Who collected the Ransom?

[Nick Hallandale]

The New Testament says that Jesus paid a ransom for many, for all.

Matthew 20:28 KJV
28Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

1Timothy 2:6 KJV
6Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

So who collected the ransom?
Was it God?
Was it the Devil?
Was it Mankind?
Tell me who you think collected the ransom and why ?

[Easyrider]

There is absolutely no point in quoting your favourite mythological/metaphorical texts at me.

You make a claim that they are mythological. Can you support that with some evidence?

[bernee51]

There is absolutely no point in quoting your favourite mythological/metaphorical texts at me.

You make a claim that they are mythological. Can you support that with some evidence?

I have no evidence that they are anything other than as I state other than the claims of those that believe otherwise. Or to put it another way - do you believe the Bhagvad Gita is mythology? Why so?

[Easyrider]

There is absolutely no point in quoting your favourite mythological/metaphorical texts at me.

You make a claim that they are mythological. Can you support that with some evidence?

I have no evidence that they are anything other than as I state other than the claims of those that believe otherwise. Or to put it another way - do you believe the Bhagvad Gita is mythology? Why so?

Perhaps you can go into reincarnation and your views on that?

[bernee51]

There is absolutely no point in quoting your favourite mythological/metaphorical texts at me.

You make a claim that they are mythological. Can you support that with some evidence?

I have no evidence that they are anything other than as I state other than the claims of those that believe otherwise. Or to put it another way - do you believe the Bhagvad Gita is mythology? Why so?

Perhaps you can go into reincarnation and your views on that?

Though it is a little off topic (but perhaps not - we are talking about debt and reincarnation is seen as a way to pay of karmic debt)...

I do not believe that the popular idea of reincarnation (i.e. we die and are reincarnated in another body) is valid. It is, like all ideas of an afterlife, yet another way of dealing with the obvious impermanance of the phenomenal world.

[redstang281]

Sin is a distortion, a corruption, a mutation (if I may) of holiness.

Do you consider man to have 'holiness' or is that a preserve of 'god'

Holiness meaning the state of acceptibility in God's eyes could not be said of mortal mankind.

When Satan chose to rebel against God using his free will he created sin.

Does the 'he' in this statement refer to god or satan?

Satan. Maybe I should have stated that he initiated sin as this seems to be causing a lot of confusion.

Sin is essentially the act of rebelling from God. It wasn't sin that caused Satan to rebel it was Satan's free will that allowed for it.

I was under the impression that it was the 'sin of pride' which brought about Satan's downfall.

Yes, so what I'm saying is because God had given him free will he was able to manifest this pride that he turned into sin. Instead of standing in awe of God he turned that attention to himself. That's why I said that sin isn't a new creation it is a distortion of an existing creation.

[bernee51]

Do you consider man to have 'holiness' or is that a preserve of 'god'

Holiness meaning the state of acceptibility in God's eyes could not be said of mortal mankind.

Are you saying no living human being can ever be acceptible in god's eyes?

When Satan chose to rebel against God using his free will he created sin.

Does the 'he' in this statement refer to god or satan?

Satan. Maybe I should have stated that he initiated sin as this seems to be causing a lot of confusion.

I was under the impression that (from the bible) god created sin.

Confusion is par for the course with hermeneutics.

[redstang281]

Do you consider man to have 'holiness' or is that a preserve of 'god'

Holiness meaning the state of acceptibility in God's eyes could not be said of mortal mankind.

Are you saying no living human being can ever be acceptible in god's eyes?

Not in human form. We are declared righteous because God judges Jesus in our place.

When Satan chose to rebel against God using his free will he created sin.

Does the 'he' in this statement refer to god or satan?

Satan. Maybe I should have stated that he initiated sin as this seems to be causing a lot of confusion.

I was under the impression that (from the bible) god created sin.

The Bible doesn't say that. It says satan is the originator of sin.

Confusion is par for the course with hermeneutics.

So is confusion with learning other things in life new languages, computer programming, chemistry, politics etc.. It doesn't necessarily mean something is nonsense simply because it is hard to pickup.

[bernee51]

Not in human form. We are declared righteous because God judges Jesus in our place.

This begs the question as to why a perfect entity would create a being that can never, in the form he created it, be acceptable to itself.

In judging Jesus is god not judging himself. If he is judging himself that implies there are attributes of himself that are less than perfect.

[redstang281]

Not in human form. We are declared righteous because God judges Jesus in our place.

This begs the question as to why a perfect entity would create a being that can never, in the form he created it, be acceptable to itself.

In order to create a dependence of us on himself (God), which I suspect was God's intent.

In judging Jesus is god not judging himself. If he is judging himself that implies there are attributes of himself that are less than perfect.

God is judging Jesus as himself in human. When Jesus walked the earth he was God taking on human form. So for that period of time he was taking on both natures, God and man. So when God judges Jesus he does so in the same fashion he would judge a man. Like you said, there are attributes of mankind that are definitely less then perfect. But because Jesus is God, and he circumvented the curse of sin (by means of the virgin birth) he is able to be found righteous in God's eyes.

[Cathar1950]

According to the oldest traditions, Jesus became God's son at his baptism.
Becoming God's son (anointed) was not divinity any more then David the Priests or the Prophets. The virgin birth is hardly credible and is a misreading of the Hebrew scripture translated into Greek.

In order to create a dependence of us on himself (God), which I suspect was God's intent.

Dependence? Wow, you sure have a low view of God's intent.
"I call you friends not servants"

God is judging Jesus as himself in human. When Jesus walked the earth he was God taking on human form. So for that period of time he was taking on both natures, God and man. So when God judges Jesus he does so in the same fashion he would judge a man. Like you said, there are attributes of mankind that are definitely less then perfect.

How can he have both natures and be perfect?
Why is he judging Jesus or himself?

But because Jesus is God, and he circumvented the curse of sin (by means of the virgin birth) he is able to be found righteous in God's eyes.

The curse of sin is a Pauline invention, which is really the curse of the law.
Maybe he found righteousness in God's eyes as others have but that hardly justifies us. But the fall is really not a Hebrew concept.
The whole thing sound convoluted.