No Deal with the Devil: Christ's Ransom and the Justice of God

[makesends]

Christ Death destroyed the works of the devil 1 Jn 3:8

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Christ destroyed unbelief for the elect. Christ redeemed the elect from all iniquity, the works of the devil who had us captive in unbelief

You are still doing it. You're connecting dots across large spaces.

That we are saved from our sin, and forgiven of our sins, and that we are freed from our captivity to sin, and even to say that we are freed from our captivity to the devil, does not translate to we are REDEEMED from the devil.

 

[Eleanor]

That the devil has much to do with unbelief—how does that make your point? The price paid resulting in redemption is not paid to the devil.

The price paid resulting in redemption is paid to Justice, just as the execution of a murderer is the price paid to justice.

 

[brightfame52]

You are still doing it. You're connecting dots across large spaces.

That we are saved from our sin, and forgiven of our sins, and that we are freed from our captivity to sin, and even to say that we are freed from our captivity to the devil, does not translate to we are REDEEMED from the devil.

The works of the devil have been destroyed by Christ, which one work of his is holding men in unbelief. If you don't believe it or see it, that is fine, I see it and gave you Scripture why. I'm not going to be going back and forth with you either

 

[makesends]

The works of the devil have been destroyed by Christ, which one work of his is holding men in unbelief. If you don't believe it or see it, that is fine, I see it and gave you Scripture why. I'm not going to be going back and forth with you either

I don't disagree with what you say here. I disagree with your use of it, to make the claim that we are redeemed from sin/Satan. That is a mistaken use of the word Redeem. "Freed"? —yes, certainly! "Redeemed"? —no. "Freed from sin/Satan via the Redemption" could even be argued, but we are not redeemed from sin/Satan.

 

[brightfame52]

And not that the devil has no work there, and no captivity, but it is not the devil who accepts the redemption payment.

Who said anything about the devil accepting any payment? It's God's justice that needs to be satisfied. However the works of the devil were destroyed for the elect, that released them from the captivity of the devil. Men don't repent and acknowledge the truth when being captive by the devil 2 Tim 2:25-26

25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

God will grant the elect repentance to recover from that captivity because he's been redeemed

 

[Arial]

God will grant the elect repentance to recover from that captivity because he's been redeemed

I have heard the work that Christ does in taking us out of captivity referred to as a rescue, as being delivered, as being snatched from the kingdom of darkness. Never, ever have I heard it reduced to a "recovery".

 

[brightfame52]

Redeemed"? —no. "Freed from sin/Satan via the Redemption" could even be argued, but we are not redeemed from sin/Satan

I think you are trying to make a distinction that is not there. To be redeemed implies a liberation from the power and possession of another. The Greek word λυτρόω in Titus 2 14 means:

3084 lytróō (cognate with 3083/lytron, "a ransom-price") – properly, to release (set free) by paying the full ransom; "to release, on receipt of ransom" (Vine); (figuratively) to restore "something back, into the possession of its rightful owner – i.e. rescuing from the power and possession of an alien possessor" (Wm. Barclay).

By nature the elect are the goods or possession of the devil under the power of sin and darkness and unbelief

 

[makesends]

Who said anything about the devil accepting any payment? It's God's justice that needs to be satisfied. However the works of the devil were destroyed for the elect, that released them from the captivity of the devil. Men don't repent and acknowledge the truth when being captive by the devil 2 Tim 2:25-26

25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

God will grant the elect repentance to recover from that captivity because he's been redeemed

What I said agrees with what you say here. But that is not redemption. Arguably the RESULT of redemption, but not redemption.

 

[makesends]

I think you are trying to make a distinction that is not there. To be redeemed implies a liberation from the power and possession of another. The Greek word λυτρόω in Titus 2 14 means:

3084 lytróō (cognate with 3083/lytron, "a ransom-price") – properly, to release (set free) by paying the full ransom; "to release, on receipt of ransom" (Vine); (figuratively) to restore "something back, into the possession of its rightful owner – i.e. rescuing from the power and possession of an alien possessor" (Wm. Barclay).

By nature the elect are the goods or possession of the devil under the power of sin and darkness and unbelief

I think you are trying to do away with the distinction that is, by definition of "redeemed", there. Nobody is saying that the redeemed are not freed. But the freeing is a result of redemption and not the redemption itself.

 

[brightfame52]

What I said agrees with what you say here. But that is not redemption. Arguably the RESULT of redemption, but not redemption.

Redemption and the results of it are one, cause and effect

 

[Arial]

I think you are trying to make a distinction that is not there. To be redeemed implies a liberation from the power and possession of another. The Greek word λυτρόω in Titus 2 14 means:

3084 lytróō (cognate with 3083/lytron, "a ransom-price") – properly, to release (set free) by paying the full ransom; "to release, on receipt of ransom" (Vine); (figuratively) to restore "something back, into the possession of its rightful owner – i.e. rescuing from the power and possession of an alien possessor" (Wm. Barclay).

By nature the elect are the goods or possession of the devil under the power of sin and darkness and unbelief

You are still talking about redemption and ransom as though they were the same thing. You use the two words interchangeably. The ransom Christ paid was in his substitutionary death (PSA) He paid our debt. The ransom paid is what purchases the redemption.

 

[John Bauer]

The Atonement of Jesus indeed had Him conquering and being Victor over Satan, but the primary aspect of it would be found in his atoning work as being a penal Substitutionary atonement viewpoint

As I said elsewhere (but I don't remember where), while Reformed theology can and often does embrace other biblical motifs as well (victory over death, moral renewal, ransom, covenant faithfulness, etc.), these flow from and through penal substitution—not instead of it.
Remove penal substitutionary atonement and the Reformed doctrine of justification collapses, because forensic righteousness requires that sin be legally punished and righteousness legally imputed.

 

[Eleanor]

I think you are trying to make a distinction that is not there. To be redeemed implies a liberation from the power and possession of another. The Greek word λυτρόω in Titus 2 14 means:

3084 lytróō (cognate with 3083/lytron, "a ransom-price") – properly, to release (set free) by paying the full ransom; "to release, on receipt of ransom" (Vine); (figuratively) to restore "something back, into the possession of its rightful owner – i.e. rescuing from the power and possession of an alien possessor" (Wm. Barclay).

By nature the elect are the goods or possession of the devil under the power of sin and darkness and unbelief

We are redeemed from the condemnation into which we were born (Eph 2:3), we are not redeemed from Satan.

 

[brightfame52]

We are redeemed from the condemnation into which we were born (Eph 2:3), we are not redeemed from Satan.

I believe it is clear the elect were redeemed from the works of the devil by which the elect were captive by. Acts 26 18

18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Jer 31 11

For the Lord hath redeemed Jacob, and ransomed him from the hand of him that was stronger than he.

 

[JesusFan]

Hypothetically, a man is convicted of murder and placed on death row. He is guilty of the crime for which he was convicted. A date has been set for his execution, when Justice will be met. Before that day arrives, the Governor grants a pardon (as is his right). The prisoner is now held to be not guilty under the law and is released from his prison.

Is a “death” still owed to “Justice”?

“Your sins are forgiven” - Jesus

Big difference is that God told us, in divine justice, the soul that sins must die , so someone has to take that due penalty from God for breaking His law

 

[JesusFan]

Brightfame, you are making the same error in logic here as in your assertion elsewhere that the elect, redeemed by Christ's sacrifice, forgiven through Christ's work on the cross, are from that time forward forgiven. You are engaging in false equivalence by way of a category error.

In that earlier context, you might as well say that the elect are born saved, so also here: You might as well say that the unbelief is the debt.

Our brother is a hyper Calvinist, holding to eternal Justification, so the elect indeed to him would be born in a saved state

 

[JesusFan]

As I said elsewhere (but I don't remember where), while Reformed theology can and often does embrace other biblical motifs as well (victory over death, moral renewal, ransom, covenant faithfulness, etc.), these flow from and through penal substitution—not instead of it.
Remove penal substitutionary atonement and the Reformed doctrine of justification collapses, because forensic righteousness requires that sin be legally punished and righteousness legally imputed.

Believe it was Calvin who stated that the entire Pauline Justification stands or falls upon Psa as the Hinge of salvation

 

[JesusFan]

We are redeemed from the condemnation into which we were born (Eph 2:3), we are not redeemed from Satan.

Satan had nothing to do with our salvation, other then playing "his role" in getting Judas to point out Jesus and get Him to trial and crucifixion then , by stirring up the crowd against Jesus

 

[makesends]

Our brother is a hyper Calvinist, holding to eternal Justification, so the elect indeed to him would be born in a saved state

While what @brightfame52 says reduces to that, I don't think he quite SAYS so. I'm waiting to find out, since to say so implies regeneration is not directly related to salvation, and that, therefore, faith is endemic to the elect even at birth. That is, unless he imports more human reasoning (sans scripture) into his Ordo Salutis.

 

[atpollard]

Big difference is that God told us, in divine justice, the soul that sins must die , so someone has to take that due penalty from God for breaking His law

Not “someone” … “the soul that sins” MUST DIE.
[for the record, everyone that I know either HAS or WILL die, so the penalty shall be paid.]