Understanding atonement

Lent 2024 – Part 4, A Ransom to the Father

This Lent, I reflect deeply on the profound significance of Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection, exploring the various theories embraced or historically cherished by Christian churches. I realize that this journey reveals a rich tapestry of beliefs and interpretations. It’s important to acknowledge that there is more than a single perspective, and for those who have engaged in discussions about them, there are way more than the two you have argued over.

Changing what you believe about atonement is not denying Jesus. The gospel is not a description of how Jesus’ death (and resurrection, ascension, and enthronement) rescues the world, but that it does so. The gospel is not a theory or advice, it is news.

This is one of six different theories that look at Jesus paying a ransom which developed over time.

• The ransom was paid to Satan
• The ransom was paid to God
• Satisfaction
• Penal Substitution
• Governmental
• Christus Victor 

 What we have here is the Ransom Theory part two. It differs from the other one in only one way, the ransom of Jesus was not to appease Satan, it was to appease God the Father. This is because it is built on a different interpretation of the fall.

The Fall

Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made.

He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” ² And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, ³ but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” ⁴ But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. ⁵ For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” ⁶ So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. ⁷ Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths.

Genesis 3:1-7

These verses from the previous post still apply. It is after all a version of the Ranson theory.

The Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

Matthew 20:28 ESVUK

⁵ For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, ⁶ who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.

1 Timothy 2:5-6

The traditional Ransom theory beautifully suggests that Adam and Eve, in their moment of vulnerability, inadvertently entrusted humanity to the devil during the fall. However, this set the stage for a magnificent act of redemption: justice required that God pay a ransom to reclaim us. The death of Jesus stands as that profound and transformative sacrifice, illuminating our path to hope and restoration.

But what if we interpret the fall another way, like this?

Originally, humanity was lovingly designed to reflect the image of God, to exist in harmony with His divine essence, and to steward all of creation. The struggle that ensued from humanity’s failure in this sacred calling is often referred to as sin or the “fall.” This “fall” signifies a poignant moment where humanity found itself diverging from its intended purpose, evoking a deep sense of loss and longing for the connection and fulfilment that was meant to be.

The fall was the fault of Adam and Eve and taints all humanity. Man owes God a ransom but can do nothing to buy himself back. But Jesus, God in human form and fully human, pays the price to set humanity free.

The rest is the same as in the previous post.

---

< Previous | Next >