According to the Watchtower:
Who received the Ransom payment?
Why did the Ransomer need to be paid?
Who was Jesus sacrificed to?
Who was being held captive and by whom?
Whom did the Ransomer release?
Doug
Please explain the Watchtower's "Ransom" for me
by Doug Mason 44 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
waton
you are going too fast. The ransom was "to undo the works of the devil", which started with the talking snake working in his behalf. no talking snake, no ransom required.
-
Sanchy
I'll take a stab at it. Here's how I understood JW Ransom nonsense:
Who received the Ransom payment?
Jehovah
Why did the Ransomer need to be paid?
Jehovah's perfect sense of justice required that only perfect blood can make up for Adam's sin.
Who was Jesus sacrificed to?
I guess Jehovah
Who was being held captive and by whom?
We humans were held captive by sin and thus death
Whom did the Ransomer release?
Released us from the slavery to sin
-
EverApostate
A father had 2 sons. Eldest was wicked and youngest innocent. In order to Forgive the Eldest, he commands him to kill his younger brother in a gruesome manner. What a Dad.
Despite the killing, the eldest son is not forgiven yet.
That's Christianity.
-
waton
A stickler for protocol, some of the time. requires to have his son killed to satisfy the [later] law of eye for an eye, "unless blood is spilled.." but has no problems with all the laws of nature violated in all the "miracles of the bible stories. pile stories high of you know what.
-
cofty
Russell originally taught that Jesus died only for Adam - one perfect life for one perfect life.
The rest of mankind were redeemed by proxy as they were as yet unborn in "Adam's loins".
"One redeemer was quite sufficient in the plan which God adopted, because only one had sinned, and only one had been condemned. Others shared his condemnation…One unforfeited life could redeem one forfeited life and no more." - Divine Plan of the Ages p.132 (1886)
Rutherford initially went along with this doctrine but, speaking like a lawyer, he presented it like a financial transaction.
In Rutherford’s book, “The Harp of God”, published in 1921, he used an illustration concerning three men, John, Charles, and Mr. Smith. John is in prison unable to pay a $100 fine. His brother Charles has no money but does have time and energy. It is argued that, just as Charles’ strength could not help John directly, neither could Jesus’ life redeem Adam. So Charles works for Mr. Smith to turn his energy into cash which he uses to free John. Similarly: Jesus must reduce his perfect humanity to a purchasing value, which we may call merit, and which merit or purchasing value would be sufficient for the payment of Adam’s debt and release Adam and his offspring from that judgement. In order to provide this price it was necessary for Jesus to die. – p.142
In 1939 however Rutherford made a significant change to this unique doctrine.
"The judgement entered against Adam was just, it must stand forever....
This text does not say or mean that Adam was or is ransomed, but does mean that the human perfection once possessed by the perfect man Adam (and which human perfection carried with it the right to life, which life and right thereto were forfeited by the wilful disobedience of Adam) is purchased or bought back or ransomed for Adam’s offspring, who were prevented from receiving that life and right thereto by reason of Adam’s sin – Salvation p.176.
In my opinion this strange interpretation of the meaning of Jesus' death - the doctrine of soteriology - is the single most important factor that distinguishes JWs from christianity.
-
scratchme1010
Who received the Ransom payment?
ISIS
Why did the Ransomer need to be paid?
For their election campaign
Who was Jesus sacrificed to?
Hillary Clinton
Who was being held captive and by whom?
Anne Coulter
Whom did the Ransomer release?
Kellyanne Conway
I'm not kidding. My point is that any answer I can give you, including those, make as much sense as the ones that the WT gives. It's all fabricated, made up nonsense.
-
waton
If the ransom would be for Adam, he would be a candidate for the resurrection, which wt denies
"To buy back that what Adam lost "--oops---, but not for himself, but for his off spring?
-
cofty
Don't you think it is worth trying to properly understand the things we rightly condemn?
The WT doctrine of the Ransom bears absolutely no resemblance to the christian gospel. Ask any christian about why Jesus had to die and they will talk about how Jesus suffered the punishment for their sins. This is how the early church explained Jesus' death. Vicarious punishment was also an important part of Russell's doctrine. It was the very thing he fell out with Barbour about.
-
cofty
If the ransom would be for Adam, he would be a candidate for the resurrection, which wt denies - Waton
Russell taught that Adam was redeemed and would be raised.