解説

 

A Ransom for Many - What can that mean?

作者: 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.

聖書

 

Luke 24:26

勉強

       

26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?

スウェーデンボルグの著作から

 

Arcana Coelestia#10099

この節の研究

  
/ 10837に移動  
  

10099. 'Shall be for his sons after him' means within the natural, successively. This is clear from the meaning of 'Aaron's sons' as those things which emanate from Divine Good as the Father, dealt with in 9807, 10068; and from the meaning of 'after him' as successively or in successive order. And when those things are said of Aaron's garments, which represented the Divine Spiritual, 10098, the statement that 'they shall be for his sons after him' means the Divine Spiritual within the natural, successively. For there are three entities which succeed one another in heaven and which, if people are to have any clear-cut idea of them, must be called by their particular names - celestial, spiritual, and natural. These three emanate there in order one from another; they are interconnected by an influx passing successively from one on to the next, and in this way they make one. What is Divine and the Lord's in the heavens is referred to by these different names on account of differences in the reception of it.

[2] The subject at present is the second ram, called the ram of fillings [of the hand]; and 'filling the hand' means consecration to represent what is Divine and the Lord's in the heavens, and the transmission and the reception of it there, 10019. Consequently, in order that the reception of it in the natural may also be described, the present verse speaks about Aaron's garments, about their being worn in succeeding years by his sons after him. By this the succeeding stage of that reality in the heavens which is meant by 'the filling of the hands' should be understood. From this it is evident that these matters in the internal sense hold together in an unbroken sequence, even though in the sense of the letter a break in the series of details regarding what had to be done with the ram is apparent here.

Since things which exist in successive order in heaven are the subject here, something must also be stated to explain what 'successive' means. The majority of learned people at the present day have no other idea of things existing in successive order than of a continuation, or of things held together by continuing one into the next. This being their idea of the way that things succeed one another they can have no conception of the nature of the difference between exterior and interior things in a person, nor consequently of the difference between a person's body and his spirit. When therefore they contemplate these matters with the ideas they have they cannot possibly understand how a person's spirit can be alive within a human form after the decay or death of the body.

[3] But things existing in successive order are not continuous, merging one into the next; instead they are discrete, that is, belong to distinct degrees that are clear-cut one from the next. For interior things are entirely distinct from exterior ones, so distinct that the exterior things can be separated and the interior ones still retain the life they have. So it is that a person can be withdrawn from the body and think within his spirit or, as an expression commonly used by the ancients puts it, withdrawn from sensory perceptions and raised to more internal things. The ancients also knew that when a person is withdrawn from perceiving things with his physical senses he is drawn up or raised to the light belonging to his spirit, that is, the light of heaven. So it was also that learned ancients knew that when their body had decayed they would be living a more internal life, which they called their spirit. And since they regarded this life to be the truly human life they also knew that they would be living within a human form. Such was the idea they had regarding a person's soul. And since that life partook of Divine life they perceived that their soul was immortal; for they knew that that part of a person which was a partaker of Divine life and for this reason linked to it could never die.

[4] But this idea of a person's soul and spirit disappeared after those ancient times, for the reason, as stated above, that people did not have a right idea about things existing in successive order. This also explains why those who in their thinking rely on present-day learning do not know what the spiritual is, nor that this is distinct from the natural. For those who conceive of things in successive order as something continuous inevitably take the spiritual to be nothing more than a purer extension of the natural, when yet the spiritual and the natural are as distinct from each other as prior and posterior, and so as that which begets and that which is begotten. Consequently learned people such as these do not see the difference between the internal or spiritual man and the external or natural man, nor therefore between a person's inward thought and will and his outward thought and will. Consequently also they cannot understand anything regarding faith and love, heaven and hell, or the life of a person after death.

[5] But those who have a right and distinct idea about things existing in successive order can in some measure comprehend that with a person who is being regenerated interior things are opened in successive order, and that as they are opened they are also raised to interior light and life, and nearer to the Divine; and that this opening and consequent raising is accomplished by means of God's truths, which are vessels receptive of the good of love from the Divine. The good of love is what joins a person directly to the Divine, for love is spiritual togetherness. From this it follows that a person can be opened and raised up on increasingly internal levels, in the measure that the good of love from the Divine exists in him, and conversely that there is no such opening or consequent raising up with the person who does not receive God's truths, which happens if evil resides in him. But a fuller statement regarding this successive order and its mysteries will in the Lord's Divine mercy be presented elsewhere 1 .

脚注:

1. This intention was not fulfilled in Arcana Caelestia. But see Divine Love and Wisdom published in 1763, paragraphs 173-281, in particular 205-208.

  
/ 10837に移動  
  

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