Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
On what basis can forgiveness happen other than that sin is in some way judged. Is judgment of sin unbiblical? To me,ppeasement is locked into the notion of forgiveness

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Forgiveness is an important analogy, but I don't think it is all there is to it when it comes to us and God. The problem is not simply a matter of reconciliation, but of our sin being like a cancer in us. So God cannot simply say "ok I'm not mad any more" nor can he simply say "ok I punished someone else so that's out of the way". Sin is our problem and needs to be healed, removed, purified. PSA only deals with sin on God's side (satisfying his anger) which is silly because God is not the one with the problem, we are.

There's a story of Jesus healing a paralyzed man where he asks "what is easier, to forgive sin or to say 'get up and walk?" and then he says "so you may know that I have power to forgive sin... get up and walk". This indicates for me that when God forgives that it is not simply about leniency (inaction: not hitting back), but is more like saying "get up and walk" (active: transforming power). God's forgivness has creative life-giving power in it that re-creates us.

---

Precisely, so Sharktacos! That incident from Jesus' life explicitly shows that forgiveness and restoration (the undoing of the wrong) are not the same thing (though, of course, in real life experience the realisation (making real for the individual) of forgiveness, and restoration may occur simultaneously).

[ 24. July 2007, 08:45: Message edited by: Jolly Jape ]

--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
The problem is not simply a matter of reconciliation, but of our sin being like a cancer in us. So God cannot simply say "ok I'm not mad any more" nor can he simply say "ok I punished someone else so that's out of the way". Sin is our problem and needs to be healed, removed, purified. PSA only deals with sin on God's side (satisfying his anger) which is silly because God is not the one with the problem, we are.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomOfTarsus:
Would it surprise anyone that I think both are true?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
On what basis can forgiveness happen other than that sin is in some way judged. Is judgment of sin unbiblical? To me,ppeasement is locked into the notion of forgiveness

---

Appeasement is the polar opposite of forgiveness.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
On what basis can forgiveness happen other than that sin is in some way judged. Is judgment of sin unbiblical? To me,ppeasement is locked into the notion of forgiveness

---

Appeasement is the polar opposite of forgiveness.

---

This statement just shows that in my view,you don't have a biblical notion of forgiveness from God's viewpoint

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
He was sinless sacrifice, passover lamb etc
We are able to partake of the judgement of God on him.Ro 6 Our Old man was crucified with him etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
why don't you tell me how someone can RIGHTEOUSLY be forgiven by God without Christ having been judged on their behalf.

---

quote:

---

Luke 17:3 Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying, ‘I repent,’ you shall forgive him.”

Mark 1:4 John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Luke 3:3 And he went into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,

Luke 24:47 that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins;

---

quote:

---

Matthew 6:12 And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors.

Matthew 6:14 “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Mark 11:25 “And whenever you stand praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive him, that your Father in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses. But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father in heaven forgive your trespasses.”

Luke 6:37 “Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
I understand the reasoning, what I am asking if for you to show me where it says this in the Bible.

If you are going to claim a concept is "biblical" you should be able to demonstrate that.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
I understand the reasoning, what I am asking if for you to show me where it says this in the Bible.

If you are going to claim a concept is "biblical" you should be able to demonstrate that.

---

So you want the actual 'legal' words that prove something? the proof texts? Eph 2:14-16 Romans5:8-10 1Pet 2:24 Col 2:13-14 1Jn 2:2 2Cor 5:21

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
You are entitled to your opinion of course, The word'binblical' is a bit pejorative.
The reasoning is.
Sin is serious, God must condemn sin and sinners.

---

quote:

---

He wants to demonstrate his love nevertheless but his integrity demands he CAN'T forgive without dealing with or passing judgement on sin.

---

quote:

---

Christ fulfils the role of victim and saviour enabling forgiveness because:

He was sinless sacrifice, passover lamb etc
We are able to partake of the judgement of God on him.Ro 6 Our Old man was crucified with him etc.

Forgiveness is therefore a consequence of God's righteous anger against sin being appeased.

---

quote:

---

Now I could add the whole book of Romans as a basis but you wouldn't appreciate that so why don't you tell me how someone can RIGHTEOUSLY be forgiven by God without Christ having been judged on their behalf.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
Freddy,

I do think there is more to the cross than just forgiveness. Otherwise, why did Jesus need to die (and Jesus stresses that he does need to)? We can see hints of it in what Paul says about dying with Christ. The problem is when we impose a foreign understanding of forgiveness onto Paul based on legal thought. What Paul is saying is not reasonable legal conclusions (nor is it simply the logic of repent and you are forgiven), it is a "scandal". Likewise what Isaiah 53 talks about is this huge shock.

I think we need to really dig into that "foolishness" of the cross. So I am wary of any view which is too "reasonable" (which I think can apply both to PSA and to the view you are proposing of simple forgiveness) because there is something deep and hidden that as Isaiah says we can hardly believe when we hear it. So our understanding needs to go into those dark depths.

I don't mean to say that this means that what you say about forgiveness is not true, but that there is also something deeper still.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
So you want the actual 'legal' words that prove something? the proof texts? Eph 2:14-16 Romans5:8-10 1Pet 2:24 Col 2:13-14 1Jn 2:2 2Cor 5:21

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

I agree completely. There is something deep and hidden. Christ did an impossible thing. There is definitely more to it than simple forgiveness. We could not have been forgiven without the Incarnation - we would instead have been completely destroyed.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:

quote:

---

I agree completely. There is something deep and hidden. Christ did an impossible thing. There is definitely more to it than simple forgiveness. We could not have been forgiven without the Incarnation - we would instead have been completely destroyed.

---

A minor quibble, I know, but what do you think to my argument that we could, indeed, have been forgiven without the incarnation, but that forgiveness would have, in effect, done us no good, since without the transformation that frees us from the death principle (which was wrought by Christ, we could not inherit eternal life. The incarnation is about salvation, or reconciliation if you like, not forgiveness, which was always available to us.

---

I think I agree with you. You might be over-thinking it. The whole point was to make people better, not to overcome technical or legal obstacles. I'm not sure if that is what you are saying.

As I see it the issue is simply about becoming "good" people. Christ had to come because humanity, as a whole, was turning away from God. He came to convince them, or to make it possible for them, to turn back to God.

So I agree that forgiveness was always available. I also agree that forgiveness does us no good if we have not made the "transformation that frees us from the death principle." I understand that last phrase to be about the process of reformation and regeneration that involves recognizing our sins, repenting of them, praying to God for His aid, and living a new life.

So I also agree that the Incarnation is about salvation, or reconciliation if you like, not forgiveness, because He came to save us from the power of darkness. His forgiveness had always been available. But He needed to make it possible for people to genuinely make the change from evil to good, or to be able to choose life over death. He did this by re-establishing order and balance in the relationship between humanity and the spiritual forces that affect them. His primary means were "the sword of His mouth" (Revelation 2.16) or His words.

So if that is what you meant, I really like your argument.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
Freddy, you say that redemption comes through "recognizing our sins, repenting of them, praying to God for His aid, and living a new life". I know I keep saying this, but I think a bigger factor here is our being "filled with the spirit" and experiencing the "new birth" were we enter into the resurrection life of Christ and become "part of the vine" so that Jesus indwells and empowers us to be "transformed into the image of God". It is this new birth that is at the core of the new covenant where God makes his temple in us.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
I don't know much about your faith tradition, but I think it arose with this kind of experiential relational faith, and then later moved away from this kind of mystical relational emphasis to focus on works of love. Maybe it needs to do both?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
I would say that this new birth gives us the power to lead a life of Christ-like love. We are first loved, and that overflows.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
He was sinless sacrifice, passover lamb etc
We are able to partake of the judgement of God on him.Ro 6 Our Old man was crucified with him etc.

---

I don't think that this demonstrates the error of what Shaktacos was saying. Just Romans? Not Jesus?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
why don't you tell me how someone can RIGHTEOUSLY be forgiven by God without Christ having been judged on their behalf.

---

According to Jesus, the usual way is to repent:

quote:

---

Luke 17:3 Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying, ‘I repent,’ you shall forgive him.”

Mark 1:4 John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Luke 3:3 And he went into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,

Luke 24:47 that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins;

---

We are also forgiven as we forgive others:

quote:

---

Matthew 6:12 And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors.

Matthew 6:14 “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Mark 11:25 “And whenever you stand praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive him, that your Father in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses. But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father in heaven forgive your trespasses.”

Luke 6:37 “Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

---

These passages don't suggest that forgiveness is about Christ being judged on our behalf. They tie forgiveness to our choices.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
So you want the actual 'legal' words that prove something? the proof texts? Eph 2:14-16 Romans5:8-10 1Pet 2:24 Col 2:13-14 1Jn 2:2 2Cor 5:21

---

Jamat, when you assert so strongly that the Bible says something, and then chafe at having to quote it and explain how it says what you claim it says, you're not really helping us to understand.

Sharktacos' counter-explanations are pretty good, I think.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Ro 5:9 clearly states we are saved from God's wrath through him. How could you not read appeasement into that?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
[QUOTE] God absorbed the wrath meant for us in His own flesh.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
[QUOTE] God absorbed the wrath meant for us in His own flesh.

---

You come to the point very readily Mr Shark.
How is this not saying that God 'appeased' himself in Christ?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Ro 5:9 clearly states we are saved from God's wrath through him. How could you not read appeasement into that?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

I understand in part what you are saying in that God cannot ignore sin, and that there is a cost to forgiveness. When we forgive, we take that pain upon ourselves instead of insisting on getting payback. Anyone who has had to forgive a grievous wrong or betrayal knows that there is a cost to forgiveness. God payed the cost of forgiveness by bearing our sin in his body. God allowed himself to be wronged, unjustly condemned. God paid what he did not owe because he was willing to be wronged, to be striped naked and humiliated, because he loved us and would pay any price to get us back, even though we were his enemies.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Forgiveness isn't a magic wand, it is a tough transaction with a legal basis.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

I think I agree with you. You might be over-thinking it. The whole point was to make people better, not to overcome technical or legal obstacles. I'm not sure if that is what you are saying.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
I would say that this new birth gives us the power to lead a life of Christ-like love. We are first loved, and that overflows.

---

I don't disagree that this is the way that it actually happens. But I think that we are at first insensible of Christ's love working within us. It works within everyone, but we can't, at first, feel it, except maybe on occasion.

As I understand it, the choice to act or not act on that love and on that power is ours. We become aware of that love, and benefit from its power, only as we think, feel, and act according to it over time. This allows it to open a channel within us, and brings about our new birth.

Alternatively, we can ignore it and refuse to act according to that love or listen to God's words. This is our choice.

So it's true that God's love and power really come first. But to all intents and purposes, in our subjective lives, we need to hear God's Word, believe it, and obey it, or nothing happens.

Fortunately, most people have a lot of time to figure this out, try out alternatives, and move along a path of their own choosing. I think that Christ made it clear, though, that there are different paths, that we need to choose among them, and that they do go different places.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
I think there is a deal of sense here, Freddy, but I would still assign a greater importance to God's role and a lesser importance to our own, than I suspect you would.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
I believe that we can only be "good" (to put it a bit lamely, but YKWIM) through an ongoing supernatural encounter with the power of God. Now we may, or we may not, be wholly aware of that process, but I believe it is a process which is going on anyway.

---

Yes, that's it. I agree. I would vote for being less aware of that process, maybe, than you.

For example, I have just spent a good five minutes writing these words. I'm sure that God is typing for me. I'm sure that anything close to the truth in what I am saying is from Him. I can even say that I, in a sense, can feel that in my heart.

But I can also say that I might just as easily be way off the mark, listening to things that aren't God at all, but are mistaken. I can try to know whether I am right or wrong, pray about it, and look to the Bible for guidance. In the end, though, I can't know for sure whether or not the way I see it is right, wrong, or somewhere in between. And it is important for me to know, so it is important for me to do what is necessary to find out - a genuine listening to God.

I can't imagine that it is different for you. If you claim to be very sensible of God's influence, then that would also make you very sure of the rightness of your position and actions. Do you think that you can have that blessed assurance?

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posted                       

quote:

---

If you claim to be very sensible of God's influence, then that would also make you very sure of the rightness of your position and actions. Do you think that you can have that blessed assurance?

---

Well sometimes, I am reasonably confident in that way, but most of the time, just like you, I suspect, I live by faith rather than by sight, and just trust that He'll sort it out. Except when I don't

But the point that I was making is that, quite often, we are unaware of that influence, that it is a mystery but we are influenced by it anyway, whereas ISTM that you are sying that, in order for the process to be effective, we must be rationally engaged in it. Or have I misread you? Now I have nothing against rational engagement, but it seems, I don't know, an inadequate explanation of our interaction with God.

--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
But the point that I was making is that, quite often, we are unaware of that influence, that it is a mystery but we are influenced by it anyway, whereas ISTM that you are sying that, in order for the process to be effective, we must be rationally engaged in it. Or have I misread you? Now I have nothing against rational engagement, but it seems, I don't know, an inadequate explanation of our interaction with God.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
[QUOTE] God absorbed the wrath meant for us in His own flesh.

---

You come to the point very readily Mr Shark.
How is this not saying that God 'appeased' himself in Christ?

---

Because you can't appease yourself.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Ro 5:9 clearly states we are saved from God's wrath through him. How could you not read appeasement into that?

---

Actually, it doesn't. The original Greek does not specify from whose wrath we are saved. Alison and Girard make very powerful arguments that it is our slavery to wrath and our propensity for scapegoating from which we require delivering. We are God's enemy, He is not ours.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Forgiveness isn't a magic wand, it is a tough transaction with a legal basis.

---

I'm sorry, but the two clauses of your sentence are seperate assertions, the second of which does not follow from the first. I agree that forgiveness is not a magic wand. In fact, a number of posters on here, myself included, have gone to great lengths to explain how we understand forgiveness, and, I have to say, references to Harry Potter have been few and far between! But the suggestion that forgiveness is a legal transaction is a category error. Forgiveness is relational, not legal. The fact that various writers (interestingly, excluding Jesus) use legal terminology for the atonement (which, in any case, I do not consider to be about forgiveness per se) means nothing more than that educated people of that time understood a legal metaphor. In fact, Paul's whole argument about the "law" could be summed up as "you are all so obsessed with your status under the Jewish law, but it's a different kind of law, the law of sin and death, about which you ought to be worried."

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

I too am sorry. Forgiveness has a legal aspect. I never said it is not relational as well. Of course it is. Legality is actually to do with the formalization of relationships.

---

quote:

---

The atonement IS about forgiveness. To deny that is to deny sin and its solution.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
[QUOTE] There is no indication that in God's economy of forgiveness that He requires appeasement before he will forgive. Zip.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
[QUOTE] God absorbed the wrath meant for us in His own flesh.

---

You come to the point very readily Mr Shark.
How is this not saying that God 'appeased' himself in Christ?

---

Because you can't appease yourself.

---

Your opinion? God actually says he can and does! Christ was judged by God for our sins. Christ is the eternal word. the logic is inescapable. Who are you actually wanting to pick an argument with?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

You are like a man denying his baldness in the the mirror if you deny that the scriptures I quoted above cannot be validly read as God demanding appeasement.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:

quote:

---

You are like a man denying his baldness in the the mirror if you deny that the scriptures I quoted above cannot be validly read as God demanding appeasement.

---

They could be read that way I suppose. I just think it is a wrong reading of them that imposes a worldly understanding of justice onto the text that distorts the writer's intent. The question is not whether it is plausible, but whether it is compelling.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
where does it say in the Bible that God requires punishment before he will forgive?

Pick any one of these and show me were it says anything about punishment being a prerequisite to forgiveness.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
[QB]

In 1 the hostility is literally the hostility of God vs Gentiles since they did not keep his law as the Jews did. The hostility then becomes a metaphor for Gods anger against sin and sinners.
In 2 God's wrath is the point. It needs 'appeasing'
In 3 the sense of Christ 'bearing' our sins is found in that he bore the brunt of the judgement for them.
In 4 the code is the legal right Satan had to us before the cross event.
In 5 the sacrifice functions as a tool of appeasement.
[QB]

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

The words price and penalty are in this context interchangeable. You are quibbling about semantics.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:
[QB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamat:
[QB]

[QUOTE] In 1 the hostility is literally the hostility of God vs Gentiles since they did not keep his law as the Jews did. The hostility then becomes a metaphor for Gods anger against sin and sinners.
In 2 God's wrath is the point. It needs 'appeasing'
In 3 the sense of Christ 'bearing' our sins is found in that he bore the brunt of the judgement for them.
In 4 the code is the legal right Satan had to us before the cross event.
In 5 the sacrifice functions as a tool of appeasement.
[QB]

---

You are not demonstrating that they say anything about appeasement, you are merely asserting it.

---

quote:

---

It is not a given you can simply assert. I agree with you that these verses refer to the problem of God's wrath and even punishment due us. I see however no indication that God is solving this problem of wrath here through appeasement, and as far as I can see, you are simply assuming this because you cannot conceive of any other way to deal with sin. Again, show me where any idea of Christ's death being an appeasement (ie satisfaction of justice through punishment) is stated in the Bible.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Well I actually think that the burden of proof is on you to prove they don't.

---

quote:

---

Try Matt 20:28 then, Jesus says he 'came to give his life as a ransom for many.'
Is 53:10 Thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin.
Jn 11:51 Jesus should die for the nation.
Heb 9:28 He was offered to bear the sins of many.

---

quote:

---

Now could a ransom be meaningful unless it was paid to someone for something... to 'appease' them?

---

quote:

---

or let's say to pacify them and prevent them from commiting a violent act? God was in danger of being provoked to judgement. Indeed, he had been so provoked before. Christ's death 'appeased' this need in God when his anger threatened to boil over against sin.

---

quote:

---

If you cavil so much at the word 'appeasement' then try propitiation or expiation.

---

quote:

---

Incidentally, perhaps you could show me the word 'trinity' in the Bible.

---

quote:

---

2Cor 5:21 seems to me to be fairly definitive. 'He made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin.'
This verse states Christ was made sin. Why was this necessary?

---

quote:

---

I 'd suggest that it was that a sinless sacrifice was needed to 'appease' God's righteous judgement.

---

quote:

---

Gal 3:13 reinforces this idea.

---

quote:

---

I'd suggest that in toto, the evidence from scripture is overwhelming that the saviour's death achieved among other things, a legal and moral avenue that enabled God to forgive and renew humanity,

---

quote:

---

but only because sin was righteously judged by the cross event.

---

quote:

---

God no longer had to legally judge our sin. He could see it as judged in Christ and thus show his love while maintaining his integrity and his nature of holiness.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:

quote:

---

Now could a ransom be meaningful unless it was paid to someone for something... to 'appease' them?

---

The plain meaning of ransom refers to purchasing their freedom out of slavery. So no, there is no sense of appeasement in ransom.

---

quote:

---

Deuteronomy 7:8 The LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you from the house of bondage, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

Deuteronomy 9:26 Your people and Your inheritance whom You have redeemed through Your greatness, whom You have brought out of Egypt with a mighty hand.

Nehemiah 1:10 Now these are Your servants and Your people, whom You have redeemed by Your great power, and by Your strong hand.

Isaiah 50:2 Is My hand shortened at all that it cannot redeem? Or have I no power to deliver? Indeed with My rebuke I dry up the sea, I make the rivers a wilderness;

Jeremiah 50.34 Their Redeemer is strong; The LORD of hosts is His name.
He will thoroughly plead their case,
That He may give rest to the land,
And disquiet the inhabitants of Babylon.
35 “ A sword is against the Chaldeans,” says the LORD,
“ Against the inhabitants of Babylon,

Isaiah 49.25 Thus says the LORD:
“ Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away,
And the prey of the terrible be delivered;
For I will contend with him who contends with you,
And I will save your children.
26 I will feed those who oppress you with their own flesh,
And they shall be drunk with their own blood as with sweet wine.
All flesh shall know
That I, the LORD, am your Savior,
And your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob.”

Isaiah 59.16 He saw that there was no man,
And wondered that there was no intercessor;
Therefore His own arm brought salvation for Him;
And His own righteousness, it sustained Him.
17 For He put on righteousness as a breastplate,
And a helmet of salvation on His head;
He put on the garments of vengeance for clothing,
And was clad with zeal as a cloak.
18 According to their deeds, accordingly He will repay,
Fury to His adversaries,
Recompense to His enemies;
The coastlands He will fully repay.
19 So shall they fear
The name of the LORD from the west,
And His glory from the rising of the sun;
When the enemy comes in like a flood,
The Spirit of the LORD will lift up a standard against him.
20 “ The Redeemer will come to Zion,
And to those who turn from transgression in Jacob,”

---

quote:

---

Isaiah 35:4 Behold, your God will come with vengeance,
With the recompense of God;
He will come and save you.” ….
8 A highway shall be there, and a road,
And it shall be called the Highway of Holiness.
The unclean shall not pass over it….
But the redeemed shall walk there,
10 And the ransomed of the LORD shall return,
And come to Zion with singing,

---

quote:

---

Isaiah 43:3 For I am the LORD your God, The Holy One of Israel, your Savior; I gave Egypt for your ransom, Ethiopia and Seba in your place.

---

quote:

---

Hosea 13:14 “ I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death. O Death, I will be your plagues! O Grave, I will be your destruction! Pity is hidden from My eyes.”

---

quote:

---

Luke 24:18 Then the one whose name was Cleopas answered and said to Him, “Are You the only stranger in Jerusalem, and have You not known the things which happened there in these days?”
19 And He said to them, “What things?”
So they said to Him, “The things concerning Jesus of Nazareth, who was a Prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death, and crucified Him. 21 But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharktacos:

quote:

---

Now could a ransom be meaningful unless it was paid to someone for something... to 'appease' them?

---

The plain meaning of ransom refers to purchasing their freedom out of slavery. So no, there is no sense of appeasement in ransom.

---

That's right. And, as I pointed out before, the Bible connects the idea of ransom with redemption, which in many cases is achieved by force or power:


So what Jesus did was not about appeasing God but about overcoming God's enemies.

---