Ransom

This word is used several times in Scripture to denote the immense price the Lord Jesus gave for the purchase of his people. He saith him self, (Mat 20:28.) The son of man came to give his life a ransom for many." And his servant the apostle saith, (1 Tim. 2: 6.) Who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time." And to heighten the subject, beyond all possible conception, of the greatness of the value, Peter was commissioned to tell the church that "they were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver andgold, but with the precious blood of Christ, as a lamb without blemish and without spot." (1 Pet. i. 18, 19.) And the Psalmist brings in his testimony to the same amount, (Ps. xlix. 7, 8.) "None can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him: for the redemption of his soul is precious, and it ceaseth for ever." But to shew, at the same time, that what the Lord Jesus gave was fully equal, yea, more than equal to the vast purchase, ’the Holy Ghost, in the book of Job, introduceth JEHOVAH as speakingconcerning the redeemed sinner, "Deliver him from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom." (Job 33. 24.) And hence, in proof that this one offering of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all, hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified, the prophet Isaiah is appointed to describe the happy effects of redemption in the everlasting salvation of all Christ’s people. "The ransomed of the Lord (saith he) shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads; they shall obtain joy andgladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away." (Isa. xxxv. 10.) I hope the reader will indulge me with one short observation on the subject of Jesus giving himself a ransom for his people. Never in all the annals of mankind was there ever heard of such unparalleled love. Suppose some generous prince, out of compassion to any of his captive subjects, were to abridge his pleasures, and give large sums of money to bring them out of captivity - - how would the deed be applauded, and his name be idolized to all gene rations!But supposing this generous prince was to give himself for them, and exchange their persons in slavery by voluntarily surrendering up himself to such a state - - what would be said of this? And yet the Lord Jesus hath done this, and infinitely more, not for friends, but enemies, not for those who loved him, but those who hated him; and not only by slavery, but by death. He hath died for them, washed them in his blood, brought them out of slavery and the shadow of death, and hath broke their bonds asunder, and purchased for them an endless state of happiness, and is gone before to take possession of it in their name, and will come again to receive them to himself, that where he is there they may be also. "Wonder, O heavens, and be astonished, O earth, for the Lord hath done it!"

Greek lutron, antilutron (1Ti 2:6). ("A price paid for freeing a captive".) Anti implies vicarious, equivalent substitution, "a ransom for many" (Mat 20:28; Eph 1:7; 1Pe 1:18-19). Man was the slave of Satan, sold under sin. He was unable to ransom himself, because absolute obedience is due to God; therefore no act of ours can satisfy for the least offense. Lev 25:48 allowed one sold captive to be redeemed by one of his brethren. The Son of God therefore became man in order that as our elder brother He should redeem us (Heb 2:14-15). (See REDEEM.)

In the O.T., except in Exo 21:30, the word is kopher, lit. ’a covering,’ a cognate word to ka phar, often translated ’atonement.’ None "can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him." Psa 49:7. But God could say, "Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom." Job 33:24. The word occurs also in Exo 30:12; Job 36:18; Pro 6:35; Pro 13:8; Pro 21:18; Isa 43:3. In the N.T. it is λύτρον, or ἀντίλυτρον, from ’to loose, set free.’ Christ gave Himself, His life, a ransom for many: the precious blood of Christ witnesses that every claim of God against the believer has been answered. Mat 20:28; Mar 10:45; 1Ti 2:6.

RANSOM.—The word ‘ransom’ occurs twice in the NT, in both cases with reference to Christ’s giving of Himself for the redemption of man: (1) in Mat 20:28 = Mar 10:45, where it represents the Gr. λύτρον: ‘the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many’; and (2) in 1Ti 2:6, where it stands for ἀντίλυτρον: ‘For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus (1Ti 2:5), who gave himself a ransom for all.’ The idea, however, is implicit in the verb (λυτροῦμαι) and nouns (λυτρωτής, λύτρωσις, ἀπολύτρωσις) used to express the thought and fact of redemption (see Redemption). It is probable from its structure that the second of the above passages (1Ti 2:6) looks back upon Christ’s saying in the first (Mat 20:28); it has been thought also that the ἐλυτρώθητε in 1Pe 1:18 is an echo of the same saying (Denney, Death of Christ, p. 92). The word λύτρον itself is most probably the equivalent of the Heb. word כֹּפֵר (Wendt and others question this, but most admit the connexion), and the attempt to give a closer definition of its meaning in relation to Christ’s redemption goes back on the usage of this OT word (cf. the elaborate discussion in Ritschl’s Recht. u. Vers. ii. pp. 70–80).

כֹּפֶר, then, the word generally translated ‘ransom’ in the OT (Exo 21:30; Exo 30:12, Num 35:31-32 Authorized Version ‘satisfaction’; 1Sa 12:3 Authorized Version ‘bribe,’ Job 33:23-24; Job 36:18, Psa 49:7, Pro 6:35; Pro 13:8; Pro 21:18, Isa 43:3, Amo 5:12), is derived, like the verb בִּפֶּר ‘to propitiate,’ ‘to atone,’ from a root meaning ‘to cover.’ It may thus be used, as in 1Sa 12:3 above, of a bribe given to blind the eyes from seeing what, in justice, they ought to see (cf. Exo 23:8, Job 9:24). This connects itself with the old idea of a gift as ‘covering the face’ (cf. Gen 32:20) of an offended person, i.e. propitiating, appeasing him, or inclining him to favour. As, however, in the case of an offence, there is little difference between covering the eyes of the offended party from beholding the offence, and covering the offence from his sight, it can easily be seen how בִּפֶּר came to take this second sense of covering the sinful person or his iniquity. This leads to the idea, which is the common one in the OT, of כֹּפֶּר as a ‘ransom,’ in the sense of something given in exchange for another as the price of that other’s redemption, or for one’s own redemption, or, what is at bottom the same idea, as satisfaction for a life. Thus in Isa 43:3-4 Jehovah is metaphorically said to have given Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba as a ransom for (‘instead of’) Israel. Hofmann, in his Schriftbeweis (ii. p. 234, 2nd ed.), has a different interpretation. He takes the notion of ‘covering’ in this word to apply to ‘covering in value’ (one thing covering the worth of another), and so imports into כֹּפֶר the idea of strict equivalence. It is true that ‘ransom’ in the OT usually includes the idea of rendering what may be termed an equivalent; but it is more than doubtful whether this can be read into the etymological signification. The term has, on the other hand, in nearly every case the direct meaning of a redemption-price for another, or for one’s own life. (1) In illustration of the latter sense, we have it declared in Num 35:31-32 that in no circumstances is a ‘ransom’ to be taken for the life of a murderer. Again, in Exo 21:30 it is provided that if, through its owner’s carelessness, an ox gore a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and the owner shall pay ‘for the ransom of his life’ what is laid on him (in the case of a slave, 30 shekels, v. 32). So at the taking of a census (Exo 30:12), each Israelite above twenty years had to pay half a shekel—‘atonement-money’ (Exo 30:15 f.)—as ‘a ransom for his soul (or life).’ (2) In illustration of the former sense—redemption-price for another (cf. Isa 43:3 above)—two instances stand out conspicuously. One is Psa 49:7 ‘None of them [the rich in this life] can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him ‘(cf. Psa 49:8 f.); the other is Job 33:24 ‘Then he is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom.’ כֹּפֶר, in both of these passages, has clearly the sense of something given in exchange for a life, which redeems it from death.

In the above cases in the Law, the ransom is a sum of money; in the case of the firstborn, though the word כֹּפֶר is not used, it is a sacrifice—a life for a life (cf. Num 18:15-16). Here the fact is to be noticed—of interest in the NT connexion—that in all this range of meanings the word ‘ransom’ is never in the OT directly connected with the propitiatory sacrifices. It is connected with propitiatory payments (cf. Exo 30:12 above), and in 2Sa 21:3-7 the idea, if not the word, is connected with the propitiatory delivering up of Saul’s seven sons to the Gibeonites (after refusal of a money-satisfaction, 2Sa 21:4). But the victim, even in sin- and trespass-offerings, is never spoken of as ‘ransoming’ the offerer. Its blood propitiates, atones for his sin, but the term ‘ransom’ is not employed. Yet it must be held that the connexion between the two ideas of sacrifice offered for the removal of sin (to make propitiation, כִּפֶּר) and of ‘ransom’ (כֹּפֶר) is very close; and that, whether the word is used or not, the expiatory sacrifice was also, in its own way, a כֹּפֶר for the life of the offerer (the LXX Septuagint in Psa 49:8 as in 1Sa 12:3 renders the word by ἐξιλασμα). Ritschl’s generalization of the meaning of the term (applied also to the sacrifice) into ‘a means of protection’ (Schutzmittel), ignores the essential point of redemption (not simply protection) by the payment of a price, or offering of an expiation.

The way is now clearer for the understanding of the NT passages. There can be little difficulty, when his words are taken in the general connexion of his thought, in apprehending what St. Paul meant when he spoke in 1Ti 2:6 of Christ’s having given Himself as an ἀντίλυτρον for all. ‘Ransom’ has here its true and proper sense of ‘a price paid in exchange,’ and the ideas of ‘ransom’ and expiatory sacrifice flow together in the unity of the thought of redemption through Christ’s reconciling death (see Redemption). In St. Paul’s view, Christ has given Himself up as a sin-offering for the world upon the Cross (Rom 8:3, 2Co 5:14; 2Co 5:21, Gal 3:13 etc.). He has redeemed the world by Himself dying for it (Rom 5:6; Rom 5:9-10). His death, reconciling us to God (Rom 3:24-25, Eph 2:16, Col 1:20 etc.), brings life and salvation to mankind. St. Paul’s mind is not troubled by the monetary analogy: it is not of a money price he is thinking, but of a great ethical reparation rendered to God’s broken law of righteousness. It is to God the ‘ransom’ is paid, not to another. The Son of God, in humanity, renders it for the world.

If, therefore, St. Paul knew of the saying of Jesus recorded in Matthew and Mark, there can be little doubt how he would have interpreted it. Alike in his thought and that of St. Peter (cf. 1Pe 1:18-19), the idea of a λύτρον is involved in the conception of ἀπολύτρωσις. Redemption has the two aspects, which can never be separated—redemption by ‘ransom,’ i.e. from sin’s guilt and condemnation; and redemption by power, from sin’s bondage and other evil effects. The Apostolic gospel comprehended both. But what of Christ’s own thought? The genuineness of the saying in Mat 20:28 = Mar 10:45 has been assailed (by Baur, etc.), but surely without the slightest grounds (cf. Ritschl, ii. p. 42 ff.; Denney, p. 36 f.). Its meaning also must be interpreted by the fact that Christ’s own mind at the time of uttering it was full of the thought of His death. It is His ‘life’ He gives, and He startles by saying that He yields it up as a λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν. He declares, further, that it was for this very end He came. His death was neither unforeseen, nor simply submitted to. He came to redeem the world by offering Himself as a ‘ransom’ for it. No doubt it is possible to empty the saying of most of its significance by generalizing it to mean that in some undefined way Christ’s death would be of great saving benefit to mankind, and therefore might be spoken of metaphorically as a ransom for the good of many (cf. Wendt, Lehre Jesu, ii. p. 509 ff.). This interpretation fails, if account be taken of the redeeming efficacy which Jesus in other places (as in the words at the Last Supper) undeniably attributes to His death (see Redemption). Ritschl, though he unduly weakens the force of the word λύτρον, does not fall into any such superficializing. He sees a solemn and weighty import in the words of Jesus, and interprets them to mean that Jesus, by His voluntary and guiltless death, directed to this end, redeems the members of His community from the doom of final annihilation impending over them in the judgment of God, gives death a new character to them, and delivers them from its fear (ii. p. 87). The interpretation cannot be accepted; neither is it explained how the death of Jesus should effect such a result. Yet Jesus assuredly did view the world as lying under condemnation of God, sunk in estrangement and evil, and needing both forgiveness and renewal to righteousness, and redemption from this state He connected with His own Person, and in a peculiar way with His death, which He here speaks of as a λύτρον, or redemption-price, to that end. Further investigation must be left to other articles (see Atonement, Reconciliation, Redemption).

The idea of Christ’s death as ‘a ransom for all’ has ever been a favourite one in the preaching, theology, and hymnology of the Church. In certain circles it early became connected with the fanciful notion that the ransom was paid, not to God, but to the Evil One, who was supposed to have acquired rights over man through sin, which God, in righteousness, could not ignore. Christ’s soul, therefore, it was taught, was given up to Satan as the price of the surrender of these assumed rights over mankind. But Satan was deceived in the bargain, for, having obtained possession of the sinless soul of Jesus, he could not hold it. That sinless soul was a torture to him. This theory, connected in the early Church with Origen and Gregory of Nyssa (though Origen, at least, frequently expresses himself in a quite contrary sense), prevailed extensively in the Middle Ages, but never really stood alone, or gained ascendency over the abler minds. Distinguished Fathers repudiated it, and Anselm reasons against it in his Cur Deus Homo.

Literature.—Ritschl, Recht. und Vers. ii. pp. 51 ff., 192 ff.; Wendt, Lehre Jesu, ii. p. 511 ff.; artt. ‘Propitiation,’ ‘Ransom,’ in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible ; Denney, Death of Christ, p. 42 ff.; Stevens, Theol. of the NT, p. 126 ff.

James Orr.

():

By: Wilhelm Bacher, Julius H. Greenstone

Captivity being considered a punishment worse than starvation or death (B. B. 8b, based on Jer. xv. 2), to ransom a Jewish captive was regarded by the Rabbis as one of the most important duties of a Jewish community; and such duty was placed above that of feeding or clothing the poor. He who refrains from ransoming a captive is guilty of transgressing the commandments expressed or implied in Biblical passages such as the following: "Thou shalt not harden thy heart" (Deut. xv. 7); "Thou shalt not shut thine hand from thy poor brother" (ib.); "Neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbor" (Lev. xix. 16); "He shall not rule with rigor over him in thy sight" (ib. xxv. 53, R. V.); "Thou shalt open thy hand wide unto him" (Deut. xv. 8, 11); ". . . that thy brother may live with thee" (Lev. xxv. 36); "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (ib. xix. 18); "Deliver them that are drawn unto death" (Prov. xxiv. 11; Maimonides, "Yad," Mattenot 'Aniyim, viii. 10; Shulḥan 'Aruk, Yoreh De'ah, 252, 2). One who delayed in the work of ransoming a Jewish captive was placed in the category of the murderer (Yoreh De'ah, 252, 3).

Urgency of the Duty.

Any money found in the communal treasury, even though it had been collected for other purposes, might be utilized in ransoming captives. Not only the money collected for the building of a synagogue might be so used, but also the building materials themselves might be sold and the money diverted to that end. If, however, the synagogue had already been erected it might not be sold for such purpose (B. B. 3b; "Yad," l.c. viii. 11; Yorch De'ah, 252, 1; see Desecration).

If there were several Jewish captives and the money in the communal treasury was not sufficient to ransom all of them, the cohen (priest) had to be redeemed first, and then the Levite, the Israelite, the bastard, the Natin (see Nethinim), the proselyte, and the liberated slave in the order named. A learned man, however, even though a bastard, took precedence over a priest who was an ignoramus. A woman captive was to be released before a man captive, unless the captors were suspected of practising pederasty. One's mother takes precedence over all others in regard to release from captivity; and thereafter one is required to release himself, then his teacher, and then his father (Hor. 13a; comp. Precedence).

When a man and his wife were taken captive the court might sell the man's property, even against his will, for the purpose of redeeming his wife. The court might sell also a captive's property for his own redemption, in spite of the captive's protest. If a man voluntarily sold himself into slavery, or was taken captive for debts he owed, the community was obliged to pay his ransom the first and second times, but not the third time, unless his life was in danger. His children, however, were in any case to be redeemed after his death (Giṭ. 46b). The community was not obliged to liberate a convert from Judaism, even when his apostasy consisted in the fact that he gave up only one of the laws of the Jewish religion. A slave who had gone through the ceremony of the ritual bath and had lived as a Jew was to be liberated at the expense of the community ("Yad," l.c. viii. 14).

Provisions Against Excessive Ransom.

In the tannaitic period it had already been found necessary to make provision against paying too high a ransom for Jewish captives, so as not to encourage pirates in their nefarious practises. The ransom-money might not exceed the value of thecaptive, if sold as a slave, or the price usually placed on captives (Giṭ. 45a; "Yad," l.c. viii. 12; Yoreh De'ah, 252, 4). This law was relaxed in later times. A man might give all he possessed for his own release, or for that of his wife (see Husband and Wife). The community was required to pay all that was demanded for the ransom of a learned man or of a promising youth (comp. Giṭ. 45a; Tos. s.v. "Delo"; ROSH ad loc. § 44; comp. Grätz, "Gesch." 3d ed., vii. 175, where it is related that R. Meïr of Rothenburg refused to be released for the large sum of 20,000 marks, which the German Jews were willing to pay for his ransom, lest similar captures should be encouraged thereby). The Rabbis forbade the assistance of captives in their attempts to escape, lest the treatment of captives generally should in consequence become more cruel (Giṭ. 45a). See Captives.

Bibliography:

Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, pp. 96, 335, Philadelphia, 1896;

Hamburger. R. B. T. ii. 82;

Kol Bo, § 82, Fürth, 1782.

RANSOM.—See Redeemer, Redemption.

ran´sum (the noun occurs in the English Bible 12 times (Exo 21:30 the King James Version פּדיון, pidhyōn; Exo 30:12; Job 33:24; Job 36:18; Pro 6:35; Pro 13:8; Pro 21:18; Isa 43:3, כּפר, kōpher; Mat 20:28; Mar 10:45, λύτρον, lútron; 1Ti 2:6, ἀντίλυτρον, antı́lutron); the verbal form occurs 4 times (Isa 35:10; Hos 13:14, פּדה, pādhāh; Isa 51:10 the King James Version; Jer 31:11, גּעל, gā’al; these two Hebrew verbs are generally rendered in other passages by the English “redeem”)):

1.    Usage by Christ

2.    Old Testament Usage - the Law

(1)    General Cases

(2)    Redemption Money - the Firstborn

(3)    Connection with Sacrifice

(4)    Typical Reference to the Messiah

3.    The Psalms and Job

4.    Apostolic Teaching

5.    To Whom Was the Ransom Paid?

(1)    Not to Satan

(2)    To Divine Justice

(a)    Redemption by Price

(b)    Redemption by Power

LITERATURE

1. Usage by Christ:

The supremely important instance is the utterance of the Lord Jesus Christ as reported by Matthew and Mark (Mat 20:28; Mar 10:45), and in looking at it we shall be able, by way of illustration, to glance at the Old Testament passages. The context refers to the dispute among the disciples concerning position in the Kingdom, with their misconception of the true nature of Christ’s Kingdom. Christ makes use of the occasion to set forth the great law of service as determining the place of honor in that Kingdom, and illustrates and enforces it by showing that its greatest exemplification is to be found in His own mission: “For the Son of man also came not to be ministered unto, but to minister” (Mar 10:45). His ministry, however, was to pass into the great act of sacrifice, of which all other acts of self-sacrifice on the part of His people would be but a faint reflection - “and to give his life (soul) a ransom for many” (same place). He thus gives a very clear intimation of the purpose and meaning of His death; the clearest of all the intimations reported by the synoptists. The word He uses bears a well-established meaning, and is accurately rendered by our word “ransom,” a price paid to secure the freedom of a slave or to set free from liabilities and charges, and generally the deliverance from calamity by paying the forfeit. The familiar verb lúō, “to loose,” “to set free,” is the root, then lútron, that which secures the freedom, the payment or forfeit; thence come the cognate verb lutróō, “to set free upon payment of a ransom,” “to redeem”; lútrōsis, “the actual setting free,” “the redemption,” and lutrōtḗs, “the redeemer.” The favorite New Testament word for “redemption” is the compound form, apolútrōsis.

2. Old Testament Usage - The Law:

The word lutron was common in Greek classical literature, constantly bearing the sense of “ransom price,” and was frequently connected with ritual usage, with sacrifice and expiation. But for the full explanation of our Lord’s great thought we have to look to the Old Testament usage. The two leading Hebrew verbs translated in our version by “redeem,” are generally rendered in the Septuagint by lutroō, and derivatives of these words conveying the idea of the actual price paid are translated by this very word lutron.

(1) General Cases.

In Exo 21:30 we have the law concerning the case of the person killed by an ox; the ox was to be killed and the owner of it was also liable to death but the proviso was made, “If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him” (the King James Version). The Hebrew for “sum of money” is kōpher, literally, “atonement” (the Revised Version (British and American) “ransom”); the word for “ransom” (the Revised Version (British and American) “redemption”) is pidhyōn (from pādhāh); the Septuagint renders both by lutron (rather by the plural form lutra). In Lev 25, among the directions in relation to the Jubilee, we have the provision (Lev 25:23) that the land was not to be sold “in perpetuity,” but where any portion has been sold, opportunity is to be given for re-purchase: “Ye shall grant a redemption for the land” (Lev 25:24). The Hebrew is g^e’ullāh, a derivative of gā’al, the Septuagint lutra. In Lev 25:25, Lev 25:26, the case is mentioned of a man who through poverty has sold part of his land; if a near kinsman is able to redeem it he shall do so; if there is no one to act this brotherly part, and the man himself is able to redeem it, then a certain scale of price is arranged. In the Hebrew it is again gā’al that is used with the cognate gō’el for “kinsman.” The last clause rendered in the King James Version, “and himself be able to redeem it” (in the Revised Version (British and American) “and he be waxed rich and find sufficient to redeem it”), is literally, “and his hand shall acquire and he find sufficient for its redemption”; the Septuagint has the verb lutroō in the first part, and renders the clause pretty literally, “and there be furnished to his hand and there be found with him the sufficient price (lutra) of it.” In Lev 25:51, Lev 25:52, in reference to the redemption of the Jew sold into slavery, we have twice in the Hebrew the word g^e’ullāh, rendered in English accurately “the pricen of his redemption”; and by Septuagint with equal accuracy, in both cases, lutra, “the ransom-price.” In Lev 27:31 the King James Version, the phrase “if a man will at all redeem aught of his tithes” is intended to represent the emphatic Hebrew idiom, “if a man redeeming will redeem,” which is rendered by Septuagint eán dé lutrṓtai lútrō ánthropos.

(2) Redemption Money - The Firstborn.

But perhaps the most important passage is the law concerning the half-shekel to be paid by every Israelite from 20 years old and upward when a census was taken. It was to be the same for rich and poor, and it was called “atonement money,” “to make atonement for their souls.” In the opening words of the law, as given in Exo 30:12 (the King James Version), we read “Then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the Lord” - the Hebrew kōpher; the Septuagint rendering is lútra tḗs psuchḗs autoú, “a ransom price for his soul.” All the people were thus considered as doomed and needing atonement, and it is significant that this atonement money paid at the first census furnished the silver for the sockets of the tabernacle boards, intimating that the typical tabernacle was built upon atonement. The same thought, that the people’s lives were forfeited, comes out in the provision for the consecration of the Levites, recorded in full in Num 3:40-51. The firstborn represented the people. God claimed all the firstborn as forfeited to Himself, teaching that Israel deserved the same punishment as the Egyptians, and was only spared by the grace of Yahweh, and in virtue of the sprinkled blood. Now He takes to Himself for His services the Levites as the equivalent of the firstborn, and when it was found that the number of the firstborn exceeded the number of the Levites, equivalence was maintained by ransoming at a certain price the surplus of the firstborn males. In the Septuagint account, lutrá occurs 4 times, twice for the phrase “those to be redeemed,” and twice for “redemption money.” Thus the idea of ransom for the forfeited life became familiar to the people as educated by the typical system, and redemption expressed the sum total of their hopes for the future, however faulty might be their conception of the nature of that redemption.

(3) Connection with Sacrifice.

It is also clear in the typical teaching that sacrifice and ransom were closely related. Even in classical Greek, as we have noted, the two conceptions were connected, and it is not surprising to find it so in the Old Testament. Kōpher, we have seen, is literally, “atonement” and comes from kāphar, literally, “to cover,” and thence by covering to make atonement, or to cover by making atonement; and so it is in the Piel form, the most common and technical Hebrew word for making atonement, or expiation, or propitiation, and is frequently rendered in the Greek by hiláskomai, often too by the compound exiláskomai. In Exo 21:30, kōpher, we noted, is used interchangeably with pidhyōn, both being represented in the Septuagint by lutra, and so in Exo 30:12; Num 35:31, Num 35:32; the Hebrew kōpher is lutra in the Greek In the latter place, where it is twice stated that no satisfaction shall be taken for the life of a murderer, the Hebrew is kōpher, the Septuagint has lutra; the Revised Version (British and American) has “ransom;” the King James Version has “satisfaction.”

(4) Typical Reference to the Messiah.

Sacrifice was thus linked with ransom. Sacrifice was the divinely-appointed covering for sin. The ransom for the deliverance of the sinner was to be by sacrifice. Both the typical testimony of the Law and the prophetic testimony gave prominence to the thought of redemption. The Coming One was to be a Redeemer. Redemption was to be the great work of the Messiah. The people seem to have looked for the redemption of the soul to God alone through the observance of their appointed ritual, while redemption, in the more general sense of deliverance from all enemies and troubles, they linked with the advent of the Messiah. It required a spiritual vision to see that the two things would coincide, that the Messiah would effect redemption in all its phases and fullness by means of ransom, of sacrifice, of expiation.

Jesus appeared as the Messiah in whom all the old economy was to be fulfilled. He knew perfectly the meaning of the typical and prophetic testimony; and with that fully in view, knowing that His death was to fulfill the Old Testament types and accomplish its brightest prophetic anticipations, He deliberately uses this term lutron to describe it (Mat 20:28); in speaking of His death as a ransom, He also regarded it as a sacrifice, an expiatory offering. The strong preposition used intensifies the idea of ransom and expiation, even to the point of substitution. It is anti, “instead of,” and the idea of exchange, equivalence, substitution cannot be removed from it. In Num 3:45, “Take the Levites instead of all the first-born,” the Septuagint uses anti, which, like the English “instead of,” exactly represents the Hebrew taḥath; and all three convey most unmistakably the idea of substitution. And as the Levites were to be substituted for the firstborn, so for the surplus of the firstborn the “ransom money” was to be substituted, that idea, however, being clearly enough indicated by the use of the genitive. Indeed the simpler way of describing a ransom would be with the genitive, the ransom of many; or as our version renders, “a ransom for many”; but just because the ransom here is not simply a money payment, but is the actual sacrifice of the life, the substitution of His soul for many, He is appropriately said “to give his soul a ransom instead of many.” The Kingdom of God which Christ proclaimed was so diverse in character from that which Salome and her sons anticipated that, so far from appearing in dazzling splendor, with distinguished places of power for eager aspirants, it was to be a spiritual home for redeemed sinners. Men held captive by sin needed to be ransomed that they might be free to become subjects of the Kingdom, and so the ransom work, the sufferings and death of Christ, must lie at the very foundation of that Kingdom. The need of ransom supposes life forfeited; the ransom paid secures life and liberty; the life which Christ gives comes through His ransoming death.

3. The Psalms and Job:

Besides the passages in the Pentateuch which we have noted, special mention should be made of the two great passages which bear so closely upon the need of spiritual redemption, and come into line with this great utterance of Christ. Psa 49:7, Psa 49:8, “None of them can by any means redeem (pādhāh; lutroō) his brother, nor give to God a ransom (kōpher; exı́lasma) for him (for the redemption of their life is costly, and it faileth forever).” (The Hebrew gives pidhyōn for “redemption”; the Greek has “the price of the redemption of his soul.”) No human power or skill, no forfeit in money or service or life can avail to ransom any soul from the doom entailed by sin. But in Psa 49:15 the triumphant hope is expressed, “But God will redeem (pādhāh; lutroō) my soul from the power of Sheol.” In Job 33:24, “Deliver him from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom”: God is the speaker, and whatever may be the particular exegesis of the passage in its original application, it surely contains an anticipation of the gospel redemption. This divine eureka is explained in the light of Christ’s utterance; it finds its realization through the cross: “I have found a ransom,” for “the Son of Man” has given “his soul a ransom for many.”

4. Apostolic Teaching:

This great utterance of the Saviour may well be considered as the germ of all the apostolic teaching concerning redemption, but it is not for us to show its unfolding beyond noting that in apostolic thought the redemption was always connected with the death, the sacrifice of Christ.

Thus, Paul (Eph 1:7), “In whom we have our redemption through his blood.” Thus Peter (1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19), “Ye were redeemed, not with corruptible things ... but with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, even the blood of Christ.” So in Heb 9:12 it is shown that Christ “through his own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption”; and in the Apocalypse (Rev 5:9) the song is, “Thou wast slain, and didst purchase unto God with thy blood men of every tribe,” etc. In all but the last of these passages there is an echo of the very word used by Christ, apolutrōsis and lutrōsis, both being connected with lutron. In 1Ti 2:5, 1Ti 2:6 Paul has a still closer verbal coincidence when he says, “Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all” (antilutron). The word used in the Apocalypse is agorazō, to buy in the open market, and is frequently used of the redeeming work of Christ (Rev 14:3, Rev 14:4; 2Pe 2:1; 1Co 6:20; 1Co 7:23). In the two places where Paul uses it he adds the means of purchase: “Ye were bought with a price,” which from his point of view would be equivalent to ransom. In the passage in Gal 3:13; Gal 4:5, Paul uses the compound exagorázō, which is equivalent to “redeem, buy off, deliver by paying the price.”

5. To Whom Was the Ransom Paid?:

The question “Who receives the ransom?” is not directly raised in Scripture, but it is one that not unnaturally occurs to the mind, and theologians have answered it in varying ways.

(1) Not to Satan.

The idea entertained by some of the Fathers (Irenaeus, Origen) that the ransom was given to Satan, who is conceived of as having through the sin of man a righteous claim upon him, which Christ recognizes and meets, is grotesque, and not in any way countenanced by Scripture.

(2) To Divine Justice.

But in repudiating it, there is no need to go so far as to deny that there is anything answering to a real ransoming transaction. All that we have said goes to show that, in no mere figure of speech, but in tremendous reality, Christ gave “his life a ransom,” and if our mind demands an answer to the question to whom the ransom was paid, it does not seem at all unreasonable to think of the justice of God, or God in His character of Moral Governor, as requiring and receiving it. In all that Scripture asserts about propitiation, sacrifice, reconciliation in relation to the work of Christ, it is implied that there is wrath to be averted, someone to be appeased or satisfied, and while it may be enough simply to think of the effects of Christ’s redeeming work in setting us free from the penal claims of the Law - the just doom of sin - it does not seem going beyond the spirit of Scripture to draw the logical inference that the ransom price was paid to the Guardian of that holy law, the Administrator of eternal justice. “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us” (Gal 3:13). This essential, fundamental phase of redemption is what theologians, with good Scripture warrant, have called redemption by blood, or by price, as distinguished from the practical outcome of the work of Christ in the life which is redemption by power.

(A) Redemption by Price:

As to Satan’s claims, Christ by paying the ransom price, having secured the right to redeem, exercises His power on behalf of the believing sinner. He does not recognize the right of Satan. He is the “strong man” holding his captives lawfully, and Christ the “stronger than he” overcomes him and spoils him, and sets his captives free (Luk 11:21, Luk 11:22). In one sense men may be said to have sold themselves to Satan, but they had no right to sell, nor he to buy, and Christ ignores that transaction and brings “to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb 2:14), and so is able to “deliver all them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb 2:15).

(B) Redemption by Power:

Many of the Old Testament passages about the redemption wrought on behalf of God’s people illustrate this redemption by power, and the redemption by power is always founded on the redemption by price; the release follows the ransom. In the case of Israel, there was first the redemption by blood - the sprinkled blood of the Paschal Lamb which sheltered from the destroying angel (Ex 12) - and then followed the redemption by power, when by strength of hand Yahweh brought His people out from Egypt (Exo 13:14), and in His mercy led forth the people which He had redeemed (Exo 15:13).

So under the Gospel when “he hath visited and wrought redemption for his people” (Luk 1:68), He can “grant unto us that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies should serve him without fear” (Luk 1:74). It is because we have in Him our redemption through His blood that we can be delivered out of the power of darkness (Col 1:13, Col 1:14). See further, REDEEMER, REDEMPTION.

Literature.

See works on New Testament Theology (Weiss, Schmid, Stevens, etc.); articles in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes); Hastings, Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels.

‘Ransom’ is the rendering in Authorized Version and Revised Version of a word (ἀíôßëõôñïí) rare in apostolic literature, and possibly coined by St. Paul for use in 1Ti_2:6, ‘Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.’ It appears to be a strengthened form of ëýôñïí (cf. Expositor’s Greek Testament , ‘1 Tim.,’ 1910, p. 105), the word attributed to Jesus, and rendered ‘ransom’ in Mat_20:28, Mar_10:45, ‘to give his life a ransom for many.’ The strong substitutionary force of ἀíôß in the compound word may be reduced by the ὑðÝñ (‘on behalf of’) which immediately follows in 1Ti_2:6. ‘Ransom’ is not elsewhere used in the NT.

In each place it is the figure chosen to indicate the redemptive significance of the death of Christ which had become familiar in the Apostolic Church, and had apparently become specialized by the time the Pastoral Epistles were written. Access to its meaning in the apostolic times may be sought in (a) the fairly frequent uses in the NT of cognate or derivative forms of ëýôñïí for expressing the saving processes or issues of Christ’s death for men; e.g. ἐëõôñþèçôå (1Pe_1:18), ëýôñùóéò (Heb_9:12), ἀðïëýôñùóéò (Rom_3:24, Eph_1:7, Col_1:14); as so used its reference is clear; it offers an illustrative form of the great apostolic unity of thought which directly relates the death of Christ to the reconciliation of God and men; (b) the occasion and context of the term as used by the Synoptics (Mar_10:45, Mat_20:28); here the redemption for which the Son of Man gave His life a ransom is closely connected in the context with the liberation of the disciples of Jesus from the thraldom of worldly and ambitious self-seeking, and their entrance into the liberty of self-imparting service in the Kingdom of God which it was the mission of Jesus to establish by His death (so Beyschlag, NT Theol. i. 153; Stevens, Christian Doctrine of Salvation, p. 47 f.); but this view is not fully adequate to the expiatory value attributed to Christ’s death by Christ and His apostles (Mat_26:28, 1Co_11:25; 1Co_15:3); (c) the attempt to find, with most expositors, a closer definition of the term by isolating it from its context and treating it as a word study; it is the representative in the Septuagint of certain much-used Hebrew words. Several of these are there rendered by a common use of ëýôñïí. Which of them corresponds most closely to the NT usage is a matter of discussion. One of them, áִּôֶּø, is said to have the root idea of ‘covering,’ or of ‘wiping away,’ though it is almost entirely used in an accommodated moral sense of ‘making propitiation’ (cf. Driver in Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) iv. 128, G. F. Moore in Encyclopaedia Biblica iv. 4220). The leaning here is, therefore, towards sacrificial implications. The alternative words are ôָּãָä and ðָּàַì with the primary significance of ‘liberating,’ which lean towards the social or legal notion of redemption, illustrated possibly by the obligation to redeem laid upon the goel or kinsman (cf. Lev_25:51; see T. V. Tymms, Christian Idea of Atonement, London, 1904, p. 240 ff.). The majority of expositors favour the former derivation, though Wendt and others criticize its linguistic basis. The idea of ransom is thus obtained from the idea of ‘covering’ or ‘clearing the face’ of an offended person by means of a gift, especially by a gift which is the satisfaction for the life of a man paid either to God or man (cf. Exo_21:30; Exo_30:12, Num_21:30, Job_33:24, Isa_12:3, Psa_49:7, Pro_6:35, Amo_5:12; cf. also Cremer, Bibl.-Theol. Lex. of NT Greek3, p. 408; B. Weiss, Bibl. Theol. i. 101). Support for the second line of derivation with the primary idea of a ransom price paid is found in the rendering of ôָּãָä in Isa_35:10, Psa_69:18, Hos_13:14, Isa_51:11, Jer_31:11; and in the rendering of âָּàַì in Isa_51:10, Jer_31:11. (d) Dissatisfied with a reference of the NT passages to the Septuagint , and assuming that Jesus spoke not Greek, but Aramaic, G. Hollmann has sought by elaborate investigation to discover the Aramaic term of which ëýôñïí is the equivalent; he thinks that this inquiry results more favourably for the idea of ‘liberating’ than of ‘covering’ in the Hebrew original (Die Bedeutung des Todes Jesu, Tübingen, 1901, p. 98 ff.). One advantage of the precarious method of thus going behind the Greek term has been a fruitful suggestion by Ritschl that Psa_49:7 f. and Job_33:23 (cf. Mar_8:37), where both ôָּãָä and âָּàַì occur, may furnish the best interpretation of ëýôñïí in the mind of Christ (cf. Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung4, ii. 69 ff.; Denney, Death of Christ, p. 43 f.).

Whichever line of derivation may be followed, the resultant idea from the Hebrew terms, of which ëýôñïí is the representative in the Septuagint , is that the word indicates the means or cost by which a redemption is achieved. Consequently the apostolic interpretation will lie within that circle of ideas which carry the implication that life in the higher sense may be lost, and that man has no means of buying it back. To meet such a situation Christ laid down His life as a price or means of redemption by which the forfeited possession was restored. The further implication we should gather from the consensus of the teaching of Jesus and His apostles is that this ransom was not His death alone, but His life also-Himself indeed, in that perfect unity of which the life lived, laid down, and taken again are integral parts. It is not stated to whom the ransom price was paid. This has been the subject of wide conjecture. It does not seem essential to the apostolic use of the metaphor to state it. Nor is it stated precisely from what the ransom delivered; it was a saving advantage for men. A closer definition when sought will best be supplied from the analogy of faith as it deals with the issues of the death of Christ and from the more definite use of analogous terms in the apostolic teaching (see Atonement and Redemption).

Literature.-For a discussion of ëýôñïí and its cognates see B. F. Westcott, Hebrews, London, 1889, pp. 295 f., 229 ff.; W. Beyschlag, NT Theol., Halle, 1891-92, i. 149, Eng. translation , Edinburgh, 1895, i. 152; J. Denney, Death of Christ, London, 1902, p. 38 f.; A. Ritschl, Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung4, Bonn, 1895-1902, iii. 68-88, Eng. translation , Justification and Reconciliation, Edinburgh, 1900; G. B. Stevens, Theology of the NT, do., 1899, p. 126 ff., Christian Doctrine of Salvation, do., 1905, p. 45 ff.; H. H. Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, Eng. translation , do., 1892, ii. 226 ff.; B. Weiss, Biblical Theology of NT, Eng. translation , do., 1882-83, i. 101; H. Cremer, Bibl.-Theol. Lex. of NT Greek, do., 1880, p. 408.

Frederic Platt.

Job 33:24 (b) The Lord JESUS CHRIST is the only ransom that can deliver us. Job found that ransom, and it may be that Elihu did as well. CHRIST is the only one who could pay the debt and set us free. He must belong to us to be our ransom. (See Mat 20:28).

Job 36:18 (b) This represents the great price which GOD accepted from the Lord JESUS CHRIST at Calvary where the Saviour paid the debt for the sinner. The work of CHRIST does not avail after death.

Psa 49:7 (b) The redeeming of the soul is by the precious Blood of JESUS, and there is no substitute for it. No person, nor priest, can buy salvation for another.

1Ti 2:6 (a) CHRIST is the ransom for the sinner. No woman, no man, no church, no religion, no good works, no money, no prayers can avail for this purpose. JESUS CHRIST only can pay the debt and set us free.

See REDEMPTION.