주석

 

A Ransom for Many - What can that mean?

작가: 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.

성경

 

John 17:12

공부

       

12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

스웨덴보그의 저서에서

 

Arcana Coelestia #6745

해당 구절 연구하기

  
/ 10837  
  

6745. 'And nurse him for me' means that she should instill into him good compatible with that kind of religion. This is clear from the meaning of 'nursing' as instilling good, dealt with below; and from the representation of' Pharaoh's daughter' as a kind of religion, dealt with in 6729. And since Pharaoh's daughter says that the woman should nurse him for her, the meaning is that she should instill good compatible with that kind of religion.

[2] The fact that 'nursing' means instilling good is evident from the meaning of 'a wet nurse' as the instillation of good, dealt with above in 6740. In addition to the places there which are quoted from the Word there are also the following: In Moses,

They will call peoples to the mountain; there they will offer sacrifices of righteousness, because they will suck the plentifulness of the sea, and the hidden treasures of the secrets of the sand. Deuteronomy 33:19.

This is a prophetic utterance made by Moses concerning Zebulun and Issachar. 'Calling peoples to the mountain, there offering sacrifices of righteousness' means worship arising out of love. 'Sucking the plentifulness of the sea' means that they will at that time take in a large amount of true factual knowledge, that is, such knowledge will be instilled into them. For 'sucking' here is the same expression as 'being nursed', as it also is in the places commented on below.

[3] In Isaiah,

I will make you an eternal magnificence, a joy of generation after generation; and you will suck the milk of the nations, indeed the breasts of kings will you suck. Isaiah 60:15-16.

This refers to Zion and Jerusalem, which are the celestial Church, 'Zion' being the internal part of it and 'Jerusalem' the external. 'Sucking the milk of the nations' stands for the instillation of celestial good, 'sucking the breasts of kings' for the instillation of celestial truth. Anyone can see that these words conceal a meaning that is not apparent in the letter and that since it is the Divine Word there is a holiness concealed within that meaning. If this were not so what would 'sucking the milk of the nations' or 'sucking the breasts of kings' be? The holy meaning concealed there is not at all evident unless one knows what is meant by 'sucking', 'milk', 'the nations', 'breasts', and 'kings'. 'Milk' is the celestial-spiritual or the truth of good, see 2184;'the nations' are forms of good contained in worship, 1259, 1260, 1416, 1849, 6005; 'breasts' are affections for goodness and truth, 6432; 'kings' are truths, 1672, 2015, 2069, 3009, 4575, 4581, 4966, 5044, 5068, 6148; and 'sucking' is the instillation of good.

[4] From all this one may now know what the meaning of these words is when they apply to the celestial Church, which is Zion and Jerusalem. When Zion and Jerusalem are mentioned together, they mean the celestial Church, 'Zion' the internal part of it and 'Jerusalem' the external, as stated above. But when Jerusalem is mentioned without Zion it in most cases means the spiritual Church.

[5] In the same prophet,

That you may suck and be satisfied with the breast of Jerusalem's consolations, and that you may press out and be delighted by the splendour of her glory. Behold, I spread peace over her like a stream, and the glory of the gentiles like an inundating torrent, in order that you may suck; you will be lifted onto her side and find pleasure on her knees. Isaiah 66:11-12.

Here also 'sucking' stands for the instillation of good.

[6] In Jeremiah,

Even the sea monsters present the breast, they nurse their young; the daughter of My people is cruel, the tongue of the nursling has cleaved to the roof of its mouth because of thirst. Lamentations 4:3-4.

'The daughter of My people' stands for the spiritual Church, here for that Church when it has been laid waste. Its failure, unlike even the sea monsters, to nurse its young stands for no instillation of truth. 'The tongue of the nursling has cleaved to the roof of its mouth because of thirst' stands for the want of such truth, so that every trace of innocence perishes, 'nursling' being innocence and 'thirst' the want of truth.

  
/ 10837  
  

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