings as well. So what's your excuse? If you affirm Sola Scriptura why are many of your arguments based on the ECF's?

I'll tell you one thing. I'm glad I live in a free country, where a theocratic dictator doesn't tell me what to believe and that finally, we have a forum in which to rediscover the truth found in the New Testament, which is the heritage of all Christians, taken from us by power hungry people. We have been blessed with this small window of opportunity to search and explore the only complete compendium of God's revelation as to his will for mankind in freedom of conscience. I'm not about to spoil such a precious gift by demanding that everyone believe what I believe or agree with my interpretation of the scriptures. I would rather do my best study and say, "hey, isn't this what the scriptures say?", and leave it to others to agree or disagree. I say window of opportunity because I believe that the two witnesses will be taken up into heaven once again and we will lose their testimony again. So cherish them while we have them with us.

rejoice44
Feb 13th 2011, 06:30 PM
He's not speaking of what was written in their hearts. The thread is about the Law of Moses. Those laws were deemed laws by Moses while in the Wilderness. God didn't put it in a man's heart not to wear clothes blended with cotton and silk etc. That was written by Moses. "Moral Laws" you can certainly show were in man's heart... but not many of the ordinances and precepts found in the law of Moses.

There is no argument that most of the laws, if not all the laws, would not have been given had it not been for the disobedience of Israel.

Like as when Israel asked for a king, thus rejecting God as their king, so did they reject God as their priest. God wanted to speak to Israel directly, but they said no, lest we die, give us Moses as our mediator. Had they not asked for Moses as their mediator there would have been no need of a Priesthood.

The king they requested became a burden to them as was prophesied.

1 Samuel 8:18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

1 Samuel 10:19 And ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us. Now therefore present yourselves before the LORD by your tribes, and by your thousands.

So did Israel likewise with God, their high priest, when they asked for Moses to be their mediator.

Exodus 20:19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.

This is why the priesthood was started with all its rules. When you compare the kingship with the priesthood you can see a parallel. See the rules that would follow the kingship.

1 Samuel 8:11-19 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day. Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

Can you see the parallel between the kingship and priesthood. While some Jews today say the laws that came with the priesthood are not a burden, how can one say the kosher laws are not a burden? The truth is the laws are a burden, and in their self-righteousness, the Jews say they love them because it makes them righteous.

Many, if not all the laws have a spiritual application, though some applications may not be readily evident.

God worked through their disobedience for his own glory.

LookingUp
Feb 13th 2011, 06:42 PM
Was the "ransom price" paid to Satan or to God?It seems it was paid to death. Death is portrayed as an entity seeking to conquer (Rev. 6:8). Of course, death is not literally a being and a literal ransom was not paid. Christ’s death was an act that had the effect of a ransom, destroying death’s hold over man.

rejoice44
Feb 13th 2011, 06:54 PM
Was the "ransom price" paid to Satan or to God?

My vote is God. He is the master and Lord to whom we have sinned against, and to whom Adam sinned against.

Satan is only master of sin, and the one to whom we become a partner with when we do sin. Satan himself needs a ransom, but it seems as if there is not one for him.

BroRog
Feb 13th 2011, 07:15 PM
It seems it was paid to death. Death is portrayed as an entity seeking to conquer (Rev. 6:8). Of course, death is not literally a being and a literal ransom was not paid. Christ’s death was an act that had the effect of a ransom, destroying death’s hold over man.Your idea is supported by Hosea 13:14 also.

Isn't it also true that the Bible describes Christ's death in many ways other than ransom, e.g. redemption, sacrifice, offering, propitiation, Passover Lamb, and others? None of these seem to capture the idea perfectly by themselves but work together to form a complete picture together. Isn't that what you have observed? If so, and if the idea of "ransom" is a metaphor, then there doesn't actually need to be anyone in particular to whom the ransom was paid. That is, the similarity between the cross and actual ransom might not include an actual person to whom the ransom is paid.

For example, when the Bible says that we are a slave of sin, it isn't as if there is an actual person holding us in bondage. If anything, we are in bondage to ourselves or to our inherant nature. And when the Bible talks about being set free from sin, it doesn't intend to suggest an actual jailer kept us in chains.

We tend to think of ransom as the payment one makes to a kidnapper, but I think the term "ransom" is broader than that and would include any sort of means or instrament of release or deliverence. For instance, Solomon says

The ransom of a man's life is his wealth, But the poor hears no rebuke. (emphasis added)

Here, I think, the word ransom is being used to describe how wealth keeps a man free. A wealthy man doesn't need to work for someone else, either to sell his time as an employee, or work as an indentured servant. His wealth is the instrament of his freedom, Solomon says, and he means this in terms of what allows the free man to remain free, not what liberated a prisoner from a jailer, or a captive from a kidnapper.

So, when Jesus says that he will be the ransom of the many, I don't think he means that he will pay some actual person to set us free, but that he will become the means of our freedom in whatever way is necessary.

dagar
Feb 13th 2011, 08:02 PM
Where did I say man had no choice? I didn't, you assumed that.http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/220884-Mosaic-Law-amp-Eternal-Life?p=2617959#post2617959


Man could choose whatever he wanted, however, being under the control of another that choice really doesn't mean much.Then man could not choose!


The Scriptures I quoted also say that Paul was sent to turn the Gentiles from the power of Satan. If they were not under his power why exactly would they need to be turned from his power?Again the power of Satan is death, according to scripture, which you even posted. Paul was sent to turn the Gentiles life, which they were separated from and aliens to.

dagar
Feb 13th 2011, 08:12 PM
The scriptures are clear that say Jesus was a ransom, to whom is a ransom paid?to what is holding captive -Death, justly imposed on man by God as a consequence for mans sin.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2011, 08:45 PM
There is no argument that most of the laws, if not all the laws, would not have been given had it not been for the disobedience of Israel.

Like as when Israel asked for a king, thus rejecting God as their king, so did they reject God as their priest. God wanted to speak to Israel directly, but they said no, lest we die, give us Moses as our mediator. Had they not asked for Moses as their mediator there would have been no need of a Priesthood.But then think of the Law of Moses... it had rules for even the king. :)

Deuteronomy 17:14 ¶"When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, `I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,´
15 you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman.
16 "Moreover, he shall not multiply horses for himself, nor shall he cause the people to return to Egypt to multiply horses, since the LORD has said to you, `You shall never again return that way.´
17 "Neither shall he multiply wives for himself, lest his heart turn away; nor shall he greatly increase silver and gold for himself.
18 ¶"Now it shall come about when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself a copy of this law on a scroll in the presence of the Levitical priests.
19 "And it shall be with him, and he shall read it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, by carefully observing all the words of this law and these statutes,
20 that his heart may not be lifted up above his countrymen and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, to the right or the left; in order that he and his sons may continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel.[/quote

Certainly prophetic but again... no surprise and even there... set the law.




The king they requested became a burden to them as was prophesied.

1 Samuel 8:18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

1 Samuel 10:19 And ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us. Now therefore present yourselves before the LORD by your tribes, and by your thousands.

So did Israel likewise with God, their high priest, when they asked for Moses to be their mediator.

Exodus 20:19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.

This is why the priesthood was started with all its rules. When you compare the kingship with the priesthood you can see a parallel. See the rules that would follow the kingship.

1 Samuel 8:11-19 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day. Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

Can you see the parallel between the kingship and priesthood. Oh I think one would have to look pretty hard to make the parallels viable. Keep in mind that before the king it was the judges and prophets. Not the priest that ruled. Not saying the highpriest didn't have tremendous influence and power... certainly they did. But that wasn't the seat of Moses. Moses was THE JUDGE... and like Moses, he too was a prophet.


While some Jews today say the laws that came with the priesthood are not a burden, how can one say the kosher laws are not a burden? The truth is the laws are a burden, and in their self-righteousness, the Jews say they love them because it makes them righteous.Agree with this totally.




Many, if not all the laws have a spiritual application, though some applications may not be readily evident.In this day of hyper-spiritualization... everything has an application. But I could challenge you on many of those. ;)



God worked through their disobedience for his own glory.Oh that will always be the case!

Butch5
Feb 13th 2011, 11:11 PM
to what is holding captive -Death, justly imposed on man by God as a consequence for mans sin.

So then, are you saying the ransom was paid to God?

Butch5
Feb 13th 2011, 11:18 PM
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/220884-Mosaic-Law-amp-Eternal-Life?p=2617959#post2617959

You might want to read that again, nowhere does it say man did not have a choice.


Then man could not choose!

Sure he could, but again if you are under the control of another your choice doesn't carry much weight. Don't you think that the Jews chose to be free rather than under the control of the Romans? However, they were not, they were subject to the Romans, no matter what choice they made.


Again the power of Satan is death, according to scripture, which you even posted. Paul was sent to turn the Gentiles life, which they were separated from and aliens to.

You might want to read that again too. The Scripture says that Satan "HAD" the power of death. It doesn't say his power was death. There is a big difference.

LookingUp
Feb 14th 2011, 01:26 AM
Your idea is supported by Hosea 13:14 also.

Isn't it also true that the Bible describes Christ's death in many ways other than ransom, e.g. redemption, sacrifice, offering, propitiation, Passover Lamb, and others? None of these seem to capture the idea perfectly by themselves but work together to form a complete picture together. Isn't that what you have observed? If so, and if the idea of "ransom" is a metaphor, then there doesn't actually need to be anyone in particular to whom the ransom was paid. That is, the similarity between the cross and actual ransom might not include an actual person to whom the ransom is paid.

For example, when the Bible says that we are a slave of sin, it isn't as if there is an actual person holding us in bondage. If anything, we are in bondage to ourselves or to our inherant nature. And when the Bible talks about being set free from sin, it doesn't intend to suggest an actual jailer kept us in chains.

We tend to think of ransom as the payment one makes to a kidnapper, but I think the term "ransom" is broader than that and would include any sort of means or instrament of release or deliverence. For instance, Solomon says

The ransom of a man's life is his wealth, But the poor hears no rebuke. (emphasis added)

Here, I think, the word ransom is being used to describe how wealth keeps a man free. A wealthy man doesn't need to work for someone else, either to sell his time as an employee, or work as an indentured servant. His wealth is the instrament of his freedom, Solomon says, and he means this in terms of what allows the free man to remain free, not what liberated a prisoner from a jailer, or a captive from a kidnapper.

So, when Jesus says that he will be the ransom of the many, I don't think he means that he will pay some actual person to set us free, but that he will become the means of our freedom in whatever way is necessary.Yeah, I don’t think there’s an actual person who’s paid anything. I like the way you put it—that he meant he will become the means of our freedom in whatever way is necessary. But I do think, more specifically, that our freedom was barred due to the powers of darkness that Christ came to defeat. He defeated these powers by freeing people from the oppression of Satan through healings and deliverance, portraying humility and self-sacrificial love during his life, by his sacrificial death and then, of course, through his victory demonstrated by the resurrection. I see from the beginning (Gen. 3:15) until the end (Rev 20:2; Mt 25:41) that this entire narrative is a story about God’s ongoing conflict with and ultimate victory over cosmic and human agents who oppose him and who threaten His creation. I can’t help but place Christ’s life, death and resurrection at the center of this story which illuminates the message of this narrative: God overcomes evil with good.

I have been trying to fuse all the metaphors used to describe what Christ did for humanity. I do have a tendency to want everything to fit together in a nice, little package. That can be a weakness of mine. Of course, there is no way that any one of them captures the complete idea to form the full picture for us. So how do these other metaphors fit in with the idea that salvation is about God rescuing us from the powers of darkness? I’m trying to figure that all out.

Butch5
Feb 14th 2011, 01:46 AM
It doesn't bless anyone for us to enter sarcasm mode. Just show us the scriptures were it says that Satan was compensated.

It doesn't bless anyone when we contradict Scripture either. You've been given the scriptures, if you choose to interpret them in a way other than what they say that is your prerogative.


I agree that many Christians verbally subscribe to Sola Scriptura but in really they give equal weight and authority to other writings as well. So what's your excuse? If you affirm Sola Scriptura why are many of your arguments based on the ECF's?

I didn't say I affirm "Sola Scriptura", I said the Scriptures should be the final authority. The Scriptures don't address every issue, however, every issue they do address, they should be the final authority. When we come across issues that the Scriptures don't address then we must look elsewhere, that is why many of my arguments are based on the ECF's. In addition, my arguments from the ECF's can be backed up by Scripture.


I'll tell you one thing. I'm glad I live in a free country, where a theocratic dictator doesn't tell me what to believe and that finally, we have a forum in which to rediscover the truth found in the New Testament, which is the heritage of all Christians, taken from us by power hungry people. We have been blessed with this small window of opportunity to search and explore the only complete compendium of God's revelation as to his will for mankind in freedom of conscience. I'm not about to spoil such a precious gift by demanding that everyone believe what I believe or agree with my interpretation of the scriptures. I would rather do my best study and say, "hey, isn't this what the scriptures say?", and leave it to others to agree or disagree. I say window of opportunity because I believe that the two witnesses will be taken up into heaven once again and we will lose their testimony again. So cherish them while we have them with us.

It's not about telling people what to believe Rog. One reason for the sarcasm was this changing of the issues. It's about "IGNORING" evidence. Would you be glad to live in a country where judges and juries treated criminal cases the way many Christians deal with the Scriptures? I don't think so. Oh, I don't like the idea of Mr. Smith going to prison so I will just ignore what that witness said.That's the way many Christians treat the Scriptures. Oh, I don't like the idea that someone could lose their salvation, so I'll just hold on to this Scripture and ignore the others that say one can be lost. Or better yet, I'll pretend they say something else. That's what happens Rog. People can claim what they want, but when one does that they can't say the are honestly seeking the truth. It just doesn't work that way. If someone says they are a Christian it is incumbent on them to do what they must to arrive at the truth. We can pretend and play our little word games, but Jesus sees right through them. He knows what we are doing. He knows that Christians pick and choose their little doctrines and ignore evidence that refutes them. Remember Jesus said,

John 4:23-24 ( KJV )
But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Are we really worshipping in spirit and in truth when we ignore evidence in favor or our pet doctrines? It's one thing when a Christian doesn't know, it's another when they ignore the evidence.

Butch5
Feb 14th 2011, 02:10 AM
to what is holding captive -Death, justly imposed on man by God as a consequence for mans sin.

To what is holding captive? Then you agree with me that it is Satan???

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Weren't they subject to the one who has the power? It was Satan who was vested with the power of death.

Paul wrote,

Ephesians 4:8-10 ( KJV )
Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

If Christ lead captivity free from death, why are they still dead?

He also wrote,

Colossians 1:12-13 ( KJV )
Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Paul didn't say He delivered us from the power of death, he said from the power of darkness. Paul doesn't leave us wondering what darkness means.

Ephesians 6:10-12 ( KJV )
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Butch5
Feb 14th 2011, 02:11 AM
My vote is God. He is the master and Lord to whom we have sinned against, and to whom Adam sinned against.

Satan is only master of sin, and the one to whom we become a partner with when we do sin. Satan himself needs a ransom, but it seems as if there is not one for him.

Have you thought through the implications of your statement?

BroRog
Feb 14th 2011, 02:16 AM
It doesn't bless anyone when we contradict Scripture either. You've been given the scriptures, if you choose to interpret them in a way other than what they say that is your prerogative. So far you haven't provided any scriptures.


I didn't say I affirm "Sola Scriptura", I said the Scriptures should be the final authority.What's the difference?


The Scriptures don't address every issue, however, every issue they do address, they should be the final authority. When we come across issues that the Scriptures don't address then we must look elsewhere, that is why many of my arguments are based on the ECF's.Gee, how did I know you were going to say this?


It's not about telling people what to believe Rog. One reason for the sarcasm was this changing of the issues. It's about "IGNORING" evidence. Would you be glad to live in a country where judges and juries treated criminal cases the way many Christians deal with the Scriptures? I don't think so. Oh, I don't like the idea of Mr. Smith going to prison so I will just ignore what that witness said.That's the way many Christians treat the Scriptures. Oh, I don't like the idea that someone could lose their salvation, so I'll just hold on to this Scripture and ignore the others that say one can be lost. Or better yet, I'll pretend they say something else. That's what happens Rog. People can claim what they want, but when one does that they can't say the are honestly seeking the truth. It just doesn't work that way. If someone says they are a Christian it is incumbent on them to do what they must to arrive at the truth. We can pretend and play our little word games, but Jesus sees right through them. He knows what we are doing. He knows that Christians pick and choose their little doctrines and ignore evidence that refutes them.Get over it. We are not the Holy Spirit. We can't open eyes and hearts. He can. Our job is to present the clearest explication of the scriptures and have the patience to wait.


Are we really worshipping in spirit and in truth when we ignore evidence in favor or our pet doctrines? It's one thing when a Christian doesn't know, it's another when they ignore the evidence.Just put it in his hands.

Butch5
Feb 14th 2011, 02:17 AM
It seems it was paid to death. Death is portrayed as an entity seeking to conquer (Rev. 6:8). Of course, death is not literally a being and a literal ransom was not paid. Christ’s death was an act that had the effect of a ransom, destroying death’s hold over man.

Was Christ's death a metaphor also?

How exactly did Christ's ransom destroy death's hold over man?

Be careful Julie, it is easy to get pulled into this line of reasoning. The Scriptures are clear, Christ died to destroy "him who had the power of death".

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

It was not death that deceived Eve in the Garden, death didn't come along until after the sin, after the temptation.

Butch5
Feb 14th 2011, 02:42 AM
So far you haven't provided any scriptures.

Come on Rog, that's what I'm talking about. Just ignore the evidence. I gave you several Scriptures and now you say I haven't provided any.


What's the difference?

The difference is, when the Scriptures deal with an issue they should be the final authority. That, however, does not mean we only get our teaching from Scripture, or what modern protestants call Scripture. Up until about the 1500's the Apocrypha was also considered Scripture. What modern has the authority to remove something from Scriptures? We learn things from other sources, however, these things must be in accordance with the Scriptures, if they are not, they must be rejected. So, the Scriptures aren't the only place we learn of biblical things, they are, however, the final authority on what is and is not doctrine.


Gee, how did I know you were going to say this?

You may not like what they say, but that doesn't change the validity of their argument.


Get over it. We are not the Holy Spirit. We can't open eyes and hearts. He can. Our job is to present the clearest explication of the scriptures and have the patience to wait.

Oh, so, we can't seek truth huh, we just listen to every, Tom, Dick, And Harry, that comes along and wait for the Holy Spirit to tell us which one to believe, right? Come on man, what did Paul commend the Bereans for, sitting around listening to every wind of doctrine, or for searching the scriptures to see if what he said was true? This is bogus, So many Christians will spend years studying for their degrees and learning their professions and so forth. For what, a little bit of money to pay some bills and buy some food, and maybe give a little to the poor? Yet they won't spend an hour a week studying the Scriptures which is infinitely more important than any career. We are supposed to be being conformed into the image of Christ, how exactly is that going to happen if one is not studying the word of God? How exactly does a Christian enter the kingdom to rule with Christ when he has no idea of what Christ expects?


Just put it in his hands.

What, our willful ignorance? Do you really think He's going to but it?

BroRog
Feb 14th 2011, 03:46 AM
Come on Rog, that's what I'm talking about. Just ignore the evidence. I gave you several Scriptures and now you say I haven't provided any.You haven't. You have not provided any scriptures that explicitly or implicitly say that Jesus paid a ransom to Satan. If you did, I didn't see them.


The difference is, when the Scriptures deal with an issue they should be the final authority. That, however, does not mean we only get our teaching from Scripture, or what modern protestants call Scripture. Up until about the 1500's the Apocrypha was also considered Scripture. What modern has the authority to remove something from Scriptures? We learn things from other sources, however, these things must be in accordance with the Scriptures, if they are not, they must be rejected. So, the Scriptures aren't the only place we learn of biblical things, they are, however, the final authority on what is and is not doctrine.To me you are just blowing smoke. The point I made earlier is, not only are you using the ECF's for historical background information, but you quote them as an inspired authority. You can deny this if you want, but that is what you do.


You may not like what they say, but that doesn't change the validity of their argument.Again, I could care less what the ECF's say. In my view, they are simply guys like us who had opinions and got stuff wrong.


Oh, so, we can't seek truth huh, we just listen to every, Tom, Dick, And Harry, that comes along and wait for the Holy Spirit to tell us which one to believe, right? Come on man, what did Paul commend the Bereans for, sitting around listening to every wind of doctrine, or for searching the scriptures to see if what he said was true? This is bogus, So many Christians will spend years studying for their degrees and learning their professions and so forth. For what, a little bit of money to pay some bills and buy some food, and maybe give a little to the poor? Yet they won't spend an hour a week studying the Scriptures which is infinitely more important than any career. We are supposed to be being conformed into the image of Christ, how exactly is that going to happen if one is not studying the word of God? How exactly does a Christian enter the kingdom to rule with Christ when he has no idea of what Christ expects? Where did you get the idea that I said we shouldn't seek the truth? That isn't what we are doing here is it? Seeking the truth is what we do off-line. What we do on-line is offer our opinion on what we have found.

You really seem to believe that the Holy Spirit has no power to open eyes and minds to the truth and that it's up to you to be more than persuasive. You really think that if YOU don't convince someone of your position that they are going to hell? What a heavy weight you must carry around on your shoulders.


What, our willful ignorance? Do you really think He's going to but it?You have really exagerated and escalated the issue here, which demonstrates to me that you are emotionally invested in whether someone agrees with you, and you are frustrated that you can't persuade anyone to believe you. Take this to God in prayer. Let go of your need to be acknowledged as being right.

dagar
Feb 14th 2011, 04:20 AM
You might want to read that again, nowhere does it say man did not have a choice.
"Once ransomed and again in His ownership, God now gives man the choice of whom he will serve."



Sure he could, but again if you are under the control of another your choice doesn't carry much weight. Don't you think that the Jews chose to be free rather than under the control of the Romans? However, they were not, they were subject to the Romans, no matter what choice they made.Sorry, I don't hold reformed theology and you still have not provided any scripture for this supposed control.



You might want to read that again too. The Scripture says that Satan "HAD" the power of death. It doesn't say his power was death. There is a big difference.Correct.

Butch5
Feb 14th 2011, 04:38 AM
"Once ransomed and again in His ownership, God now gives man the choice of whom he will serve."

So, where did I say that man did not have a choice before the cross. As I said, man's choice while under the power of Satan, doesn't accomplish much. Having been freed from the power of darkness, man's choice now has an effect on the outcome of his life.




Sorry, I don't hold reformed theology and you still have not provided any scripture for this supposed control.

Look, if you're going to ignore the evidence there is no point in discussing anything. You're simply doing the same thing that BroRog is doing. ignoring the evidence. I presented Scripture, however, since you claim I haven't provided any I can only assume that the answer to the question I asked you is no. The question, which you did not answer was, 'do you accept the words of Jesus'? Since you rejected the Scriptures I gave I can only assume the answer is no. However, for those who are following I'll post them again.

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Weren't they subject to the one who has the power? It was Satan who was vested with the power of death.

Paul wrote,

Ephesians 4:8-10 ( KJV )
Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

If Christ lead captivity free from death, why are they still dead?

He also wrote,

Colossians 1:12-13 ( KJV )
Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Paul didn't say He delivered us from the power of death, he said from the power of darkness. Paul doesn't leave us wondering what darkness means.

Ephesians 6:10-12 ( KJV )
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Acts 26:12-18 ( KJV )
Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,
At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.
And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.


1 John 3:8 ( KJV )
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.


2 Timothy 2:26 ( KJV )
And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

dagar
Feb 14th 2011, 04:42 AM
To what is holding captive? Then you agree with me that it is Satan???

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Weren't they subject to the one who has the power? It was Satan who was vested with the power of death.

Paul wrote,

Ephesians 4:8-10 ( KJV )
Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

If Christ lead captivity free from death, why are they still dead?

He also wrote,

Colossians 1:12-13 ( KJV )
Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Paul didn't say He delivered us from the power of death, he said from the power of darkness. Paul doesn't leave us wondering what darkness means.

Ephesians 6:10-12 ( KJV )
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Satan is strong (Mat 12:29). His 'power' is darkness (Act 26:18) which darkness leads (Eph 2:2; 5:8, 11; 6:12 ) men to death and its power (Heb 2:14). The power in Heb 2:14 is death, not Satan. Plainly says power of death, not power of Satan. You have to ask yourself what it means that Satan had the power of death since his power is the darkness of this (prince of) world. Satan does not and never has had the power of death. That ignores scripture that attributes that power to God. Again, you have to ignore the basic fundamentals of the faith to believe this stuff you are propagating.

dagar
Feb 14th 2011, 04:43 AM
So, where did I say that man did not have a choice before the cross.amazing!

You said
"Once ransomed......God now"

LookingUp
Feb 14th 2011, 04:45 AM
If Christ lead captivity free from death, why are they still dead?Why are they still dead?

dagar
Feb 14th 2011, 04:48 AM
Why are they still dead?
Who?...............

LookingUp
Feb 14th 2011, 04:51 AM
I thought...

Jesus didn't actually destroy Satan (who has the power of death). Not yet anyway. But Jesus disarmed him. He took away his weapon, sin. Satan can still tempt man's weak flesh, but those in Christ are immune to the poison of the weapon.

??

BroRog
Feb 14th 2011, 05:05 AM
You're simply doing the same thing that BroRog is doing. ignoring the evidence.You are loosing me with this negative attitude. What are you trying to prove with this evidence? What assertion are you defending? If you are defending the idea that Satan has the power to deceive people and bring them into darkness, then fine. But you have not yet offered evidence that God paid a ransom to Satan.

LookingUp
Feb 14th 2011, 05:56 AM
Was Christ's death a metaphor also?No.


How exactly did Christ's ransom destroy death's hold over man?I’m trying to figure that out. I’m trying to make sense of all of this. It seems that by experiencing an undeserved death, Jesus demonstrated the power of self-sacrificial love which broke open the gates of hell and destroyed the power of sin thus destroying death’s hold over man. Satan lost his only weapon, sin (the poison that kills)—sin lost its power and therefore we have been set free from all condemnation (Col 2:14-15) and the power of sin will not be able to hold us in death and we will be resurrected. The wages of sin is death, but as BroRog pointed out, death is more than physical death; it’s losing out on fulfilling the destiny God had in mind for us. Well, BroRog said it more eloquently, but that’s how I’m puttin’ it. That’s why people still die. They die because there’s no tree of life and sin still kills. Our sin even kills those who haven’t sinned yet (babies, etc.). But the real “killer” in death is that there was no way for us to be resurrected to live out our ultimate destiny. We really won’t pay the wages of sin, which is permanent death.


Be careful Julie, it is easy to get pulled into this line of reasoning. The Scriptures are clear, Christ died to destroy "him who had the power of death.I don’t think I’d say anyone “owns” death, but I would say that Satan has power in that he is able to tempt man’s weak flesh which causes man to sin. I see sin as Satan’s weapon to kill; the trigger being the temptation. Destroying the power or poison of sin makes Satan’s weapon more like a water gun. Satan becomes more of a pest than a threat.

I believe Scripture teaches that salvation is often depicted as freedom from the devil’s oppression. I think our freedom was barred due to the powers of darkness that Christ came to defeat. Jesus defeated these powers by freeing people from the oppression of Satan through healings and deliverance, portraying humility and self-sacrificial love during his life, by his sacrificial death, and then, of course, through his victorious resurrection. I see from the beginning (Gen 3:15) until the end (Rev 20:2; Mt 25:41) that this entire narrative is a story about God’s ongoing conflict with and ultimate victory over cosmic and human agents who oppose Him and who threaten His creation. Christ’s life, death, and resurrection are at the center of this story and tells us the central message of this story: God overcomes evil with good.

We are rescued from the power of darkness and transferred into the kingdom of his beloved Son (Col. 1:12-13). Because we’ve been transferred out of Satan’s dominion and brought into God’s kingdom, we can receive redemption, the forgiveness of sin (Col 1:14).


Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

It was not death that deceived Eve in the Garden, death didn't come along until after the sin, after the temptation.I agree. He destroyed Satan by disarming him of his only weapon which is sin. Sin still takes place, but for those in Christ the power of sin, the poison, is deactivated.

dagar
Feb 14th 2011, 07:14 AM
I thought...

Jesus didn't actually destroy Satan (who has the power of death). Not yet anyway. But Jesus disarmed him. He took away his weapon, sin. Satan can still tempt man's weak flesh, but those in Christ are immune to the poison of the weapon.

??So you mean they have passed from death to life, and are asking Butch why he says they are dead? :confused

LookingUp
Feb 14th 2011, 08:05 AM
So you mean they have passed from death to life, and are asking Butch why he says they are dead? :confusedNo. Butch said Jesus destroyed Satan. But that hasn't actually happened yet. Satan has taken a major blow being that his weapon has been disabled for those in Christ, but he is still a roaring lion seeking to devour. I think Butch wants to know why people still die if, in fact, Jesus has destroyed the power of death. But I think the wages of sin, death, is not just physical death. It’s about Satan being able to put a permanent end to what God has always intended for mankind; perfect unity with God which fulfills their ultimate purpose in life.

ProDeo
Feb 14th 2011, 02:57 PM
How'd you jump from the Ante Nicene fathers to Scripture? Look, if Satan owned us why the need to go to God for permission to effect Job? Why did Jesus say to Peter, Satan has desired to have you, if Satan owned Peter? Anyone that thinks this and that it is possible the devil could think Christ would remain dead needs to go way back and start over again with the obvious basics.

1 Cor 6:20 For you were bought at a price.

1 Cor 7:21-24 Were you called as a slave? Do not worry about it. But if indeed you are able to be free, make the most of the opportunity. For the one who was called in the Lord as a slave is the Lord’s freedman. In the same way, the one who was called as a free person is Christ’s slave. You were bought with a price. Do not become slaves of men. In whatever situation someone was called, brothers and sisters, let him remain in it with God.

So a legitimate question would be, from "who" we were bought? Who was the previous owner?

LookingUp
Feb 14th 2011, 04:39 PM
1 Cor 6:20 For you were bought at a price.

1 Cor 7:21-24 Were you called as a slave? Do not worry about it. But if indeed you are able to be free, make the most of the opportunity. For the one who was called in the Lord as a slave is the Lord’s freedman. In the same way, the one who was called as a free person is Christ’s slave. You were bought with a price. Do not become slaves of men. In whatever situation someone was called, brothers and sisters, let him remain in it with God.

So a legitimate question would be, from "who" we were bought? Who was the previous owner?Yes, and what’s interesting is that even false teachers who deny Christ were bought.

“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves” (2 Peter 2:1).

What I think this means is that these false teachers don’t have to stay dead (perish forever). They, like all (1 Tim. 2:6), were bought. The inheritance we are qualified to share involves receiving redemption, the forgiveness of sins (Col 1:12-14), but we can only share in this and be forgiven because we’ve been transferred out of Satan’s kingdom and brought into the kingdom of the Son. Paul says that Christ was sent to the Gentiles to open their eyes so that they may turn from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among the sanctified (Acts 26:18). He says that they should repent and turn to God (Acts 26:20). This repentance and turning to God is what gets one taken from the kingdom of Satan and brought into the kingdom of His Son where forgiveness of sin is offered.

dagar
Feb 15th 2011, 03:35 AM
Yes, and what’s interesting is that even false teachers who deny Christ were bought.

“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves” (2 Peter 2:1).

What I think this means is that these false teachers don’t have to stay dead (perish forever). They, like all (1 Tim. 2:6), were bought. The inheritance we are qualified to share involves receiving redemption, the forgiveness of sins (Col 1:12-14), but we can only share in this and be forgiven because we’ve been transferred out of Satan’s kingdom and brought into the kingdom of the Son. Paul says that Christ was sent to the Gentiles to open their eyes so that they may turn from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among the sanctified (Acts 26:18). He says that they should repent and turn to God (Acts 26:20). This repentance and turning to God is what gets one taken from the kingdom of Satan and brought into the kingdom of His Son where forgiveness of sin is offered.Right. Satan's dominion/power -sin- is/was broken by grace -His power (2Co 12:9, Eph 3:7) which is Christ crucified/resurrection (1Co 1:18). Man sins when he violates the Law of God written on his heart.

1Co 15:56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Rom 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man,..........
Rom 2:2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.
.........
Rom 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyselfwrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another; )
Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual..........

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

Rom 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Rom 3:20 ..........by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Rom 7:7 ..........I had not known sin, but by the law:.............

Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Joh 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
As you pointed out above, the whole thing is a matter of dominion. God of course has ultimate dominion but he delegated dominion of His kingdom on earth to man. I don't have the desire to write a book here so I'll make it as short as possible, but basically Satan had dominion first and sinned, then afterward man did the same. Who had dominion, other than God of course? Neither by God's standard. He rules through righteousness. This is why Satan needs permission from God. Simple common sense. Spiritually, Satan had/has more 'power' because the natural man tends looks at the natural of course. Satan became the tempter/man sins. Is man a servant of Satan or sin? Sin.

Now, correct me if I am wrong but I believe Jesus came to establish the kingdom God originally intended, and succeeded in the spiritual, no? How did he do that? As I said above, through righteousness. Need a few dozen passages? I didn't think so.

The point is this. It's God's Kingdom not Satan's. God's kingdom (spiritual) has never suffered loss, but His natural earthy kingdom certainly has through Satan's kingdom -Luk 4:6, via sin. Now, put a man -whom God gave dominion- here that lives without sin and you have a man that has dominion on earth again. But there's just one problem. The righteous king doesn't have any righteous subjects because all have sinned against God and His Law. Without subjects you have no kingdom. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission. The blood that redeems went to the mercy seat in heaven before God. It did not go to Satan. Sinful man is under God's wrath, not Satan's. Satan did not require anything and nothing is owed him. God requires blood, and the debt of sin which is death, was owed Him because it is His Law in His kingdom that was broken that imprisons and condemns those who sin against Him/His Law to death. You don't break the law of one kingdom and pay another kingdom.

Butch5
Feb 15th 2011, 02:31 PM
You haven't. You have not provided any scriptures that explicitly or implicitly say that Jesus paid a ransom to Satan. If you did, I didn't see them.

To me you are just blowing smoke. The point I made earlier is, not only are you using the ECF's for historical background information, but you quote them as an inspired authority. You can deny this if you want, but that is what you do.

Again, I could care less what the ECF's say. In my view, they are simply guys like us who had opinions and got stuff wrong.

Where did you get the idea that I said we shouldn't seek the truth? That isn't what we are doing here is it? Seeking the truth is what we do off-line. What we do on-line is offer our opinion on what we have found.

You really seem to believe that the Holy Spirit has no power to open eyes and minds to the truth and that it's up to you to be more than persuasive. You really think that if YOU don't convince someone of your position that they are going to hell? What a heavy weight you must carry around on your shoulders.

You have really exagerated and escalated the issue here, which demonstrates to me that you are emotionally invested in whether someone agrees with you, and you are frustrated that you can't persuade anyone to believe you. Take this to God in prayer. Let go of your need to be acknowledged as being right.

It's not about being right, it's simple Rog, If one is seeking the truth they "Cannot" ignore evidence. If one ignores evidence, they "Cannot" be seeking the truth.

Butch5
Feb 15th 2011, 02:39 PM
Satan is strong (Mat 12:29). His 'power' is darkness (Act 26:18) which darkness leads (Eph 2:2; 5:8, 11; 6:12 ) men to death and its power (Heb 2:14). The power in Heb 2:14 is death, not Satan. Plainly says power of death, not power of Satan. You have to ask yourself what it means that Satan had the power of death since his power is the darkness of this (prince of) world. Satan does not and never has had the power of death. That ignores scripture that attributes that power to God. Again, you have to ignore the basic fundamentals of the faith to believe this stuff you are propagating.

And you simply have to ignore the Scriptures.


Hebrews 2:14 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

This isn't the first time you have contradicted the Scriptures. If they are not authoritative to you then we have no basis for discussion.

Butch5
Feb 15th 2011, 02:41 PM
Why are they still dead?

Hi Julie,

That's my point, if the ransom was paid to death then why do you Christians still die?
If Christ lead captivity free from death, why are they still dead? If one is free from death wouldn't they be alive?

Butch5
Feb 15th 2011, 02:44 PM
I thought...

Jesus didn't actually destroy Satan (who has the power of death). Not yet anyway. But Jesus disarmed him. He took away his weapon, sin. Satan can still tempt man's weak flesh, but those in Christ are immune to the poison of the weapon.

??

It's in the word destroy and how it is applied. You are correct Christ did not physically destroy Satan but did take his power of over man.

Butch5
Feb 15th 2011, 02:46 PM
You are loosing me with this negative attitude. What are you trying to prove with this evidence? What assertion are you defending? If you are defending the idea that Satan has the power to deceive people and bring them into darkness, then fine. But you have not yet offered evidence that God paid a ransom to Satan.

Rog, I've given the evidence, sorry God didn't choose to word it exactly the way you want it worded. So, let me ask you a question. How exactly was mankind set free from Satan?

RollTide21
Feb 15th 2011, 03:28 PM
Rog, I've given the evidence, sorry God didn't choose to word it exactly the way you want it worded. So, let me ask you a question. How exactly was mankind set free from Satan?I've been trying to follow along, here, but...what is your primary point about Hebrews 2:14? That Jesus took away the power of Satan over man? Where does the ransom argument fit in? Or were you using a different verse to point that out?

Butch5
Feb 15th 2011, 03:36 PM
No.

I’m trying to figure that out. I’m trying to make sense of all of this. It seems that by experiencing an undeserved death, Jesus demonstrated the power of self-sacrificial love which broke open the gates of hell and destroyed the power of sin thus destroying death’s hold over man. Satan lost his only weapon, sin (the poison that kills)—sin lost its power and therefore we have been set free from all condemnation (Col 2:14-15) and the power of sin will not be able to hold us in death and we will be resurrected. The wages of sin is death, but as BroRog pointed out, death is more than physical death; it’s losing out on fulfilling the destiny God had in mind for us. Well, BroRog said it more eloquently, but that’s how I’m puttin’ it. That’s why people still die. They die because there’s no tree of life and sin still kills. Our sin even kills those who haven’t sinned yet (babies, etc.). But the real “killer” in death is that there was no way for us to be resurrected to live out our ultimate destiny. We really won’t pay the wages of sin, which is permanent death.

I don’t think I’d say anyone “owns” death, but I would say that Satan has power in that he is able to tempt man’s weak flesh which causes man to sin. I see sin as Satan’s weapon to kill; the trigger being the temptation. Destroying the power or poison of sin makes Satan’s weapon more like a water gun. Satan becomes more of a pest than a threat.

I believe Scripture teaches that salvation is often depicted as freedom from the devil’s oppression. I think our freedom was barred due to the powers of darkness that Christ came to defeat. Jesus defeated these powers by freeing people from the oppression of Satan through healings and deliverance, portraying humility and self-sacrificial love during his life, by his sacrificial death, and then, of course, through his victorious resurrection. I see from the beginning (Gen 3:15) until the end (Rev 20:2; Mt 25:41) that this entire narrative is a story about God’s ongoing conflict with and ultimate victory over cosmic and human agents who oppose Him and who threaten His creation. Christ’s life, death, and resurrection are at the center of this story and tells us the central message of this story: God overcomes evil with good.

We are rescued from the power of darkness and transferred into the kingdom of his beloved Son (Col. 1:12-13). Because we’ve been transferred out of Satan’s dominion and brought into God’s kingdom, we can receive redemption, the forgiveness of sin (Col 1:14).

Julie,

Death came into the world because of sin. Death is permanent unless one has a get out of death free card, (Faith in Christ). Ultimately salvation is about the kingdom of God. So many times Christians focus on salvation as something in the here and now, and it is to a point. However, the salvation here and now is preparation for the kingdom, in which believers will spend eternity.

Death is not a person or an entity. It is a thing, it is not alive and you can't bride it. You can't pay a ransom to death because death cannot demand one, it's not alive. That means there are only two to whom the ransom could have been paid, that is God or Satan. Many Christians seem to think it was paid to God. Many are repulsed with the idea that God paid a ransom to Satan, yet I don’t think they have thought through the implications of their own doctrine. If you take their doctrine to its logical conclusion I think it’s more repulsive than the idea that God paid a ransom to Satan. Consider for instance, those who say that the ransom was paid to God are in effect putting God on the same level with Baal and Molech. They are saying that God requires human sacrifices to appease His wrath. I think we have discussed this before. God makes it clear what He thinks of human sacrifices.

Ezekiel 16:15-26 ( KJV )
But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.
And of thy garments thou didst take, and deckedst thy high places with divers colours, and playedst the harlot thereupon: the like things shall not come, neither shall it be so.
Thou hast also taken thy fair jewels of my gold and of my silver, which I had given thee, and madest to thyself images of men, and didst commit whoredom with them,
And tookest thy broidered garments, and coveredst them: and thou hast set mine oil and mine incense before them.
My meat also which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou hast even set it before them for a sweet savour: and thus it was, saith the Lord GOD.
Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this of thy whoredoms a small matter,
That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire for them?
And in all thine abominations and thy whoredoms thou hast not remembered the days of thy youth, when thou wast naked and bare, and wast polluted in thy blood.
And it came to pass after all thy wickedness, (woe, woe unto thee! saith the Lord GOD
That thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place, and hast made thee an high place in every street.
Thou hast built thy high place at every head of the way, and hast made thy beauty to be abhorred, and hast opened thy feet to every one that passed by, and multiplied thy whoredoms.
Thou hast also committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh; and hast increased thy whoredoms, to provoke me to anger.

Ezekiel 20:27-32 ( KJV )
Therefore, son of man, speak unto the house of Israel, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Yet in this your fathers have blasphemed me, in that they have committed a trespass against me.
For when I had brought them into the land, for the which I lifted up mine hand to give it to them, then they saw every high hill, and all the thick trees, and they offered there their sacrifices, and there they presented the provocation of their offering: there also they made their sweet savour, and poured out there their drink offerings.
Then I said unto them, What is the high place whereunto ye go? And the name thereof is called Bamah unto this day.
Wherefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers? and commit ye whoredom after their abominations?
For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be inquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will not be inquired of by you.
And that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone.

Jeremiah 19:3-5 ( KJV )
And say, Hear ye the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle.
Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents;
They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:

Jeremiah 32:32-35 ( KJV )
Because of all the evil of the children of Israel and of the children of Judah, which they have done to provoke me to anger, they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their prophets, and the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
And they have turned unto me the back, and not the face: though I taught them, rising up early and teaching them, yet they have not hearkened to receive instruction.
But they set their abominations in the house, which is called by my name, to defile it.
And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

This is what they are actually doing by saying the ransom was paid to God. Then there is the absurdity of the scenario, consider what actually takes place if the ransom was paid to God.
It would go something like this; God owns mankind and kidnaps mankind from Himself. God then demands that He pay Himself a ransom and this ransom in the death of His own Son. So then God offer His Son to Himself and proceeds to kill His own Son so that He can give mankind back to Himself.
How absurd is that, Especially sin God said He would forgive sins? If this was a human would anyone say, Oh, what a loving father, he sacrificed his son to save his other children? No, they would call him a monster and put him in prison, yet many are accusing God of this very thing when they say the ransom was paid to God. Now, I’m not saying it is intentional, I don’t think many have really thought through this issue thoroughly. However, that is the logical conclusion of the doctrine.


I agree. He destroyed Satan by disarming him of his only weapon which is sin. Sin still takes place, but for those in Christ the power of sin, the poison, is deactivated.
I disagree, the power of sin isn’t deactivated, the apostle continuously warn against falling into sin.

Butch5
Feb 15th 2011, 03:45 PM
I've been trying to follow along, here, but...what is your primary point about Hebrews 2:14? That Jesus took away the power of Satan over man? Where does the ransom argument fit in? Or were you using a different verse to point that out?

My point in Hebrews 2:14 was simply that Satan had the power of death. I wasn't using the passage to support the Ransom view.

BroRog
Feb 15th 2011, 05:33 PM
Rog, I've given the evidence, sorry God didn't choose to word it exactly the way you want it worded. So, let me ask you a question. How exactly was mankind set free from Satan?I don't think about things in terms of outside forces, like Satan, who might do this or that to me. (I think some Christians are overly fascinated with Satan as if he is some kind of boogie man, using him as the explanation for why bad things happen.) I think about things in terms of who I am, what I want, and how I relate to God and his son. I don't think in terms of being in bondage to Satan, or the Devil or some outside agency. I think in terms of being in bondage to myself: my own fear, ignorance, foolishness, superstitions, dark heart, suspicious mind, selfish attitudes, needy disposition, greedy aspirations, and such as these. To be set free, is to be set free of these. Liberation will be seen in terms of overcoming fears (courage) and overcoming ignorance (knowledge gained) and overcoming foolishness (wisdom gained). Gaining courage, knowledge, and wisdom helps me overcome the other things such as superstition, suspiciousness, selfishness and greed. Actual and real liberation isn't being set free from an evil spirit being as if he had anything to do with it; it's being set free from flaws of my own character. The spiritual chains of darkness are internal in the inner man/woman and liberation is a change of the inner man/woman.

The Holy Spirit is the one who sets us free, giving us the knowledge, wisdom, courage, change of perspective, change of orientation, and commitment to truth and goodness. The Bible may speak in terms of an adversary, who places people in chains of darkness, but the reality of the matter is we place ourselves in these chains. All Satan does is use lies that appeal to wicked, ambitious, selfish, needy, greedy, desires that we already have. He couldn't place us in chains if we didn't already want what he is offering. We seem to have the idea that we are innocent victims and that Satan is the reason why we are suffering the consequences of our bad decisions. But that isn't true. We may moan and groan and say, "Oh God, I wish I had never started smoking, taken cocaine, slept with that hooker, bought that expensive car I couldn't afford, loaned all my money to a guy from out of town, given my kidney to a guy who said he was my father, etc." But it wasn't Satan that made you smoke or do drugs. It was your own desire to be cool, different, popular, appreciated, loved, etc.

People are set free from "Satan", if you like, through honesty and a love for the truth, which the Holy Spirit helps us get.

LookingUp
Feb 15th 2011, 10:13 PM
Julie,

Death came into the world because of sin. Death is permanent unless one has a get out of death free card, (Faith in Christ). Ultimately salvation is about the kingdom of God. So many times Christians focus on salvation as something in the here and now, and it is to a point. However, the salvation here and now is preparation for the kingdom, in which believers will spend eternity.

Death is not a person or an entity. It is a thing, it is not alive and you can't bride it. You can't pay a ransom to death because death cannot demand one, it's not alive. That means there are only two to whom the ransom could have been paid, that is God or Satan. Many Christians seem to think it was paid to God. Many are repulsed with the idea that God paid a ransom to Satan, yet I don’t think they have thought through the implications of their own doctrine. If you take their doctrine to its logical conclusion I think it’s more repulsive than the idea that God paid a ransom to Satan. Consider for instance, those who say that the ransom was paid to God are in effect putting God on the same level with Baal and Molech. They are saying that God requires human sacrifices to appease His wrath. I think we have discussed this before. God makes it clear what He thinks of human sacrifices.

Ezekiel 16:15-26 ( KJV )
But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.
And of thy garments thou didst take, and deckedst thy high places with divers colours, and playedst the harlot thereupon: the like things shall not come, neither shall it be so.
Thou hast also taken thy fair jewels of my gold and of my silver, which I had given thee, and madest to thyself images of men, and didst commit whoredom with them,
And tookest thy broidered garments, and coveredst them: and thou hast set mine oil and mine incense before them.
My meat also which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou hast even set it before them for a sweet savour: and thus it was, saith the Lord GOD.
Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this of thy whoredoms a small matter,
That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire for them?
And in all thine abominations and thy whoredoms thou hast not remembered the days of thy youth, when thou wast naked and bare, and wast polluted in thy blood.
And it came to pass after all thy wickedness, (woe, woe unto thee! saith the Lord GOD
That thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place, and hast made thee an high place in every street.
Thou hast built thy high place at every head of the way, and hast made thy beauty to be abhorred, and hast opened thy feet to every one that passed by, and multiplied thy whoredoms.
Thou hast also committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh; and hast increased thy whoredoms, to provoke me to anger.

Ezekiel 20:27-32 ( KJV )
Therefore, son of man, speak unto the house of Israel, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Yet in this your fathers have blasphemed me, in that they have committed a trespass against me.
For when I had brought them into the land, for the which I lifted up mine hand to give it to them, then they saw every high hill, and all the thick trees, and they offered there their sacrifices, and there they presented the provocation of their offering: there also they made their sweet savour, and poured out there their drink offerings.
Then I said unto them, What is the high place whereunto ye go? And the name thereof is called Bamah unto this day.
Wherefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers? and commit ye whoredom after their abominations?
For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be inquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will not be inquired of by you.
And that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone.

Jeremiah 19:3-5 ( KJV )
And say, Hear ye the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle.
Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents;
They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:

Jeremiah 32:32-35 ( KJV )
Because of all the evil of the children of Israel and of the children of Judah, which they have done to provoke me to anger, they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their prophets, and the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
And they have turned unto me the back, and not the face: though I taught them, rising up early and teaching them, yet they have not hearkened to receive instruction.
But they set their abominations in the house, which is called by my name, to defile it.
And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

This is what they are actually doing by saying the ransom was paid to God. Then there is the absurdity of the scenario, consider what actually takes place if the ransom was paid to God.
It would go something like this; God owns mankind and kidnaps mankind from Himself. God then demands that He pay Himself a ransom and this ransom in the death of His own Son. So then God offer His Son to Himself and proceeds to kill His own Son so that He can give mankind back to Himself.
How absurd is that, Especially sin God said He would forgive sins? If this was a human would anyone say, Oh, what a loving father, he sacrificed his son to save his other children? No, they would call him a monster and put him in prison, yet many are accusing God of this very thing when they say the ransom was paid to God. Now, I’m not saying it is intentional, I don’t think many have really thought through this issue thoroughly. However, that is the logical conclusion of the doctrine.


I disagree, the power of sin isn’t deactivated, the apostle continuously warn against falling into sin.Thanks. I was going to reply, but first I wanted to ask a question. If a ransom has been paid to Satan, why do people still die?

dagar
Feb 16th 2011, 01:00 AM
And you simply have to ignore the Scriptures.


Hebrews 2:14 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

This isn't the first time you have contradicted the Scriptures. If they are not authoritative to you then we have no basis for discussion.No where have I contradicted Scripture. All you have shown is that you understand it differently. Problem. If Satan had the power of death, then God didn't, and now you have contradicted and ignored much basic simple foundational scripture, so don't talk to me about contradictions and having to ignore the Scriptures ;) . This is why we have no basis for discussion Butch. You don't know the basics, so there's no way we can discuss anything beyond the basics. If you were correct, it would have ended in the garden.

episkopos
Feb 16th 2011, 01:18 AM
How did implementing the Mosaic Law advance the goal of redeeming mankind for eternal life?


For 2 things! For a representation or "type" of holiness until Christ came. And for the sake of instruction in righteousness. As Paul said...

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 2 Tim. 3:16

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 03:26 AM
I don't think about things in terms of outside forces, like Satan, who might do this or that to me. (I think some Christians are overly fascinated with Satan as if he is some kind of boogie man, using him as the explanation for why bad things happen.) I think about things in terms of who I am, what I want, and how I relate to God and his son. I don't think in terms of being in bondage to Satan, or the Devil or some outside agency. I think in terms of being in bondage to myself: my own fear, ignorance, foolishness, superstitions, dark heart, suspicious mind, selfish attitudes, needy disposition, greedy aspirations, and such as these. To be set free, is to be set free of these. Liberation will be seen in terms of overcoming fears (courage) and overcoming ignorance (knowledge gained) and overcoming foolishness (wisdom gained). Gaining courage, knowledge, and wisdom helps me overcome the other things such as superstition, suspiciousness, selfishness and greed. Actual and real liberation isn't being set free from an evil spirit being as if he had anything to do with it; it's being set free from flaws of my own character. The spiritual chains of darkness are internal in the inner man/woman and liberation is a change of the inner man/woman.

The Holy Spirit is the one who sets us free, giving us the knowledge, wisdom, courage, change of perspective, change of orientation, and commitment to truth and goodness. The Bible may speak in terms of an adversary, who places people in chains of darkness, but the reality of the matter is we place ourselves in these chains. All Satan does is use lies that appeal to wicked, ambitious, selfish, needy, greedy, desires that we already have. He couldn't place us in chains if we didn't already want what he is offering. We seem to have the idea that we are innocent victims and that Satan is the reason why we are suffering the consequences of our bad decisions. But that isn't true. We may moan and groan and say, "Oh God, I wish I had never started smoking, taken cocaine, slept with that hooker, bought that expensive car I couldn't afford, loaned all my money to a guy from out of town, given my kidney to a guy who said he was my father, etc." But it wasn't Satan that made you smoke or do drugs. It was your own desire to be cool, different, popular, appreciated, loved, etc.

People are set free from "Satan", if you like, through honesty and a love for the truth, which the Holy Spirit helps us get.

So, then there was no need to be set free from Satan? Man could have accomplished this without the help of Christ corrrect?

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 03:29 AM
Thanks. I was going to reply, but first I wanted to ask a question. If a ransom has been paid to Satan, why do people still die?

Because they sin. Paul said the wages of sin is death, all sin, all die. The ransom gives God back his property. Just as a father who paid a ransom would regain his child. It seems this was a common occurrence in the days of Christ, thus making Jesus point more vivid.

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 03:32 AM
No where have I contradicted Scripture. All you have shown is that you understand it differently. Problem. If Satan had the power of death, then God didn't, and now you have contradicted and ignored much basic simple foundational scripture, so don't talk to me about contradictions and having to ignore the Scriptures ;) . This is why we have no basis for discussion Butch. You don't know the basics, so there's no way we can discuss anything beyond the basics. If you were correct, it would have ended in the garden.

Sorry friend, I think I have enough of a track record here to show that I understand the basics. You, said that Satan did not have the power of death Scripture says otherwise. Since you seem to think the ransom was paid to death, please feel free to enlighten us as to how a ransom is paid to something that is not physical? Death is not a thing, it is the absence of life, so please feel free to explain how death would demand and receive a ransom.

LookingUp
Feb 16th 2011, 03:45 AM
Because they sin. Paul said the wages of sin is death, all sin, all die. The ransom gives God back his property. Just as a father who paid a ransom would regain his child. It seems this was a common occurrence in the days of Christ, thus making Jesus point more vivid.How did Jesus render Satan powerless? Did Jesus take away Satan's ability to kill through sin?

Hawkins
Feb 16th 2011, 03:46 AM
What matter is the Law. God has all the power to destroy death any time. But He's set up Law to rule such that freewills can understand His deed.

And by His Law, humans are captive to Satan, they sin under his influence (as Adam did). Jesus is thus the ransom paid to redeem those captive and are willing to return.

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 03:53 AM
How did Jesus render Satan powerless? Did Jesus take away Satan's ability to kill through sin?

Jesus has possession of mankind, Satan no longer does.

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Christ's death was the ransom that freed mankind. Christ bought back what belonged to God, Satan no longer has control over mankind, God does.

LookingUp
Feb 16th 2011, 04:00 AM
Jesus has possession of mankind, Satan no longer does.

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Christ's death was the ransom that freed mankind. Christ bought back what belonged to God, Satan no longer has control over mankind, God does.Sorry. I'm trying to follow. In what way did Satan have the power over death that he doesn't now?

LookingUp
Feb 16th 2011, 04:05 AM
Because they sin. Paul said the wages of sin is death, all sin, all die. The ransom gives God back his property. Just as a father who paid a ransom would regain his child. It seems this was a common occurrence in the days of Christ, thus making Jesus point more vivid.Still thinkin'. So, we became slaves to Satan by our choice to sin. Satan "owned" us in this sense. In order to get us back, ransom (Christ) was paid. Is that right?

In what way was Christ given to and accepted by Satan?

Hawkins
Feb 16th 2011, 04:25 AM
Still thinkin'. So, we became slaves to Satan by our choice to sin. Satan "owned" us in this sense. In order to get us back, ransom (Christ) was paid. Is that right?

In what way was Christ given to and accepted by Satan?

Again, what matters is the Law. By His Law, Jesus Christ's sacrifice can save. The "ransom" analogy is just for humans to understand the situation.

Hawkins
Feb 16th 2011, 04:27 AM
Sorry. I'm trying to follow. In what way did Satan have the power over death that he doesn't now?

Jesus owns the key such that He can lead the spiritual Exodus when time comes. Satan can no longer keep those captive people.

markedward
Feb 16th 2011, 04:48 AM
Scripture never says that Christ was "given to and accepted by Satan". It unambiguously says that Christ was offered to God, as a sacrifice to God, as a ransom to God, as a redemption to God. It nowhere, ever, suggests that he was killed as a ransom to Satan, or as a bait-and-switch to Satan, or anything of the sort.

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 09:28 PM
Sorry. I'm trying to follow. In what way did Satan have the power over death that he doesn't now?

I don't think it is so much about the power of death, but rather that Satan no longer has control over mankind. Think of it as a slave. A slave has no real control of anything in their lives. They are controlled by the master. The slave could choose to be free, but unless the master freed them the are not free. Christ being the ransom bought mankind, he is now in possession of mankind. Christ and God give mankind his choice, if he chooses to be free he can be. When Satan had mankind under his control he would destine man to death, he would destroy God's handiwork.

LookingUp
Feb 16th 2011, 09:51 PM
I don't think it is so much about the power of death, but rather that Satan no longer has control over mankind. Think of it as a slave. A slave has no real control of anything in their lives. They are controlled by the master. The slave could choose to be free, but unless the master freed them the are not free. Christ being the ransom bought mankind, he is now in possession of mankind. Christ and God give mankind his choice, if he chooses to be free he can be. When Satan had mankind under his control he would destine man to death, he would destroy God's handiwork.How is life different than life for the OT saint? The OT saint could also choose whether to follow Satan or God.

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 10:08 PM
Still thinkin'. So, we became slaves to Satan by our choice to sin. Satan "owned" us in this sense. In order to get us back, ransom (Christ) was paid. Is that right?

In what way was Christ given to and accepted by Satan?

That's not quite how I understand it. It is not "We". I see it as an event in the past. In the garden Adam and Eve disobeyed God and obeyed Satan, thus falling under Satan's power or control (Kidnapped). In due time Christ comes as the Ransom (His life for that of mankind), He has purchased back mankind. The way I understand it is that from that time on men are "Not" a slave to Satan unless they choose to be. Remember from the cross Christ is in possession of mankind.

How was Christ given to Satan? The Scriptures don't really go into a lot detail about the how's of it. They tell us that Christ was a ransom. Here is an excerpt from Irenaeus.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V



Chap. XXI.—Christ Is the Head of All Things Already Mentioned. It Was Fitting That He Should Be Sent by the Father, the Creator of All Things, to Assume Human Nature, and Should Be Tempted by Satan, That He Might Fulfil the Promises, and Carry Off a Glorious and Perfect Victory.


1. He has therefore, in His work of recapitulation, summed up all things, both waging war against our enemy, and crushing him who had at the beginning led us away captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head, as thou canst perceive in Genesis that God said to the serpent, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; He shall be on the watch for (observabit) thy head, and thou on the watch for His heel.” (Gen. 3:15) For from that time, He who should be born of a woman, [namely] from the Virgin, after the likeness of Adam, was preached as keeping watch for the head of the serpent. This is the seed of which the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians, “that the law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” (Gal. 3:19) This fact is exhibited in a still clearer light in the same Epistle, where he thus speaks: “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.” (Gal. 4:4) For indeed the enemy would not have been fairly vanquished, unless it had been a man [born] of a woman who conquered him. For it was by means of a woman that he got the advantage over man at first, setting himself up as man’s opponent. And therefore does the Lord profess Himself to be the Son of man, comprising in Himself that original man out of whom the woman was fashioned (ex quo ea quae secundum mulierem est plasmatio facta est), in order that, as our species went down to death through a vanquished man, so we may ascend to life again through a victorious one; and as through a man death received the palm [of victory] against us, so again by a man we may receive the palm against death.

2. Now the Lord would not have recapitulated in Himself that ancient and primary enmity against the serpent, fulfilling the promise of the Creator (Demiurgi), and performing His command, if He had come from another Father. But as He is one and the same, who formed us at the beginning, and sent His Son at the end, the Lord did perform His command, being made of a woman, by both destroying our adversary, and perfecting man after the image and likeness of God. And for this reason He did not draw the means of confounding him from any other source than from the words of the law, and made use of the Father’s commandment as a help towards the destruction and confusion of the apostate angel. Fasting forty days, like Moses and Elias, He afterwards hungered, first, in order that we may perceive that He was a real and substantial man—for it belongs to a man to suffer hunger when fasting; and secondly, that His opponent might have an opportunity of attacking Him. For as at the beginning it was by means of food that [the enemy] persuaded man, although not suffering hunger, to transgress God’s commandments, so in the end he did not succeed in persuading Him that was an hungered to take that food which proceeded from God. For, when tempting Him, he said, “If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.” (Matt. 4:3) But the Lord repulsed him by the commandment of the law, saying, “It is written, Man doth not live by bread alone.” (Deut. 8:3) As to those words [of His enemy,] “If thou be the Son of God,” [the Lord] made no remark; but by thus acknowledging His human nature He baffled His adversary, and exhausted the force of his first attack by means of His Father’s word. The corruption of man, therefore, which occurred in paradise by both [of our first parents] eating, was done away with by [the Lord’s] want of food in this world. But he, being thus vanquished by the law, endeavoured again to make an assault by himself quoting a commandment of the law. For, bringing Him to the highest pinnacle of the temple, he said to Him, “If thou art the Son of God, cast thyself down. For it is written, That God shall give His angels charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest perchance thou dash thy foot against a stone;” (Ps. 89:11) thus concealing a falsehood under the guise of Scripture, as is done by all the heretics. For that was indeed written, [namely], “That He hath given His angels charge concerning Him;” but “east thyself down from hence” no Scripture said in reference to Him: this kind of persuasion the devil produced from himself. The Lord therefore confuted him out of the law, when He said, “It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God;” (Deut. 6:16) pointing out by the word contained in the law that which is the duty of man, that he should not tempt God; and in regard to Himself, since He appeared in human form, [declaring] that He would not tempt the Lord his God. The pride of reason, therefore, which was in the serpent, was put to nought by the humility found in the man [Christ], and now twice was the devil conquered from Scripture, when he was detected as advising things contrary to God’s commandment, and was shown to be the enemy of God by [the expression of] his thoughts. He then, having been thus signally defeated, and then, as it were, concentrating his forces, drawing up in order all his available power for falsehood, in the third place “showed Him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them,” (Luke 4:6, 7) saying, as Luke relates, “All these will I give thee,—for they are delivered to me; and to whom I will, I give them,—if thou wilt fall down and worship me.” The Lord then, exposing him in his true character, says, “Depart, Satan; for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.” (Matt. 4:10) He both revealed him by this name, and showed [at the same time] who He Himself was. For the Hebrew word “Satan” signifies an apostate. And thus, vanquishing him for the third time, He spurned him from Him finally as being conquered out of the law; and there was done away with that infringement of God’s commandment which had occurred in Adam, by means of the precept of the law, which the Son of man observed, who did not transgress the commandment of God.

3. Who, then, is this Lord God to whom Christ bears witness, whom no man shall tempt, whom all should worship, and serve Him alone? It is, beyond all manner of doubt, that God who also gave the law. For these things had been predicted in the law, and by the words (sententiam) of the law the Lord showed that the law does indeed declare the Word of God from the Father; and the apostate angel of God is destroyed by its voice, being exposed in his true colours, and vanquished by the Son of man keeping the commandment of God. For as in the beginning he enticed man to transgress his Maker’s law, and thereby got him into his power; yet his power consists in transgression and apostasy, and with these he bound man [to himself]; so again, on the other hand, it was necessary that through man himself he should, when conquered, be bound with the same chains with which he had bound man, in order that man, being set free, might return to his Lord, leaving to him (Satan) those bonds by which he himself had been fettered, that is, sin. For when Satan is bound, man is set free; since “none can enter a strong man’s house and spoil his goods, unless he first bind the strong man himself.” (Matt. 12:29 and Mark 3:27) The Lord therefore exposes him as speaking contrary to the word of that God who made all things, and subdues him by means of the commandment. Now the law is the commandment of God. The Man proves him to be a fugitive from and a transgressor of the law, an apostate also from God. After [the Man had done this], the Word bound him securely as a fugitive from Himself, and made spoil of his goods,—namely, those men whom he held in bondage, and whom he unjustly used for his own purposes. And justly indeed is he led captive, who had led men unjustly into bondage; while man, who had been led captive in times past, was rescued from the grasp of his possessor, according to the tender mercy of God the Father, who had compassion on His own handiwork, and gave to it salvation, restoring it by means of the Word—that is, by Christ—in order that men might learn by actual proof that he receives incorruptibility not of himself, but by the free gift of God.

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 10:10 PM
How is life different than life for the OT saint? The OT saint could also choose whether to follow Satan or God.

See if the excerpt fro Irenaeus helps.

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 10:22 PM
How is life different than life for the OT saint? The OT saint could also choose whether to follow Satan or God.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V


Chap. XXIV.—Of the Constant Falsehood of the Devil, and of the Powers and Governments of the World, Which We Ought to Obey, Inasmuch as They Are Appointed of God, Not of the Devil.

1. As therefore the devil lied at the beginning, so did he also in the end, when he said, “All these are delivered unto me, and to whomsoever I will I give them.” (Matt. 4:9; Luke 4:6) For it is not he who has appointed the kingdoms of this world, but God; for “the heart of the king is in the hand of God.” (Prov. 21:1) And the Word also says by Solomon, “By me kings do reign, and princes administer justice. By me chiefs are raised up, and by me kings rule the earth.” (Prov. 8:15) Paul the apostle also says upon this same subject: “Be ye subject to all the higher powers; for there is no power but of God: now those which are have been ordained of God.” (Rom. 13:1) And again, in reference to them he says, “For he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, the avenger for wrath to him who does evil.” (Rom. 13:4) Now, that he spake these words, not in regard to angelical powers, nor of invisible rulers—as some venture to expound the passage—but of those of actual human authorities, [he shows when] he says, “For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, doing service for this very thing.” (Rom. 13:6) This also the Lord confirmed, when He did not do what He was tempted to by the devil; but He gave directions that tribute should be paid to the tax-gatherers for Himself and Peter; (Matt. 17:27) because “they are the ministers of God, serving for this very thing.”

2. For since man, by departing from God, reached such a pitch of fury as even to look upon his brother as his enemy, and engaged without fear in every kind of restless conduct, and murder, and avarice; God imposed upon mankind the fear of man, as they did not acknowledge the fear of God, in order that, being subjected to the authority of men, and kept under restraint by their laws, they might attain to some degree of justice, and exercise mutual forbearance through dread of the sword suspended full in their view, as the apostle says: “For he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, the avenger for wrath upon him who does evil.” And for this reason too, magistrates themselves, having laws as a clothing of righteousness whenever they act in a just and legitimate manner, shall not be called in question for their conduct, nor be liable to punishment. But whatsoever they do to the subversion of justice, iniquitously, and impiously, and illegally, and tyrannically, in these things shall they also perish; for the just judgment of God comes equally upon all, and in no case is defective. Earthly rule, therefore, has been appointed by God for the benefit of nations, and not by the devil, who is never at rest at all, nay, who does not love to see even nations conducting themselves after a quiet manner, so that under the fear of human rule, men may not eat each other up like fishes; but that, by means of the establishment of laws, they may keep down an excess of wickedness among the nations. And considered from this point of view, those who exact tribute from us are “God’s ministers, serving for this very purpose.”

3. As, then, “the powers that be are ordained of God,” it is clear that the devil lied when he said, “These are delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will, I give them.” For by the law of the same Being as calls men into existence are kings also appointed, adapted for those men who are at the time placed under their government. Some of these [rulers] are given for the correction and the benefit of their subjects, and for the preservation of justice; but others, for the purposes of fear and punishment and rebuke: others, as [the subjects] deserve it, are for deception, disgrace, and pride; while the just judgment of God, as I have observed already, passes equally upon all. The devil, however, as he is the apostate angel, can only go to this length, as he did at the beginning, [namely] to deceive and lead astray the mind of man into disobeying the commandments of God, and 553 gradually to darken the hearts of those who would endeavour to serve him, to the forgetting of the true God, but to the adoration of himself as God.

4. Just as if any one, being an apostate, and seizing in a hostile manner another man’s territory, should harass the inhabitants of it, in order that he might claim for himself the glory of a king among those ignorant of his apostasy and robbery; so likewise also the devil, being one among those angels who are placed over the spirit of the air, as the Apostle Paul has declared in his Epistle to the Ephesians, (Eph. 2:2) becoming envious of man, was rendered an apostate from the divine law: for envy is a thing foreign to God. And as his apostasy was exposed by man, and man became the [means of] searching out his thoughts (et examinatio sententioe ejus, homo factus est), he has set himself to this with greater and greater determination, in opposition to man, envying his life, and wishing to involve him in his own apostate power. The Word of God, however, the Maker of all things, conquering him by means of human nature, and showing him to be an apostate, has, on the contrary, put him under the power of man. For He says, “Behold, I confer upon you the power of treading upon serpents and scorpions, and upon all the power of the enemy,” (Luke 10:19) in order that, as he obtained dominion over man by apostasy, so again his apostasy might be deprived of power by means of man turning back again to God.

Butch5
Feb 16th 2011, 10:25 PM
Scripture never says that Christ was "given to and accepted by Satan". It unambiguously says that Christ was offered to God, as a sacrifice to God, as a ransom to God, as a redemption to God. It nowhere, ever, suggests that he was killed as a ransom to Satan, or as a bait-and-switch to Satan, or anything of the sort.

Scripture says that Christ offered Himself to God, yes. It doesn't say He was a ransom to God.

markedward
Feb 17th 2011, 12:57 AM
He certainly wasn't simultaneously "sacrificed" to God, and "ransomed" to Satan. It makes no sense to say that Jesus was a sacrificial offering to God and a ransom offering to Satan. How is one individual offered to two persons, let alone two persons of the exact opposite dispositions?

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 01:02 AM
That's not quite how I understand it. It is not "We". I see it as an event in the past. In the garden Adam and Eve disobeyed God and obeyed Satan . . .What? Where did you get the idea that Eve obeyed Satan? That's not what happened at all. It's clear from the text that Eve was contemplating eating from the tree well before the serpent showed up. And Satan didn't command Eve to do anything. All Satan did was give Eve information -- some true, some purposely false. Eve ate of the tree, not because Satan commanded her, but because she wanted to eat it.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 01:12 AM
He certainly wasn't simultaneously "sacrificed" to God, and "ransomed" to Satan. It makes no sense to say that Jesus was a sacrificial offering to God and a ransom offering to Satan. How is one individual offered to two persons, let alone two persons of the exact opposite dispositions?

Where does Scripture say that He was a sacrificial offering to God?

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 01:23 AM
Where does Scripture say that He was a sacrificial offering to God?Please. Butch, do yourself a favor, toss the ECF's, and return to our scriptures. Do a word search on the term "cross" and see observe that the purpose of the cross was for reconciliation, and has nothing at all, not a single thing to do with Satan. Period.

markedward
Feb 17th 2011, 01:24 AM
Where does Scripture say that He was a sacrificila offering to God?Aside from it being a given via Jesus being called the "Lamb of God" by John the Baptizer, and the "Lamb" by John the Revelator, and "our Passover Lamb" by Paul, each hearkening to the lambs sacrificed under the Law.

Ephesians 5.2: Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.

Hebrews 9.24,26,28: For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. ... But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. ... so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many...

Unless you want to claim that the sacrifices of the Law were sacrificial offerings to Satan, or unless you want to claim that Satan and God are the same being, it's very clear from Scripture that Jesus was a sacrifice/offering to God, and that nothing in Scripture implies or suggests that he was a sacrifice/offering to Satan.

LookingUp
Feb 17th 2011, 01:49 AM
Please. Butch, do yourself a favor, toss the ECF's, and return to our scriptures. Do a word search on the term "cross" and see observe that the purpose of the cross was for reconciliation, and has nothing at all, not a single thing to do with Satan. Period.How can you say the purpose of the cross has nothing to do with Satan? Yes, “he appeared in order to take away sins” (1 Jn 3:5) but you must not ignore that “the Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil” (1 Jn 3:8). You can’t divorce the purpose of his life from the purpose of the cross. The destruction of the devil is connected to our reconciliation. How?

dagar
Feb 17th 2011, 02:05 AM
I think, and hope, he meant for (offer) Satan? That's how I read it, and agree.

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 02:19 AM
How can you say the purpose of the cross has nothing to do with Satan? Yes, “he appeared in order to take away sins” (1 Jn 3:5) but you must not ignore that “the Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil” (1 Jn 3:8). You can’t divorce the purpose of his life from the purpose of the cross. The destruction of the devil is connected to our reconciliation. How?Yes, John says that Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. But he doesn't say that he would use the cross exclusively to do this. And more importantly for Butch to hear,

Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him the glory forever. Amen.Romans 11:33-35

The answer is, no one -- not even Satan. God didn't owe Satan anything at all. Satan didn't own human beings as if God had to give Satan something in exchange for them.

I realize that Paul says the devil has the power of death. But he is using a metaphor. In reality, all the devil has at his disposal are lies, propoganda, seduction, manipulation, tricks, misdirection, flattery, and things such as these. If the devil can talk you into living a life of darkness, disolution, dissipation, and such, leading you into oblivion, this is how he has the power of death. The cross, by itself, doesn't defeat the power of death. Rather, the cross paved the way to reconciliation with God. It is God who has the power of life and if we want life we need to get to God. Jesus is the only way to God and ultimately to Life with a capital L -- human flourishing, the significance of being a holy and good person, wellbeing, contentment, health, prosperity and no chance of loosing any of it. John summarizes this in his preamble to his gospel.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. [B]In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not extinguish it. John 1:1-5

This is the most beautiful passage in all of scripture. John begins his gospel with the conclusion of the story. The purpose of human life is to live a vigorous thriving life, eternaly happy, content, healthy, prosperous, righteous, and good. John wants to tell us the story of how human and demonic forces attempted to extinquish all possiblity of our finding this life but the Light shines in the darkness and the darkness couldn't put it out.

LookingUp
Feb 17th 2011, 03:03 AM
Yes, John says that Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. But he doesn't say that he would use the cross exclusively to do this. And more importantly for Butch to hear,

Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him the glory forever. Amen.Romans 11:33-35

The answer is, no one -- not even Satan. God didn't owe Satan anything at all. Satan didn't own human beings as if God had to give Satan something in exchange for them.

I realize that Paul says the devil has the power of death. But he is using a metaphor. In reality, all the devil has at his disposal are lies, propoganda, seduction, manipulation, tricks, misdirection, flattery, and things such as these. If the devil can talk you into living a life of darkness, disolution, dissipation, and such, leading you into oblivion, this is how he has the power of death. The cross, by itself, doesn't defeat the power of death. Rather, the cross paved the way to reconciliation with God. It is God who has the power of life and if we want life we need to get to God. Jesus is the only way to God and ultimately to Life with a capital L -- human flourishing, the significance of being a holy and good person, wellbeing, contentment, health, prosperity and no chance of loosing any of it. John summarizes this in his preamble to his gospel.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. [B]In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not extinguish it. John 1:1-5

This is the most beautiful passage in all of scripture. John begins his gospel with the conclusion of the story. The purpose of human life is to live a vigorous thriving life, eternaly happy, content, healthy, prosperous, righteous, and good. John wants to tell us the story of how human and demonic forces attempted to extinquish all possiblity of our finding this life but the Light shines in the darkness and the darkness couldn't put it out.It seems Christ didn’t redeem us from Satan, he redeemed us from the curse of the law (Gal 3:13), which I think of as the second death. I realize this was first done by getting us, enemies of God, in a position to receive forgiveness and this this was accomplished through his atoning sacrifice. But what part does Satan play in the reality that we were on our way to the second death? As I read the OT and NT, I see a running theme: good versus evil. Satan seems to be the one leading the pack of those wanting to be on the side of evil. When we side with Satan through sin, we become enemies of God (traitors siding with Satan’s kingdom, which Jesus says he has in Mt. 12:26). The NT especially makes it clear that Satan is a force to be reckoned with. The world is under his power (1 Jn 5:19) and Jesus came to battle it out with him. If Satan was no threat, I don’t see why the NT authors would go to such lengths to make him out to look so formidable. If the cross was just about our sin, why go to such lengths to show Satan’s part in our sin? In what way did the atoning sacrifice deal with vanquishing Satan’s kingdom rule?

dagar
Feb 17th 2011, 03:38 AM
Yes, John says that Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. But he doesn't say that he would use the cross exclusively to do this.What else then? We have something else to glory in? 1Co 1:23-31

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 02:34 PM
Aside from it being a given via Jesus being called the "Lamb of God" by John the Baptizer, and the "Lamb" by John the Revelator, and "our Passover Lamb" by Paul, each hearkening to the lambs sacrificed under the Law.

Ephesians 5.2: Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.

Hebrews 9.24,26,28: For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. ... But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. ... so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many...

Unless you want to claim that the sacrifices of the Law were sacrificial offerings to Satan, or unless you want to claim that Satan and God are the same being, it's very clear from Scripture that Jesus was a sacrifice/offering to God, and that nothing in Scripture implies or suggests that he was a sacrifice/offering to Satan.

Come on Mark, you can't change the wording now. You said Christ was a ransom paid to God, I asked where the Scriptures say such a thing. There is no doubt that Christ offered Himself to God, that however, does not require Him to be a ransom.

Since you think that Christ was a ransom to God, please explain to me how that is not putting God on the same lever with Baal and Molech. The pagans offered human sacrifices to appease the wrath of their gods. Your argument that Christ was a ransom paid to God does the exact same thing. In effect this says that God requires human sacrifice, do you really believe that? If so and human sacrifice appeases the wrath of God, where does forgiveness play any role?

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 03:36 PM
What else then? We have something else to glory in? 1Co 1:23-31I don't understand the question.

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 03:42 PM
It seems Christ didn’t redeem us from Satan, he redeemed us from the curse of the law (Gal 3:13), which I think of as the second death. I realize this was first done by getting us, enemies of God, in a position to receive forgiveness and this this was accomplished through his atoning sacrifice. But what part does Satan play in the reality that we were on our way to the second death? As I read the OT and NT, I see a running theme: good versus evil. Satan seems to be the one leading the pack of those wanting to be on the side of evil. When we side with Satan through sin, we become enemies of God (traitors siding with Satan’s kingdom, which Jesus says he has in Mt. 12:26). The NT especially makes it clear that Satan is a force to be reckoned with. The world is under his power (1 Jn 5:19) and Jesus came to battle it out with him. If Satan was no threat, I don’t see why the NT authors would go to such lengths to make him out to look so formidable. If the cross was just about our sin, why go to such lengths to show Satan’s part in our sin? In what way did the atoning sacrifice deal with vanquishing Satan’s kingdom rule?What part does Satan play in your sin? Don't you have free will?

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 03:52 PM
It seems Christ didn’t redeem us from Satan, he redeemed us from the curse of the law (Gal 3:13), which I think of as the second death. I realize this was first done by getting us, enemies of God, in a position to receive forgiveness and this this was accomplished through his atoning sacrifice. But what part does Satan play in the reality that we were on our way to the second death? As I read the OT and NT, I see a running theme: good versus evil. Satan seems to be the one leading the pack of those wanting to be on the side of evil. When we side with Satan through sin, we become enemies of God (traitors siding with Satan’s kingdom, which Jesus says he has in Mt. 12:26). The NT especially makes it clear that Satan is a force to be reckoned with. The world is under his power (1 Jn 5:19) and Jesus came to battle it out with him. If Satan was no threat, I don’t see why the NT authors would go to such lengths to make him out to look so formidable. If the cross was just about our sin, why go to such lengths to show Satan’s part in our sin? In what way did the atoning sacrifice deal with vanquishing Satan’s kingdom rule?

Here's something else to think about Julie. Remember you asked if it was just Christ's death that was necessary to be saved, why didn't God send Him sooner? If is was just the death of Christ needed to pay for man's sins, and His death was God's doing, why not let Him simply die in His sleep peacefully? That would accomplish what was necessary. There was no need for Christ to suffer the pain and torment of the cross or the beating he took prior to the cross. It was simply death. Torture was never given as the wages of sin. It seems that the devil had his hand in it.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 04:05 PM
Please. Butch, do yourself a favor, toss the ECF's, and return to our scriptures. Do a word search on the term "cross" and see observe that the purpose of the cross was for reconciliation, and has nothing at all, not a single thing to do with Satan. Period.

Yeah, that's the answer, toss the evidence. There's a reason these men believed this Rog. I don't think they all made this up. They were privy to a lot of information that you are not privy to. Have you read the letter to the Laodiceans, I don't think so, what about Paul's letters to the Corinthians? Have you read any other than the two in our Bible? He wrote at least one more. I don't think you've read that one. What about the oral tradition that Paul and the other apostles had given, were you privy to that? I don't think so. So, you're basically saying these men don't know what their talking about, yet you don't even have as much information as they did. You guys are insisting that Satan had no power over man yet he Scriptures tell us otherwise, if you don't believe the Scriptures you surely wouldn't believe what the ECF's said, so, I'm not the least bit surprised. It's funny that you say return to the Scriptures, yet when I gave them to you cried it doesn't say that. You didn't even accept the words of Christ Himself who told Paul He was sending him to turn the Gentiles from the power of Satan. If the cross had nothing to do with Satan, why was Christ sent to destroy the works of the devil? Why did Paul say that "THROGUH DEATH" (Which was the Cross) Christ might destroy him who had the power of death, that is the devil? You seem to think that Satan is nothing to be concerned about. The Scriptures tell us otherwise.


1 Chronicles 21:1 ( KJV )
And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

A man after God's own heart, yet he was influenced by Satan.

Daniel 10:10-21 ( KJV )
And, behold, an hand touched me, which set me upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands.
And he said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright: for unto thee am I now sent. And when he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling.
Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.
Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days.
And when he had spoken such words unto me, I set my face toward the ground, and I became dumb.
And, behold, one like the similitude of the sons of men touched my lips: then I opened my mouth, and spake, and said unto him that stood before me, O my lord, by the vision my sorrows are turned upon me, and I have retained no strength.
For how can the servant of this my lord talk with this my lord? for as for me, straightway there remained no strength in me, neither is there breath left in me.
Then there came again and touched me one like the appearance of a man, and he strengthened me,
And said, O man greatly beloved, fear not: peace be unto thee, be strong, yea, be strong. And when he had spoken unto me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me.
Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
But I will show thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.


Zechariah 3:1-2 ( KJV )
And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.
And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?


Mark 4:15 ( KJV )
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.


Luke 10:18-19 ( KJV )
And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

The had power over the power of the enemy, yet we still see that Peter was later sifted by Satan.

Luke 13:15-16 ( KJV )
The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering?
And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?

Luke 22:3 ( KJV )
Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

Luke 22:31 ( KJV )
And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:

Acts 5:3 ( KJV )
But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

Acts 26:15-18 ( KJV )
And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Romans 16:20 ( KJV )
And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

1 Corinthians 5:5 ( KJV )
To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

1 Corinthians 7:5 ( KJV )
Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

2 Corinthians 2:10-11 ( KJV )
To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

2 Corinthians 11:11-15 ( KJV )
Wherefore? because I love you not? God knoweth.
But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

2 Corinthians 12:7 ( KJV )
And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

1 Thessalonians 2:17-18 ( KJV )
But we, brethren, being taken from you for a short time in presence, not in heart, endeavoured the more abundantly to see your face with great desire.
Wherefore we would have come unto you, even I Paul, once and again; but Satan hindered us.

2 Thessalonians 2:7-10 ( KJV )
For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

1 Timothy 1:20 ( KJV )
Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

1 Timothy 5:14-15 ( KJV )
I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.
For some are already turned aside after Satan.

Revelation 12:7-13 ( KJV )
And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

\Matthew 9:32 ( KJV )
As they went out, behold, they brought to him a dumb man possessed with a devil.

Matthew 12:22 ( KJV )
Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.

Matthew 13:37-43 ( KJV )
He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Matthew 15:22 ( KJV )
And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.

Matthew 17:18 ( KJV )
And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour.

Mark 5:15 ( KJV )
And they come to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.

Acts 10:38 ( KJV )
How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

Acts 13:8-10 ( KJV )
But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith.
Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him,
And said, O full of all subtlety and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?

Ephesians 6:10-12 ( KJV )
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

1 Timothy 3:6-7 ( KJV )
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

2 Timothy 2:25-26 ( KJV )
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

James 4:7 ( KJV )
Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

1 Peter 5:8-9 ( KJV )
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.

1 John 3:7-8 ( KJV )
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

1 John 3:10 ( KJV )
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Revelation 2:10 ( KJV )
Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

I think I'll stop here, I'm getting tired. How's that? I returned to the Scriptures for you. You can pretend it has nothing to do with the devil if you like, however, I think it is quite clear the Scriptures indicate otherwise. You said,


BroRog---I don't think about things in terms of outside forces, like Satan, who might do this or that to me.

I think the Scriptures are clear.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 04:17 PM
Since you guys claim to have an understanding of this, how about you do as Irenaeus did. Why not give us an explanation of the atonement. Show us how Christ was a ransom and to whom, what purpose or purposes were accomplished by his life and death. What purpose if any you see in His being made flesh. And please, do this "Without" contradicting Scripture.

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 05:01 PM
Yeah, that's the answer, toss the evidence.I don't consider the ECF's to be evidence. I never will.


There's a reason these men believed this Rog. I don't think they all made this up.The ECF's make up all kinds of stuff.


They were privy to a lot of information that you are not privy to.I wish you would listen to me once. The ECF's are not fathers. "Father" means "originator" and the only original teaching we have is from Jesus and the apostles. The ECF's are guys like us who come to the scriptures with their biases, pre-conceptions, worldly philosophies, and excess cultural baggage. They got a lot of stuff wrong, just like we do. What they have to say is just opinion.


Have you read the letter to the Laodiceans, I don't think so, what about Paul's letters to the Corinthians? Have you read any other than the two in our Bible? He wrote at least one more. I don't think you've read that one. What about the oral tradition that Paul and the other apostles had given, were you privy to that? I don't think so. So, you're basically saying these men don't know what their talking about, yet you don't even have as much information as they did.This is completely irrelevant and I wish you could see that. Nobody has these documents. If we did, they would be in our Bibles. All you have is non-extant documents being filtered through the eyes of fallible people. Not only this but I doubt you are reading the ECF's in the original Greek, and if not, then you are reading a modern English interpretation of the ECF's. And finally, and most importantly, the ECF's are not infallible scripture. These men have nothing to teach me except, perhaps, what life was like back then.


You guys are insisting that Satan had no power over man yet he Scriptures tell us otherwise, if you don't believe the Scriptures you surely wouldn't believe what the ECF's said, so, I'm not the least bit surprised.I disagree with your spin on the scriptures, not the scriptures themselves.


It's funny that you say return to the Scriptures, yet when I gave them to you cried it doesn't say that.What you did before, and what you did just now, is list a bunch of proof texts, out of context I might add, without any commentary or attempt to make sense of the passages in the context of the discourse or the larger context of the entire Biblical picture. The thing is, you know better than this, which is why I feel such disappointment.


You didn't even accept the words of Christ Himself who told Paul He was sending him to turn the Gentiles from the power of Satan. If the cross had nothing to do with Satan, why was Christ sent to destroy the works of the devil?If the Cross destroyed the work of Satan, then why did Jesus have to send Paul to destroy the works of the devil? Ever think about THAT? The cross isn't the thing that actually destroys the work of the devil. If it was, then it would have destroyed on that fateful day. But it didn't did it? No. The cross wasn't some spooky magic bullet that destroyed the devil and his works. If it was, then the devil's work would have been destroyed THAT DAY -- end of story. But no, as Paul says, the cross stands as a demonstration, something like the bronze serpent in that in order to destroy the work of the devil, you and I need to look at it and make a decision about how we are situated with respect to it.


Why did Paul say that "THROGUH DEATH" (Which was the Cross) Christ might destroy him who had the power of death, that is the devil? You seem to think that Satan is nothing to be concerned about. The Scriptures tell us otherwise.Did I say that Satan was nothing to be concerned about? I think I said other things but not that. I remember reminding Lookingup what the works of the devil actually are, and what it means to actually be enslaved.


I think I'll stop here, I'm getting tired.Undoubtedly you are tired. How tired do you think you would get if you actually sat down and attempted to understand each passage?


How's that? I returned to the Scriptures for you. You can pretend it has nothing to do with the devil if you like, however, I think it is quite clear the Scriptures indicate otherwise.Undoubtedly there exists a spiritual creature we know as Satan, who has his own agenda for this world and uses his lies, deceit, propaganda, and such to manipulate things according to his plans. And without a doubt, human beings are seduced by his lies and live in darkness, superstition, doubt, fear, and ugly behavior. I don't think I said otherwise. But when I said that I don't think in terms of outside forces such as Satan or his minions, I was serious. The problem isn't Satan, the problem is my own wicked motivations and my own willingness to believe his lies. To focus on Satan and what he does is to place the focus on the wrong things.

Let's look at a scripture that puts this entire question into perspective. I want you to pay close attention to the role Satan plays in the following passage. Then I want you to pay attention to the conclusion. I'm sure this is a very familiar passage to most of us.



Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for [it will not come] unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains [will do so] until he is taken out of the way. Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.

What is Satan's role:
1. Deception through powers, signs, and false wonders, and "the deception of wickedness."

Human response and culpability:
1. Being motivated by a personal desire for wicked behavior, believed the lies of Satan.
2. Did not love the truth so as to be saved.
3. Took pleasure in wickedness.

God's judgment on human kind:
1. Brings on them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false.

Think about this for the moment. Who has the REAL power here? Would Satan be able to raise up a man of lawlessness if human kind was not predisposed to believe false signs and wonders? Would Satan be able to deceive human kind if we weren't already being motivated by our own lusts, pleasures, desires, and wickedness?

Paul isn't saying, "The apostasy can't come until Satan raises up the man of lawlessness." No way. Rather Paul is saying, "The apostasy can't come until humankind is so needy, so selfish, so wicked, so craven, so wanting the pleasures of life, so greedy and subject to avarice that they will believe any lie that promises them what they want." Sure, Satan is involved; but the real power of wickedness is in the black hearts of human beings. Without us, without our greed, envy, and ambition, he couldn't do anything.

markedward
Feb 17th 2011, 05:07 PM
Come on Mark, you can't change the wording now. You said Christ was a ransom paid to God, I asked where the Scriptures say such a thing.No... you asked, quote, "Where does Scripture say that He was a sacrificial offering to God?" Would you like me to show you?


Where does Scripture say that He was a sacrificial offering to God?

Don't accuse me of changing the wording. Your question used the words "sacrifice" and "offering" and "to God". The two passages I provided use those same words.


There is no doubt that Christ offered Himself to God, that however, does not require Him to be a ransom.A ransom is, by definition, a payment to someone for something/someone else. For Christ and his Apostles to call him a "ransom" necessarily means that his ransom/payment was being offered to someone else. Scripture only ever says that Christ was offered to God. It never says he was offered to Satan. So, was Christ's death a payment (ransom) offering to Satan, yes or no?


Since you think that Christ was a ransom to God,Was he a ransom offering to Satan, yes or no? If not, then to who?


please explain to me how that is not putting God on the same lever with Baal and Molech. The pagans offered human sacrifices to appease the wrath of their gods.I again point you to Ephesians 5.2 which explicitly says that "Christ ... gave himself up for us ... [as a] sacrifice to God." Christ was a human. Christ was a "sacrifice to God". Ergo, Christ was a human sacrifice to God.


where does forgiveness play any role?Christ was a sacrificial offering ("the Lamb of God") for the atonement of sins ("who takes away the sins of the world"). Those whom the sacrifice covers have their sins atoned for, and they are forgiven.


Yeah, that's the answer, toss the evidence.The Early Church Fathers are not "evidence" for your view. All they offer is an interpretation of the evidence, which is Scripture. Stick to Scripture only, not the Early Church Fathers. There's no problem with showing what they believed, but they aren't themselves "evidence" for your view.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 05:40 PM
No... you asked, quote, "Where does Scripture say that He was a sacrificial offering to God?" Would you like me to show you?

OK, I used the wrong words. Where does Scripture say that Christ was a "Ransom" to God?



Don't accuse me of changing the wording. Your question used the words "sacrifice" and "offering" and "to God". The two passages I provided use those same words.

As I said, I used the wrong words.


A ransom is, by definition, a payment to someone for something/someone else. For Christ and his Apostles to call him a "ransom" necessarily means that his ransom/payment was being offered to someone else. Scripture only ever says that Christ was offered to God. It never says he was offered to Satan. So, was Christ's death a payment (ransom) offering to Satan, yes or no?

You didn't answer, which was it? I've already made it clear that the the ransom was to Satan. If you disagree please answer my questions.



Was he a ransom offering to Satan, yes or no? If not, then to who?

As I said, I've already answered this, I'm waiting for you to answer it.


I again point you to Ephesians 5.2 which explicitly says that "Christ ... gave himself up for us ... [as a] sacrifice to God." Christ was a human. Christ was a "sacrifice to God". Ergo, Christ was a human sacrifice to God.

Does that mean He was a sacrifice used to appease the wrath of God? Sacrifice can used in different ways.



Christ was a sacrificial offering ("the Lamb of God") for the atonement of sins ("who takes away the sins of the world"). Those whom the sacrifice covers have their sins atoned for, and they are forgiven.

Please elaborate as I don't want to assume anything.


The Early Church Fathers are not "evidence" for your view. All they offer is an interpretation of the evidence, which is Scripture. Stick to Scripture only, not the Early Church Fathers. There's no problem with showing what they believed, but they aren't themselves "evidence" for your view.

It's not my view, it's theirs. And they are evidence for what the early church believed. What they beleived was believed by the church for a thousand years before this idea came along that you guys are propagating. Therefore you guys although I doubt you'll admit it must contend with the idea that what you are propagating implies that for 1000 years Christians didn't understand the atonement. Even worse, Christians who were "Directly" taught by Christ and the Apostles didn't understand the atonement. And, taking it to it's logical conclusion are saying that Christ and the apostles were not able to teach the them what the atonement meant. On the other hand though you guys are more than capable of understanding the atonement, even more capable than those who were in direct contact with Christ and His apostles. Really???

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 05:42 PM
I don't consider the ECF's to be evidence. I never will.

The ECF's make up all kinds of stuff.

I wish you would listen to me once. The ECF's are not fathers. "Father" means "originator" and the only original teaching we have is from Jesus and the apostles. The ECF's are guys like us who come to the scriptures with their biases, pre-conceptions, worldly philosophies, and excess cultural baggage. They got a lot of stuff wrong, just like we do. What they have to say is just opinion.

This is completely irrelevant and I wish you could see that. Nobody has these documents. If we did, they would be in our Bibles. All you have is non-extant documents being filtered through the eyes of fallible people. Not only this but I doubt you are reading the ECF's in the original Greek, and if not, then you are reading a modern English interpretation of the ECF's. And finally, and most importantly, the ECF's are not infallible scripture. These men have nothing to teach me except, perhaps, what life was like back then.

I disagree with your spin on the scriptures, not the scriptures themselves.

What you did before, and what you did just now, is list a bunch of proof texts, out of context I might add, without any commentary or attempt to make sense of the passages in the context of the discourse or the larger context of the entire Biblical picture. The thing is, you know better than this, which is why I feel such disappointment.

If the Cross destroyed the work of Satan, then why did Jesus have to send Paul to destroy the works of the devil? Ever think about THAT? The cross isn't the thing that actually destroys the work of the devil. If it was, then it would have destroyed on that fateful day. But it didn't did it? No. The cross wasn't some spooky magic bullet that destroyed the devil and his works. If it was, then the devil's work would have been destroyed THAT DAY -- end of story. But no, as Paul says, the cross stands as a demonstration, something like the bronze serpent in that in order to destroy the work of the devil, you and I need to look at it and make a decision about how we are situated with respect to it.

Did I say that Satan was nothing to be concerned about? I think I said other things but not that. I remember reminding Lookingup what the works of the devil actually are, and what it means to actually be enslaved.

Undoubtedly you are tired. How tired do you think you would get if you actually sat down and attempted to understand each passage?

Undoubtedly there exists a spiritual creature we know as Satan, who has his own agenda for this world and uses his lies, deceit, propaganda, and such to manipulate things according to his plans. And without a doubt, human beings are seduced by his lies and live in darkness, superstition, doubt, fear, and ugly behavior. I don't think I said otherwise. But when I said that I don't think in terms of outside forces such as Satan or his minions, I was serious. The problem isn't Satan, the problem is my own wicked motivations and my own willingness to believe his lies. To focus on Satan and what he does is to place the focus on the wrong things.

Let's look at a scripture that puts this entire question into perspective. I want you to pay close attention to the role Satan plays in the following passage. Then I want you to pay attention to the conclusion. I'm sure this is a very familiar passage to most of us.




Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for [it will not come] unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains [will do so] until he is taken out of the way. Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.


What is Satan's role:
1. Deception through powers, signs, and false wonders, and "the deception of wickedness."

Human response and culpability:
1. Being motivated by a personal desire for wicked behavior, believed the lies of Satan.
2. Did not love the truth so as to be saved.
3. Took pleasure in wickedness.

God's judgment on human kind:
1. Brings on them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false.

Think about this for the moment. Who has the REAL power here? Would Satan be able to raise up a man of lawlessness if human kind was not predisposed to believe false signs and wonders? Would Satan be able to deceive human kind if we weren't already being motivated by our own lusts, pleasures, desires, and wickedness?

Paul isn't saying, "The apostasy can't come until Satan raises up the man of lawlessness." No way. Rather Paul is saying, "The apostasy can't come until humankind is so needy, so selfish, so wicked, so craven, so wanting the pleasures of life, so greedy and subject to avarice that they will believe any lie that promises them what they want." Sure, Satan is involved; but the real power of wickedness is in the black hearts of human beings. Without us, without our greed, envy, and ambition, he couldn't do anything.

Rog, there's no point. You've made it clear, Satan is of no concern, it is the boogie man inside that you must worry about. As I said, if you aren't going to listen to the Scriptures I wouldn't expect the ECF's to mean anything at all to you.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 05:46 PM
BroRog---I disagree with your spin on the scriptures, not the scriptures themselves.

Maybe I'm not to bright, can please tell me exactly what spin I have placed on,

Acts 26:15-18 ( KJV )
And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

2 Timothy 2:25-26 ( KJV )
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 05:53 PM
This is absoluely classic,


BroRog--I disagree with your spin on the scriptures, not the scriptures themselves.

and the usual reply when someone doesn't like what the Scriptures say.

I didn't give any interpretation, I simply listed the verses. How exactly does one put spin on the passages without giving any interpretation???

markedward
Feb 17th 2011, 05:58 PM
Where does Scripture say that Christ was a "Ransom" to God?Scripture does not, anywhere, use the phrase "ransom to God". Likewise, it never uses the phrase "ransom to Satan".


You didn't answer, which was it? I've already made it clear that the the ransom was to Satan. If you disagree please answer my questions.Jesus was a ransom to God. He was not a ransom to Satan.


Does that mean He was a sacrifice used to appease the wrath of God? Sacrifice can used in different ways.He is the once-for-all-time sacrificial offering under the New Covenant, in the same lines of the repeated sacrificial offerings under the Old Covenant. The Old were sin offerings, as a means of providing atonement for the followers of God. The New is a sin offering, as the final, once-for-all means of providing atonement for the followers of God.


It's not my view, it's theirs.And you believe it as well, do you not? So it is your view, even if you're using their arguments to defend it.


And thy are evidence for what the early church believed. What they beleived was believed by the church for a thousand years before this idea came along that you guys are propagating.Let's not whitewash history here. The early Church was not as completely unified in any of their singular beliefs as you would have us believe with this statement. There were those who disagreed with this teaching, even if it happened to be the majority belief. Likewise, ancientness of a belief does not equate to authenticity of that belief. Otherwise all Anglicans and Protestants and Greek Orthodox truly would be in the wrong for breaking from the Roman Catholic church, since Roman Catholicism had been established for roughly centuries when each of these breaks too place. What you're saying about this believe, the Roman Catholic church says about the Pope. "How could all of those Protestants claim the Papacy is not a succession of bishops ordained by Christ himself when he appointed Peter? We have the Early Church Fathers as evidence, did the people whom Jesus and his Apostles taught not understand it? Were Jesus and the Apostles not able to teach it correctly???????????????????????"


Therefore you guys although I doubt you'll admit it must contend with the idea that what you are propagating implies that for 1000 years Christians didn't understand the atonement.First, having a misunderstanding over something that doesn't negate one's salvation is hardly something to criticize others about. Second, don't presume to know what I will or will not do. It's arrogant.


Even worse, Christians who were "Directly" taught by Christ and the Apostles didn't understand the atonement.Being who? People writing 100-150 years later?


And, taking it to it's logical conclusion are saying that Christ and the apostles were not able to teach the them what he atonement meant.Again, don't presume to know what I am saying unless I myself say it. Keep your words out of my mouth.

RabbiKnife
Feb 17th 2011, 06:02 PM
Gentlemen:

To your corners. Deep breath and count to 10.

Then come out swinging. But chill with the personal jabs.

markedward
Feb 17th 2011, 06:10 PM
I was doing some reading, and I thought this was worth considering:

Psalm 49.1-9: ​​​​​​​​Hear this, all peoples! Give ear, all inhabitants of the world, both low and high, rich and poor together! My mouth shall speak wisdom; the meditation of my heart shall be understanding. I will incline my ear to a proverb; I will solve my riddle to the music of the lyre. Why should I fear in times of trouble, when the iniquity of those who cheat me surrounds me, those who trust in their wealth and boast of the abundance of their riches? Truly no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life, for the ransom of their life is costly and can never suffice, that he should live on forever and never see the pit.

Seems pretty relevant to what we're speaking about. Christ said that he death was a "ransom", in order to bring everlasting life to the followers of God. Here the ancient psalmist (whether poetically or prophetically) speaks of the same subject matter, that a "ransom" would need to be paid "to God" in order to "live on forever", yet no man is able to pay this ransom.

RabbiKnife
Feb 17th 2011, 06:12 PM
I was doing some reading, and I thought this was worth considering:

Psalm 49.1-9: ​​​​​​​​Hear this, all peoples! Give ear, all inhabitants of the world, both low and high, rich and poor together! My mouth shall speak wisdom; the meditation of my heart shall be understanding. I will incline my ear to a proverb; I will solve my riddle to the music of the lyre. Why should I fear in times of trouble, when the iniquity of those who cheat me surrounds me, those who trust in their wealth and boast of the abundance of their riches? Truly no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life, for the ransom of their life is costly and can never suffice, that he should live on forever and never see the pit.

Seems pretty relevant to what we're speaking about. Christ said that he death was a "ransom", in order to bring everlasting life to the followers of God. Here the ancient psalmist (whether poetically or prophetically) speaks of the same subject matter, that a "ransom" would need to be paid "to God" in order to "live on forever", yet no man is able to pay this ransom.

Correct. Hence the necessity for the God-man to do the job. The infinite had to die an infinite death in a finite period of time to pay an infinite price.

RollTide21
Feb 17th 2011, 06:36 PM
Rog, there's no point. You've made it clear, Satan is of no concern, it is the boogie man inside that you must worry about. As I said, if you aren't going to listen to the Scriptures I wouldn't expect the ECF's to mean anything at all to you.Butch, you can't just accuse someone of not listening to the Scriptures when they just provided a broken down explanation of Scripture. In reading through this thread, that seems to be your tendency, with all due respect. I read BroRog's post and see where he is coming from. Satan as the Great Deceiver who appeals to the weaknesses of the flesh of mankind. There is certainly Scripture to back that up, is there not? It appears to be a good debate until you summarily dismiss someone else claiming that they are "ignoring Scripture".

LookingUp
Feb 17th 2011, 06:57 PM
What part does Satan play in your sin? Don't you have free will?Yes, I have free will. I think Satan takes advantage of our weak flesh (our flesh wants to sin). I think that's the part he plays in leading us to the second death. I suspect Adam would have eventually sinned without his influence, but Satan's influence clearly multiplies wickedness. The thing is, human sin is not the only problem in creation that God is dealing with. There’s a bigger picture that we are a part of. The problem of evil God confronted on the cross involved the whole of creation (Rom. 8:18-23).

There was always a battle against those who oppose God going on in the OT (as we see in the Scriptures Butch offered above). The OT teaches us that this ongoing spiritual battle has a real and direct impact our physical world. The battle became very heated when Christ entered the scene. We see more demonic influence in the NT than any other time in history. Why? I think things were gearing up in the spiritual world for the appearance of Christ. Each time Christ healed or delivered a person, the kingdom of Satan was diminished and they experienced “the kingdom of God coming upon them” (Mt 12:28). Although Christ’s ministry of teaching, healing and deliverance was the beginning of the destruction of Satan’s works, the author of Hebrews tells us that the fatal blow to Satan (the way he was rendered powerless) was through Christ’s death, which was through the cross. Do you see this as true—that Satan was rendered powerless through the cross?

We can’t separate the purpose of Christ’s life with the purpose of his death and resurrection. All of it directly or indirectly concerned manifesting the reign of God and vanquishing the reign of the demonic, destructive powers of darkness. And he destroyed all this oppression, this violence really, with not one bit of violence. He did it through humility and self-sacrificial love. That’s the example we are to follow as we continue the battle.

So, if the fatal blow was given, why the ongoing battle? Has Satan’s kingdom been vanquished or not? It has in principle, but the reality is yet to be fully realized. Why? That through faith in Christ’s cosmic victory over the powers, we can participate in his victory, experience salvation, by opposing sin and evil head on with confidence. Through this process, we are being transformed from one degree of glory to another (2 Cor. 3:18).

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 07:01 PM
Scripture does not, anywhere, use the phrase "ransom to God". Likewise, it never uses the phrase "ransom to Satan".

OK, so then you are basically in the same place that I am, correct? You can no more prove (Biblically) that Christ was a ransom to God than I can prove (Biblically) that He was a ransom to Satan. So, what then in the basis for your claiming I'm wrong?


Jesus was a ransom to God. He was not a ransom to Satan.

See above.


He is the once-for-all-time sacrificial offering under the New Covenant, in the same lines of the repeated sacrificial offerings under the Old Covenant. The Old were sin offerings, as a means of providing atonement for the followers of God. The New is a sin offering, as the final, once-for-all means of providing atonement for the followers of God.

The Old did not atone for sins. They were simply a sign of what was to come.


And you believe it as well, do you not? So it is your view, even if you're using their arguments to defend it.

It's the view I hold. I didn't create it.


Let's not whitewash history here. The early Church was not as completely unified in any of their singular beliefs as you would have us believe with this statement. There were those who disagreed with this teaching, even if it happened to be the majority belief. Likewise, ancientness of a belief does not equate to authenticity of that belief. Otherwise all Anglicans and Protestants and Greek Orthodox truly would be in the wrong for breaking from the Roman Catholic church, since Roman Catholicism had been established for roughly centuries when each of these breaks too place. What you're saying about this believe, the Roman Catholic church says about the Pope. "How could all of those Protestants claim the Papacy is not a succession of bishops ordained by Christ himself when he appointed Peter? We have the Early Church Fathers as evidence, did the people whom Jesus and his Apostles taught not understand it? Were Jesus and the Apostles not able to teach it correctly???????????????????????"

I see you sidestepped the question. First of all, I didn't say "EVERT SINGLE PERSON" believed it. I said it was the belief of the church. Your statement about ancientness may have some truth to it, being ancient does not necessitate that it is correct. However, truth "MUST" always precede error. You cannot have false doctrine until you first have doctrine. Therefore if the Classic view was that of the church for 1000years and then we see the appearance of the Satisfaction model, we can conclude that error come after truth.


First, having a misunderstanding over something that doesn't negate one's salvation is hardly something to criticize others about. Second, don't presume to know what I will or will not do. It's arrogant.

I didn't presume anything, I said that was the logical conclusion of the position that you guys are stating.


Being who? People writing 100-150 years later?

No, People who were directly taught by Jesus and the apostles.


Again, don't presume to know what I am saying unless I myself say it. Keep your words out of my mouth.

As I said I've not presumed anything. I have simply taken the argument to it's logical conclusion.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 07:03 PM
I was doing some reading, and I thought this was worth considering:

Psalm 49.1-9: ​​​​​​​​Hear this, all peoples! Give ear, all inhabitants of the world, both low and high, rich and poor together! My mouth shall speak wisdom; the meditation of my heart shall be understanding. I will incline my ear to a proverb; I will solve my riddle to the music of the lyre. Why should I fear in times of trouble, when the iniquity of those who cheat me surrounds me, those who trust in their wealth and boast of the abundance of their riches? Truly no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life, for the ransom of their life is costly and can never suffice, that he should live on forever and never see the pit.

Seems pretty relevant to what we're speaking about. Christ said that he death was a "ransom", in order to bring everlasting life to the followers of God. Here the ancient psalmist (whether poetically or prophetically) speaks of the same subject matter, that a "ransom" would need to be paid "to God" in order to "live on forever", yet no man is able to pay this ransom.

Wasn't Christ a man?

RabbiKnife
Feb 17th 2011, 07:05 PM
Not just a man. Jesus is a unique individual in all of history that is both human and divine simultaneously.

markedward
Feb 17th 2011, 07:47 PM
Wasn't Christ a man?Of course he was. But you're running after a red herring here. The point I was making is not that Christ was a man (he certainly was), but that the psalmist saw the "ransom" as something which would be offered "to God", not "to Satan", our point of disagreement.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 08:05 PM
Butch, you can't just accuse someone of not listening to the Scriptures when they just provided a broken down explanation of Scripture. In reading through this thread, that seems to be your tendency, with all due respect. I read BroRog's post and see where he is coming from. Satan as the Great Deceiver who appeals to the weaknesses of the flesh of mankind. There is certainly Scripture to back that up, is there not? It appears to be a good debate until you summarily dismiss someone else claiming that they are "ignoring Scripture".

Tide,

I have provided passage after passage of Scripture and heard, you've not provided any evidence. I'm still waiting for someone to layout this ransom to God theory, I notice no one has made any attempt to explain it, they've simply said, you're wrong Butch. I've given scenario's of the logical conclusion of this doctrine and the absurdity of it, no one has addressed it. I presented the historical belief and they said they are wrong, yet they had more information available to them than any of those who said they are wrong. I've asked questions that have gone unanswered. It seems every time they are presented with a problem that part of the post get ignored. So, why are you asking why I summarily dismissed someone else?

In post 137 I gave 38 passages of Scripture without any interpretation, yet I got,


BroRog---I disagree with your spin on the scriptures, not the scriptures themselves.

As I said, I didn't give any interpretation. Now, is that not dismissing my evidence?

I asked this question that went unaswered.

So, then there was no need to be set free from Satan? Man could have accomplished this without the help of Christ correct?

then we had this from post 95 A clear contradiction.


Originally Posted by dagar
Satan is strong (Mat 12:29). His 'power' is darkness (Act 26:18) which darkness leads (Eph 2:2; 5:8, 11; 6:12 ) men to death and its power (Heb 2:14). The power in Heb 2:14 is death, not Satan. Plainly says power of death, not power of Satan. You have to ask yourself what it means that Satan had the power of death since his power is the darkness of this (prince of) world. Satan does not and never has had the power of death. That ignores scripture that attributes that power to God. Again, you have to ignore the basic fundamentals of the faith to believe this stuff you are propagating.


Butch5---And you simply have to ignore the Scriptures.


Hebrews 2:14 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;


I bolded the above.

Then we have this from post 102

Originally Posted by Butch5
Rog, I've given the evidence, sorry God didn't choose to word it exactly the way you want it worded. So, let me ask you a question. How exactly was mankind set free from Satan?


BroRog---I don't think about things in terms of outside forces, like Satan, who might do this or that to me. (I think some Christians are overly fascinated with Satan as if he is some kind of boogie man, using him as the explanation for why bad things happen.) I think about things in terms of who I am, what I want, and how I relate to God and his son. I don't think in terms of being in bondage to Satan, or the Devil or some outside agency. I think in terms of being in bondage to myself: my own fear, ignorance, foolishness, superstitions, dark heart, suspicious mind, selfish attitudes, needy disposition, greedy aspirations, and such as these. To be set free, is to be set free of these. Liberation will be seen in terms of overcoming fears (courage) and overcoming ignorance (knowledge gained) and overcoming foolishness (wisdom gained). Gaining courage, knowledge, and wisdom helps me overcome the other things such as superstition, suspiciousness, selfishness and greed. Actual and real liberation isn't being set free from an evil spirit being as if he had anything to do with it; it's being set free from flaws of my own character. The spiritual chains of darkness are internal in the inner man/woman and liberation is a change of the inner man/woman.

The Holy Spirit is the one who sets us free, giving us the knowledge, wisdom, courage, change of perspective, change of orientation, and commitment to truth and goodness. The Bible may speak in terms of an adversary, who places people in chains of darkness, but the reality of the matter is we place ourselves in these chains. All Satan does is use lies that appeal to wicked, ambitious, selfish, needy, greedy, desires that we already have. He couldn't place us in chains if we didn't already want what he is offering. We seem to have the idea that we are innocent victims and that Satan is the reason why we are suffering the consequences of our bad decisions. But that isn't true. We may moan and groan and say, "Oh God, I wish I had never started smoking, taken cocaine, slept with that hooker, bought that expensive car I couldn't afford, loaned all my money to a guy from out of town, given my kidney to a guy who said he was my father, etc." But it wasn't Satan that made you smoke or do drugs. It was your own desire to be cool, different, popular, appreciated, loved, etc.

People are set free from "Satan", if you like, through honesty and a love for the truth, which the Holy Spirit helps us get.

I bolded the part above. Scripture says that it was Christ who set us free from Satan, not honesty and love.

And from post 104


Dagar---No where have I contradicted Scripture. All you have shown is that you understand it differently. Problem. If Satan had the power of death, then God didn't, and now you have contradicted and ignored much basic simple foundational scripture, so don't talk to me about contradictions and having to ignore the Scriptures . This is why we have no basis for discussion Butch. You don't know the basics, so there's no way we can discuss anything beyond the basics. If you were correct, it would have ended in the garden.

This based on an assumption. If Satan has the power of death it does not mean that God doesn't also have that power. The power of death can held by more than one. There are quite a few states that hold the poewr of death over criminals.

In post 74 I posted this


To what is holding captive? Then you agree with me that it is Satan???

Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV )
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Weren't they subject to the one who has the power? It was Satan who was vested with the power of death.

Paul wrote,

Ephesians 4:8-10 ( KJV )
Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

If Christ lead captivity free from death, why are they still dead?

He also wrote,

Colossians 1:12-13 ( KJV )
Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Paul didn't say He delivered us from the power of death, he said from the power of darkness. Paul doesn't leave us wondering what darkness means.

Ephesians 6:10-12 ( KJV )
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.


Yet in post 80, I got this.


Dagar---Sorry, I don't hold reformed theology and you still have not provided any scripture for this supposed control.
I bolded the above.

Then there are the passages about Human sacrifices that no one has addressed.
Ezekiel 16:15-26 ( KJV )
But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.
And of thy garments thou didst take, and deckedst thy high places with divers colours, and playedst the harlot thereupon: the like things shall not come, neither shall it be so.
Thou hast also taken thy fair jewels of my gold and of my silver, which I had given thee, and madest to thyself images of men, and didst commit whoredom with them,
And tookest thy broidered garments, and coveredst them: and thou hast set mine oil and mine incense before them.
My meat also which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou hast even set it before them for a sweet savour: and thus it was, saith the Lord GOD.
Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this of thy whoredoms a small matter,
That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire for them?
And in all thine abominations and thy whoredoms thou hast not remembered the days of thy youth, when thou wast naked and bare, and wast polluted in thy blood.
And it came to pass after all thy wickedness, (woe, woe unto thee! saith the Lord GOD
That thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place, and hast made thee an high place in every street.
Thou hast built thy high place at every head of the way, and hast made thy beauty to be abhorred, and hast opened thy feet to every one that passed by, and multiplied thy whoredoms.
Thou hast also committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh; and hast increased thy whoredoms, to provoke me to anger.

Ezekiel 20:27-32 ( KJV )
Therefore, son of man, speak unto the house of Israel, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Yet in this your fathers have blasphemed me, in that they have committed a trespass against me.
For when I had brought them into the land, for the which I lifted up mine hand to give it to them, then they saw every high hill, and all the thick trees, and they offered there their sacrifices, and there they presented the provocation of their offering: there also they made their sweet savour, and poured out there their drink offerings.
Then I said unto them, What is the high place whereunto ye go? And the name thereof is called Bamah unto this day.
Wherefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers? and commit ye whoredom after their abominations?
For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be inquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will not be inquired of by you.
And that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone.

Jeremiah 19:3-5 ( KJV )
And say, Hear ye the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle.
Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents;
They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:

Jeremiah 32:32-35 ( KJV )
Because of all the evil of the children of Israel and of the children of Judah, which they have done to provoke me to anger, they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their prophets, and the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
And they have turned unto me the back, and not the face: though I taught them, rising up early and teaching them, yet they have not hearkened to receive instruction.
But they set their abominations in the house, which is called by my name, to defile it.
And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

No one has adressed this issue either, the scenario of the ransom to God.

This is what they are actually doing by saying the ransom was paid to God. Then there is the absurdity of the scenario, consider what actually takes place if the ransom was paid to God.
It would go something like this; God owns mankind and kidnaps mankind from Himself. God then demands that He pay Himself a ransom and this ransom in the death of His own Son. So then God offer His Son to Himself and proceeds to kill His own Son so that He can give mankind back to Himself.
How absurd is that, Especially sin God said He would forgive sins? If this was a human would anyone say, Oh, what a loving father, he sacrificed his son to save his other children? No, they would call him a monster and put him in prison, yet many are accusing God of this very thing when they say the ransom was paid to God. Now, I’m not saying it is intentional, I don’t think many have really thought through this issue thoroughly. However, that is the logical conclusion of the doctrine.

I've asked about the role forgiveness plays if Christ was a ransom paid to God.

These haven't been addressed, and yet you're asking why I have dismissed some one's post? It becomes apparent at some point that people aren't going to answer the questions, at that point there really is no need to continue. You see, I try to answer questions when presented with them, and do most of the time. However, after a while I realize that it becomes fruitless. This goes back to what I was saying at the beginning of this thread. If one is seeking truth they "Cannot" ignore evidence, if one ignores evidence they "Cannot" be seeking truth.

Butch5
Feb 17th 2011, 08:09 PM
Of course he was. But you're running after a red herring here. The point I was making is not that Christ was a man (he certainly was), but that the psalmist saw the "ransom" as something which would be offered "to God", not "to Satan", our point of disagreement.

Or it can understood differently, He says no man can give a ransom for another. How then could Christ be given as ransom to God?

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 10:45 PM
Yes, I have free will. I think Satan takes advantage of our weak flesh (our flesh wants to sin). I think that's the part he plays in leading us to the second death. I suspect Adam would have eventually sinned without his influence, but Satan's influence clearly multiplies wickedness. The thing is, human sin is not the only problem in creation that God is dealing with. There’s a bigger picture that we are a part of. The problem of evil God confronted on the cross involved the whole of creation (Rom. 8:18-23).I think Paul is saying that the creation was subjected to entropy, which doesn't make it evil, it just makes it temporary. I don't think Satan has anything to do with the fact that things break, wear out, decay, rot, dissolve, lose energy, grow old, and etc. That's just life in this creation as God made it. I think Paul is looking forward to a time when things won't break, wear out, decay, rot and become useless to us.


There was always a battle against those who oppose God going on in the OT (as we see in the Scriptures Butch offered above). The OT teaches us that this ongoing spiritual battle has a real and direct impact our physical world. The battle became very heated when Christ entered the scene. We see more demonic influence in the NT than any other time in history. Why? I think things were gearing up in the spiritual world for the appearance of Christ. Each time Christ healed or delivered a person, the kingdom of Satan was diminished and they experienced “the kingdom of God coming upon them” (Mt 12:28). Although Christ’s ministry of teaching, healing and deliverance was the beginning of the destruction of Satan’s works, the author of Hebrews tells us that the fatal blow to Satan (the way he was rendered powerless) was through Christ’s death, which was through the cross. Do you see this as true—that Satan was rendered powerless through the cross?
It depends on how you want to look at it. Satan is not powerless to deceive, lie, use propaganda, seduce, and etc. He is still doing that. In another sense, though, Satan is powerless to affect a permanent outcome for those whom God is saving. If you want to look at the cross that way, I can see it and agree with it. But things need to play out in real time though. The battle you mention is still being played out in real time since the cross, the stakes are still high, and it's not a done deal for any particular individual. I mean, we still need to pray without ceasing, have faith, hope in the coming age, love our neighbor and all the things that Christ and his apostles ask of us.


We can’t separate the purpose of Christ’s life with the purpose of his death and resurrection. All of it directly or indirectly concerned manifesting the reign of God and vanquishing the reign of the demonic, destructive powers of darkness. And he destroyed all this oppression, this violence really, with not one bit of violence. He did it through humility and self-sacrificial love. That’s the example we are to follow as we continue the battle.I agree with you. My point is that the cross wasn't a magic bullet that solved our problem. The cross opened the way for us but we must walk the road, we must come to terms with the eternal, we must suffer the pain of the wish, we must personally carry our own cross.


So, if the fatal blow was given, why the ongoing battle? Has Satan’s kingdom been vanquished or not? It has in principle, but the reality is yet to be fully realized. Why? That through faith in Christ’s cosmic victory over the powers, we can participate in his victory, experience salvation, by opposing sin and evil head on with confidence. Through this process, we are being transformed from one degree of glory to another (2 Cor. 3:18).I get what you are saying, but in my previous posts I tried to bring us down to the ground. What does "victory" look like in practical terms? From my perspective, it looks like doing the hard work of reading the scriptures, praying, meditating, coming to terms with my frustrations, limitations and the futility of this existence and somehow finding the wisdom in it. Remember, Jesus says the truth will set you and me free. The cross paves the way, but the real work for us is to seek, love, and appropriate the truth. We don't fight the devil with guns, bullets, swords, or atom bombs. We fight the devil with knowledge, wisdom, information, commitment to love and life, and courage.

BroRog
Feb 17th 2011, 10:53 PM
OK, so then you are basically in the same place that I am, correct? You can no more prove (Biblically) that Christ was a ransom to God than I can prove (Biblically) that He was a ransom to Satan.He isn't a ransom to anybody. It's a metaphor; when someone holds you for ransom, the ransom is the means of your release. When the Bible refers to Christ as a ransom, all the expression seeks to suggest is that Christ is the means of our release.

dagar
Feb 18th 2011, 03:46 AM
I don't understand the question.You said
"Yes, John says that Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. But he doesn't say that he would use the cross exclusively to do this."

I said
"What else then? We have something else to glory in? 1Co 1:23-31"

What else besides the cross destroyed the works of the devil? I would like to know so I can take advantage of what else God used so I can glory in it.

BroRog
Feb 18th 2011, 04:59 PM
You said
"Yes, John says that Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. But he doesn't say that he would use the cross exclusively to do this."

I said
"What else then? We have something else to glory in? 1Co 1:23-31"

What else besides the cross destroyed the works of the devil? I would like to know so I can take advantage of what else God used so I can glory in it.

I still don't understand the connection you are making between 1Cor. 1:23-31, the concept of glory, and the topic at hand which seems to center on the role of the cross in destroying the works of the devil. But this isn't going to stop me from answering what I think is your question. :) If I don't answer your question, then please feel free in asking it again.

The cross is the locus of the Christian faith because it was the one thing that made everything else possible. Modern Christians, however, rarely see the cross as the first century Christians saw it. When I became a Christian I was introduced to the triumphant Jesus, the son of God who defeated all of his enemies and arose to sit at the right hand of the Father. And in my heart I hear the Hallelujah Chorus and cry with tears of Joy when I hear the words, "He shall reign forever and ever."

But first century Christians were close to the crucifixion event and they had to make a very tough choice. These were Jewish Christians and as such, they were expecting him to reign forever and ever on earth. They were expecting Jesus to drive the Roman honky back to Italy, to pat all the Pharisees on the back, and to clean up the town removing all the sinners. He didn't do that; but instead, he got himself killed and though he was resurrected, he left his disciples behind and went up into heaven, leaving believers to take the heat, the ridicule, the social ostracism, excommunication, arrest by the authorities, and loss of the means to make a living. When a first century Christian believed in Jesus, he or she was believing in a defeated messiah who left his people behind to fend for themselves -- maybe. I can imagine they were left with the gut feeling that had they been given a chance to run the universe, they would not have done it this way. I think this is where Paul is coming from when he pens 1Co 1:23-31.



For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

We know that God is no fool, and we know that God is most wise. So why does Paul refer to the cross as God's foolishness? He is speaking from the point of view of his own culture and society. According to the way his world thought about things, what God did was really dumb. He brought a teacher into the world and then let him get killed. And Jesus himself played right into the hands of those who sought his life, publicly humiliating the authorities and then purposely placing himself into a position to get caught. I can hear the Roman politicians at the cocktail parties saying, "Man that was really stupid. He could have made himself scarce until the heat blew over, hiding in the caves where we couldn't find him."

For the first century Jewish believers the cross wasn't a good thing. It was an embarrassment; it was the focal point of a deep hurt and disappointment. In order for the first century Jewish believer to maintain his faith, he had to come to terms with the cross, and the absence of the messiah. And as the many years went by, and Jesus didn't return, the believer had to come to terms with his delay. I believe this was a very gripping, gut-wrenching decision to continue to maintain faith in Jesus Christ. I don't know; I don't think these folks were hearing the Hallelujah Chorus (figuratively speaking.)

Anyway, first century Christians had to come to terms with the "foolishness" of the cross, which didn't do very well in the arena of competing ideas. I can imagine that the devil's propaganda machine was working overtime, attempting to raise doubt, transform the movement into a works based religion, take the movement into the spooky realm of the gnostics, and attempt to subvert Christ's teachings at every turn. The cross didn't destroy the works of the devil, at least not immediately. The cross was simply the first salvo against the enemy but the war of ideas continues. The devil is saying, "What a dumb religion -- a savior that can't save himself -- a God that can't keep a people." Where's the glory in that?

What the first century Christians saw, which their contemporaries couldn't see, was the wisdom of God in the cross.



But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, so that, just as it is written, "Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord."What neither the Greeks or the Jews could see, apart from the help of the Holy Spirit, was the fact that the cross wasn't about a messiah that would immediately take power. It was about something even more profound than that. The cross was all about righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, which is a blessing to all those who believe and have the eyes to see.

dagar
Feb 22nd 2011, 06:17 AM
The discussion of the cross has been split/continued here
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/221336-Gospel...-moved-from-the-law-and-eternal-life-thread

Amos_with_goats
Mar 12th 2011, 05:10 AM
Much talking about this... have not heard much about the OP.... :hmm:




When has the Lord changed? :confused


When was it that He realized the error of His ways? :eek:


Certainly to even suggest such is the height of foolishness. :help:


His Word is Perfect and Complete... or was patience 'invented' some time after the cross? Which of the Lord's attributes did He add later>?


Maybe James was speaking of the Lord in James 1:8... :hmm:


being double minded? CERTAINLY NOT!

James 1:2-8

2 My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, 3 knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. 4 But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing. 5 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6 But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

The Word is a seamless expression of the Love of the Father from Genesis to Revelation.

The Lord spoke His Word to the People in Exodus 20 because He Loved them then just as He does now...

Men are saved by Grace, through Faith now just as then... (read Hebrews 11?)

They looked for His coming then, just as we do now.... (many missed Him, just as many do today) No one will miss Him when He returns!


The same Lord, He was our Deliverer then, as He is now, and forever!

:pp:pp:pp:pp:pp:pp:pp.

Amos_with_goats
Mar 14th 2011, 02:49 AM
So,

A positive post on page five and not a word after... ? :hmm:

Could be enough to make me believe some prefer to argue. ;)