To whom was the ransom paid?
When it comes to the New Testament times in the Roman empire, people are very knowledgeable of sons being kidnapper by criminal kidnappers for a huge ransom, paid by wealthy parents and hopefully accepted by the Kidnappers. Julious Ceasar was kidnapper by pirates at age 21 and a huge sum was paid by his parents to get him back, which most people in the Roman empire knew about.
We are really talking about atonement, which is a huge misunderstood topic with all the theories doing a poor job explaining, look at the ransom portion:
The Bible refers to Jesus’ sacrifice as a literal ransom payment:
Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
1 Timothy 2:6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time
Heb. 9: 15…now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
We do have the blood specifically mentioned in Revelation 5:9 They sing a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slaughtered and by your blood you ransomed for God saints from every tribe and language and people and nation;
We should agree on:
1. Jesus life and death is the unbelievable huge ransom payment?
2. The ransom payment was made to set children free to go to the Kingdom and be with the Father?
3. Deity (Jesus and God both) made this unbelievable huge payment?
4. All these fit perfectly a ransom scenario?
5. The scripture is not describing Jesus’ cruel torturous death on the cross as being like a ransom payment, but as being a ransom payment?
Now think about this:
In the context of time and people being addressed how would they have understood this idea of an unbelievable huge ransom being paid. Does the “ransoming” fit a kidnapping ransom? The Bible tells us there is a ransom payment at least being offered and definitely made for “many” and “God’s saints” and there is a redemption (setting free).
Peter even helps us out more by contrasting the unbelievable huge payment of Christ to just a payment of silver and gold. Who might take silver and gold, so it can be a good analogy for Peter? 1 Peter 1:18 You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold,
A kidnapper, in general, holds back the parent’s children awaiting an acceptable ransom payment, so who do you blame for keeping children out of the Kingdom?
The Kidnapper cannot be God, since He is not an undeserving criminal kidnapper holding His own children back.
Also, the Kidnapper would not be satan, since God has the power to take from satan, without paying anything to satan. There is no cosmic Law saying you got to pay the kidnapper and it would be wrong to do so, if you could get around it and satan is fully undeserving.
We know death, sin and evil were concurred with Christ’s death and resurrection, but those are not tangible things needing to be paid anything.
So who is the kidnapper?
When you go up to a nonbelieving sinner, what are you trying to get him/her to accept: A doctrine, a denomination, a book, a theology, a church or something else. NO, you want the nonbeliever to accept “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified” and if he does accept this, then a child of God is released to enter the Kingdom and be with God, but if the sinner rejects “Jesus Christ and Him crucifies” a child is kept out of the Kingdom.
Does this not sound very much like a kidnapping scenario with a ransom being offered?
“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is described in scripture as the ransom payment.
Could the sinner holding a child of God out of the Kingdom of God, be described as a criminal kidnapper?
“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is a huge sacrificial payment, like you find with children being ransomed?
Parents will make huge sacrificial payments to have their children released, but it is still up to the kidnapper to accept or reject the ransom.
