Commento

 

A Ransom for Many - What can that mean?

Da New Christian Bible Study Staff

A Ransom for Many - What can that mean?

Almost 2000 years ago, Jesus of Nazareth -- Jesus Christ -- was crucified. He died. Painfully. And then, by the second morning after that, He was risen from the dead. His physical body was gone - or, rather, in light of subsequent events, it seems to have been transformed into a spiritual one. (That's an interesting thing to think through, in itself, but it's not the focus of this article.)

Instead, here we want to focus on some of the things that are said in the Bible about why Jesus died. There's an almost-2000-year-old confusion about it. Let's dig into it...

In Mark 10:42-45 (and in Matthew 20:25-28), we find this well-known lesson, which occurs late in Jesus's ministry. James and John - still not really understanding the depth of what was going on, are lobbying Jesus for promises of sitting at His left and right hand when he is "king". The other disciples are displeased, of course. Jesus knows what's going on, so He gathers them all, and tries to explain the real nature of His mission, and what their mission should be, too.

Here's the text:

"But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many."

A ransom. The Greek word used here is λύτρον, or lutron, which means the price for redeeming or ransoming, from λύω, luo, for loosening, untying, or setting free.

Some theologians have taken this text, and combined it with the text from the crucifixion story, when Jesus says three things that show his distress, and his feeling of separation from his Divine essence -- "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?", and "Nevertheless, not my will, but Thine be done", and "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

It can certainly be interpreted as a sort of sacrifice, in which Jesus acts as a sort of scapegoat, substituting his death for the human race that had disappointed His Father. Some theologians have done that. Anselm of Canterbury, in around 1000 AD, was one of the leaders of a faction that made that argument. But we don't think that's the right track; in fact, we think it was a wrong track that's been pretty damaging.

In New Christian theology, it doesn't make sense that God was angry. He's love itself. Is He disappointed when we don't reciprocate His love? Sure. But angry? No. There's certainly the appearance of it, especially in the Old Testament at times, but the core nature of God is love.

What's more, it should be even clearer that the death of Jesus's physical body wouldn't make God the Father feel better. Remember, they are really ONE person, of one mind - not two.

Instead, the whole cycle of God's incarnation, ministry, physical death, and resurrection was undertaken so that new truths could reach humankind.

Here's an interesting passage, from Arcana Coelestia 1419,

"The Lord, being love itself, or the essence and life of the love of all in the heavens, wills to give to the human race all things that are His; which is signified by His saying that the Son of man came to give His life a ransom for many."

Further, in Apocalypse Explained 328:15, we find this explanation:

“The phrase ‘to ransom’ means to free people from falsities and reform them by means of truths. This is signified by the words, ‘Ransom [redeem] me, O Jehovah, God of truth’” (Psalm 31:5)

One reason Jesus died was to overcome the power of hell. Jesus fought against evil spirits throughout His life. The clearest description of this is just after his baptism, when he spends 40 days in the wilderness. His suffering on the cross was the final struggle against evil, and His resurrection was his final victory over it.

For every person, overcoming evil involves temptation or a struggle against evil. As we struggle against evil individually, Christ struggled against evil on a cosmic scale. His death was the conclusion of that struggle, but it wasn't a loss; it was a win. The Bible says that God took on flesh and blood so that

“... through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil.” (Hebrews 2:14,15)

Another reason that Bible gives for Jesus’ death was that He might unite His human nature with His Divine nature, so that He could “make in Himself, of two, one new man,” (Ephesians 2:14-16, cf. John 17:11, 21; 10:30).

There are other reasons mentioned, too:

He could "go to the Father" (John 13:3; 14:2, 28; 16:10).

He could be "glorified" (John 17:1,5) or "enter into His glory" (Luke 24:26).

He could be "perfected" (Luke 13:32), or "sanctified" (John 17:19).

In Swedenborg's True Christianity 86, it says,

"Jehovah God came into the world as divine truth for the purpose of redeeming people. Redemption was a matter of gaining control of the hells, restructuring the heavens, and then establishing a church."

At the crucifixion, the forces of evil thought they had won. The religious and civic powers of the day led the way in condemning him. He was mocked. The crowd turned against him.

The death of Jesus' physical body was a "ransom" in this way: by undergoing that torture and death, He could then show that his spiritual power transcended natural death. He freed us, loosened us, from domination by the hells, and established a new church -- a new way that we can follow.

Dalle opere di Swedenborg

 

The New Jerusalem and its Heavenly Teachings #300

Studia questo passo

  
/ 325  
  

300. In this world the Lord glorified his human nature. Many places in the Word speak of the Lord's glorification (10828); in the Word's inner meaning it is the subject throughout (2249, 2523, 3245). The Lord glorified his human nature, not his divine nature, because that in and of itself was already glorious: 10057. The Lord came into the world to glorify his human nature: 3637, 4287, 9315. The Lord glorified his human nature by means of the divine nature that was within him from conception: 4727. We can get some idea of the glorification of the Lord's human nature from our idea of our own regeneration, since the Lord regenerates us in the same way that he glorified his human nature: 3043, 3138, 3212, 3296, 3490, 4402, 5688. Some of the mysteries involved in the glorification of the Lord's human nature: 10057. By glorifying his own human nature the Lord saved the human race: 1676, 4180. The Lord's state of glorification and his state of being humbled: 1785, 1999, 2159, 6866. When it has to do with the Lord, "glorification" in the Word means the union of his human nature with his divine nature, and "glorifying" means making divine: 1603, 10053, 10828.

  
/ 325  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Foundation for their permission to use this translation.

Dalle opere di Swedenborg

 

Arcana Coelestia #3043

Studia questo passo

  
/ 10837  
  

3043. 'You are clear from my oath' means the freedom that the natural man has. This is clear from the meaning of 'the servant', to whom Abraham's words are addressed, as the natural man, 3019, and from the meaning of 'being clear if the woman is unwilling to follow' in the proximate sense as not being bound if the affection for truth were not separated. These words, it is evident, imply the freedom that the natural man has; for the affection for truth, which is the subject here, and also its separation, is in the internal sense attributed to the natural man. In the historical sense these words do indeed have other connotations, but in the internal sense their implications are such.

[2] Regarding human freedom, see what has been stated and shown already in 892, 905, 1937, 1947, 2744, 2870-2893, for these paragraphs show what is implied by freedom. Freedom is attributed to the natural man, but not so much to the rational man, because it is by way of the rational man and into the natural man that good flows in, in heavenly freedom, from the Lord. It is the natural man that is the recipient of that good, and in order that it may receive it and so be joined to the heavenly freedom flowing in by way of the rational man, the natural man is left in freedom. For freedom goes with love or affection. If the natural man does not receive an affection for truth from an inflowing affection for good, that man is in no sense joined to the rational. This is how it is with man, whom the Lord reforms by means of freedom, see 1937, 1947, 2876-2878, 2881.

[3] In the Lord's case He too left the Natural in freedom when He made His Rational Divine as regards truth, that is, when He allied Divine Truth to the Divine Good of the Rational, for He was willing to make His Human Divine in the ordinary way. The ordinary way is that which occurs in anyone who is being reformed and regenerated. The actual reformation and regeneration of man is therefore a replica of what took place in the Lord. For by reformation and regeneration he becomes a new person, and is consequently called one begotten anew, and one created anew; and to the extent that he has been reformed he seems to have the Divine within him. But there is this difference, that the Lord made Himself Divine by His own power, whereas man is not able to effect the slightest reformation by his own power, only from the Lord. The expression 'seems to have the Divine' is used because man is solely a recipient of life, whereas the Lord is Life itself as to both Essences, see 1954, 2021, 2658, 2706, 3001.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.