If Jesus needed a redeemer then He was a sinner who needed to be redeemed from sin. I say He is the Redeemer, the Lamb of God who takes away sin by His perfectness. If Jesus needed to be redeemed then we are all in deep trouble, forever. I say He was sinless and perfect, regardless of what Satan says. Jesus is my Savior and without sin, sinfulness or need of redemption.
Did Jesus need a redeemer? Or was He The Redeemer?
- Thread starter Duckybill
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It seems to me that the scriptures portray Christ as both redeemer and redeemed.
He is the one whose sacrifice provided us a means by which we could be redeemed from sin and death. (Galatians 3:13, Luke 1:68)
However, he needed redemption from death and cried out to God for such.
We have this in Hebrews 5
7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. (ESV)
I read the 'him' as being his Father, and this clearly refers to his agony in the garden of Gethsemane. 'Not my will, but thy will be done'
Psalm 69 is a messianic psalm which portrays for us the words and feeling of Christ in Gethsemane.
I believe the Psalm would have also been applicable to David at a time when he wrote it of course, and so perhaps not every little detail applies to Christ, but some aspects of it are uniquely messianic and fulfilled by Christ.
Compare Psalm 69:20 with Matthew 26:37-38
Compare Psalm 69:21 with Matthew 27:34
The whole Psalm speaks of this one in tumult needing the deliverance and salvation of God.
Verse 20: Draw near to my soul, redeem me; ransom me because of my enemies!
This is surely true of Christ in his hour of distress.
The idea of the word 'redeem' is to 'repurchase' or 'buy back'.
Christ had been given over to his enemies who clamored for and obtained his violent death. He entered the gates of the grave and they shut upon him for three whole days. He was in need of resurrection. He needed to be 'redeemed' from the grave.
Psalm 31 is another psalm with messianic overtones, and it appears that the Lord's last words on the cross were quoted from this Psalm.
He said: 'Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit' (Luke 23:46)
Psalm 31:5 begins: "Into your hand I commit my spirit"... and at this point the Lord stopped his quotation and died. When did he complete the quotation of this verse? When was the rest of the verse fulfilled?
When he awoke on the third day... "you have redeemed me, O LORD, faithful God"
In dying and being resurrected, the Lord identified with those he came to save and stood in need of redemption from death and mortality.
And yet in doing so, he was also their redeemer and the means by which God reconciles the world to Himself.
So I suggest its not a question of either/or, but the Lord was both redeemer and redeemed, representing both the Saviour (God) and the Saved (mortal man).
I hope you can follow my reasoning here.
He is the one whose sacrifice provided us a means by which we could be redeemed from sin and death. (Galatians 3:13, Luke 1:68)
However, he needed redemption from death and cried out to God for such.
We have this in Hebrews 5
7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. (ESV)
I read the 'him' as being his Father, and this clearly refers to his agony in the garden of Gethsemane. 'Not my will, but thy will be done'
Psalm 69 is a messianic psalm which portrays for us the words and feeling of Christ in Gethsemane.
I believe the Psalm would have also been applicable to David at a time when he wrote it of course, and so perhaps not every little detail applies to Christ, but some aspects of it are uniquely messianic and fulfilled by Christ.
Compare Psalm 69:20 with Matthew 26:37-38
Compare Psalm 69:21 with Matthew 27:34
The whole Psalm speaks of this one in tumult needing the deliverance and salvation of God.
Verse 20: Draw near to my soul, redeem me; ransom me because of my enemies!
This is surely true of Christ in his hour of distress.
The idea of the word 'redeem' is to 'repurchase' or 'buy back'.
Christ had been given over to his enemies who clamored for and obtained his violent death. He entered the gates of the grave and they shut upon him for three whole days. He was in need of resurrection. He needed to be 'redeemed' from the grave.
Psalm 31 is another psalm with messianic overtones, and it appears that the Lord's last words on the cross were quoted from this Psalm.
He said: 'Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit' (Luke 23:46)
Psalm 31:5 begins: "Into your hand I commit my spirit"... and at this point the Lord stopped his quotation and died. When did he complete the quotation of this verse? When was the rest of the verse fulfilled?
When he awoke on the third day... "you have redeemed me, O LORD, faithful God"
In dying and being resurrected, the Lord identified with those he came to save and stood in need of redemption from death and mortality.
And yet in doing so, he was also their redeemer and the means by which God reconciles the world to Himself.
So I suggest its not a question of either/or, but the Lord was both redeemer and redeemed, representing both the Saviour (God) and the Saved (mortal man).
I hope you can follow my reasoning here.
Robbie
New Member
I could look for a reason to disagree with you but I'm tired of playing christian so instead I'll just ask you a question to try and understand you or maybe point out something that might be relative to what you're talking about so we can find common understanding... haha
So here's the question: Are you saying Jesus needed a Power greater than Himself to deliver Him from death?
And here's maybe the common understanding: Because I do remember something about God being the One who didn't allow His Holy One to see corruption.
So here's the question: Are you saying Jesus needed a Power greater than Himself to deliver Him from death?
And here's maybe the common understanding: Because I do remember something about God being the One who didn't allow His Holy One to see corruption.
Hi Robbie,
God didn't need anything. He laid down His life because nobody nor nothing could take it from Him. "The wages of sin is death". Jesus had no sin so He gave His life so that we can live.
Corruption only comes from committing sin. Jesus was perfect.
Robbie
New Member
That's cool... that's your belief but there is scriptures that people believe say otherwise so I would understand why different people have different beliefs on the subject... can't you?
I mean this is the writer of acts understanding...
"Now when they had fulfilled all that was written concerning Him, they took Him down from the tree and laid Him in a tomb. [sup]30[/sup] But God raised Him from the dead. [sup]31[/sup] He was seen for many days by those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are His witnesses to the people. [sup]32[/sup] And we declare to you glad tidings—that promise which was made to the fathers. [sup]33[/sup] God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm:
‘ You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.’[sup][f][/sup]
[sup]34[/sup] And that He raised Him from the dead, no more to return to corruption, He has spoken thus:
‘ I will give you the sure mercies of David.’[sup][g][/sup]
[sup]35[/sup] Therefore He also says in another Psalm:
‘ You will not allow Your Holy One to see corruption.’[sup][h]"[/sup]
and hey just so you know my response wasn't to you.. it was to clarity... and written in the kind of tone that was like, "I'd rather try and relate to you than argue" When I re-read it as if it was directed at you it sounded kind of rude... just so no weird thoughts pop up.
I mean this is the writer of acts understanding...
"Now when they had fulfilled all that was written concerning Him, they took Him down from the tree and laid Him in a tomb. [sup]30[/sup] But God raised Him from the dead. [sup]31[/sup] He was seen for many days by those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are His witnesses to the people. [sup]32[/sup] And we declare to you glad tidings—that promise which was made to the fathers. [sup]33[/sup] God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm:
‘ You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.’[sup][f][/sup]
[sup]34[/sup] And that He raised Him from the dead, no more to return to corruption, He has spoken thus:
‘ I will give you the sure mercies of David.’[sup][g][/sup]
[sup]35[/sup] Therefore He also says in another Psalm:
‘ You will not allow Your Holy One to see corruption.’[sup][h]"[/sup]
and hey just so you know my response wasn't to you.. it was to clarity... and written in the kind of tone that was like, "I'd rather try and relate to you than argue" When I re-read it as if it was directed at you it sounded kind of rude... just so no weird thoughts pop up.
Jesus had to be perfect to die for us. A sinner can't die to redeem a sinner.
I'm not sure of your question. There is only one God who is sinless and perfect, not sinful. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is God, not sinful. The Father is God. The Holy Spirit is God. They are one.
Matthew 28:19 (ESV)
[sup]19 [/sup]Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Robbie
New Member
I'm not trying to debate with you or anything you're saying about Jesus... I was just pointing something out in scripture that the writer of ACTS quoted in relation to Jesus which was, "You will not allow Your Holy One to see corruption." I'm not saying you have to agree with the writer of ACTS... I'm just pointing out what he had written.
I hear ya. Someone in the forum is dedicated to making Jesus sinful. I will never accept that. Our salvation it totally dependent upon Him being sinless and pure. Satan will try every sneaky way to make our Savior sinful.
Robbie
New Member
Yeah... I don't see that as saying Jesus is sinful... since it says that He's His Holy One... but I do believe that all the power Jesus has comes from His Father... or you could say all the power God's Word has comes from God... but yeah... I would never call God's Word sinful...
I do see how Christ gave His Father credit for everything and also that He said the Father is greater than Him... also that everything He said and did came from the Father... but that to me just means that Him and the Father are One... and is just more reason for me to personally believe that He is Holy and not sinful.
I do see how Christ gave His Father credit for everything and also that He said the Father is greater than Him... also that everything He said and did came from the Father... but that to me just means that Him and the Father are One... and is just more reason for me to personally believe that He is Holy and not sinful.
Ducky, are you saying that when it speaks of redeeming in scripture it is only ever speaking of redeeming from sins?
It seems to me that redemption can be from a number of things and the context will determine what it is.
I'm certainly not suggesting that Jesus needed redeeming from sin and transgression. But its different to say he needed redemption from the effects of sin and death which he shared in.
Can you see the distinction that's being made?
Hi Robbie,
As I read some scriptures, it certainly seems they are teaching that Christ was dependent on his Father to raise him from the dead.
I think your quote from Acts 2 is a good example of just such a scripture. He (God) would not allow (he had the power either way) his holy one (His beloved son) to see corruption.
As Ducky rightly points out, the reason he was raised before corruption set in (implication is that it would have) is because he had lived a sinless life.
It seems to me that redemption can be from a number of things and the context will determine what it is.
I'm certainly not suggesting that Jesus needed redeeming from sin and transgression. But its different to say he needed redemption from the effects of sin and death which he shared in.
Can you see the distinction that's being made?
Hi Robbie,
As I read some scriptures, it certainly seems they are teaching that Christ was dependent on his Father to raise him from the dead.
I think your quote from Acts 2 is a good example of just such a scripture. He (God) would not allow (he had the power either way) his holy one (His beloved son) to see corruption.
As Ducky rightly points out, the reason he was raised before corruption set in (implication is that it would have) is because he had lived a sinless life.
Robbie
New Member
When I listen to Christ it doesn't just sound like He was dependent only on His Father to raise Him from the dead... but for everything... but that makes sense... when I speak my word is dependent completely upon me speaking it... what I say is what comes out my mouth... that just means my word is completely dictated by my will...which is what makes it me... Jesus is the Word of God... and He is completely dictated by God's will... that is why Jesus is Holy and is One with the Father... the mystery being that God's Word was manifested in the flesh and actually dwelt among us in our likeness...
Another thing I noticed is that you made Holy One not capital... it's "Your Holy One"... and my belief is Jesus being completely dictated and empowered be the Father doesn't make Him sinful... it's actually what makes Him Holy... capital H x 2
Another thing I noticed is that you made Holy One not capital... it's "Your Holy One"... and my belief is Jesus being completely dictated and empowered be the Father doesn't make Him sinful... it's actually what makes Him Holy... capital H x 2
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
There are some ideas that I have to take at face value. The Trinity (including the true nature of Christ as my sinless savior and God) and the Eucharist are two examples.
Hi Robbie, I was quoting from Psalm 16, but yes you are right.
It's curious, the translators of the ESV I'm currently referring to have put 'holy one' in Psalm 16 and 'Holy One' in Acts 2.
It would have been a good one to be consistent on.
Robbie
New Member
Yeah... it's all good... just sharing my beliefs... and as far as the capital thing I didn't think you intentionally changed it to deceive me or something... haha... just pointing it out...
You seem nice... looking forward to hearing more about your beliefs...
Robbie
You seem nice... looking forward to hearing more about your beliefs...
Robbie
Yeah it's all good, no probs Robbie.
Look forward to reading more of your thoughts too!
I have been struggling with this concept too. I think what I think (that sounds ridiculous) is that the separation from God that sin causes and even death are not in themselves sinful. That our acts of sin cause our separation from God, yet the separation itself is not sin. In this way Christ was separated from God by our sin and redeemed from death and separation according to His being sinless, all of which were possible without Christ being sinful. That the effects of sin are not in themselves sin, and that someone can be in a position of separation from God and still not be sinful.
[sup]John 9:1[/sup]As He passed by, He saw a man blind from birth. [sup]2[/sup]And His disciples asked Him, "[sup](A)[/sup]Rabbi, who sinned, [sup](B)[/sup]this man or his [sup](C)[/sup]parents, that he would be born blind?"
[sup]3[/sup]Jesus answered, "It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so [sup](D)[/sup]that the works of God might be displayed in him.
Jesus proved that not all of the effects of sin we experience in this life result from sinfulness of the one who experienced the effects or even the parents. Those same words "It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him." can be related to Jesus and His death on the cross. That isn't what this scripture is referring to but I think it is a truth that I think is relevant and true pertaining to Christ and His experience.
[sup]John 9:1[/sup]As He passed by, He saw a man blind from birth. [sup]2[/sup]And His disciples asked Him, "[sup](A)[/sup]Rabbi, who sinned, [sup](B)[/sup]this man or his [sup](C)[/sup]parents, that he would be born blind?"
[sup]3[/sup]Jesus answered, "It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so [sup](D)[/sup]that the works of God might be displayed in him.
Jesus proved that not all of the effects of sin we experience in this life result from sinfulness of the one who experienced the effects or even the parents. Those same words "It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him." can be related to Jesus and His death on the cross. That isn't what this scripture is referring to but I think it is a truth that I think is relevant and true pertaining to Christ and His experience.
Wow. Thanks Martin. Yes I think you have great points here.
I think we can certainly establish from scripture that our sins (i.e. transgressions) separate us from God. It seems to me however, that our nature, though mortal and separate from God in the sense that He is immortal does not morally alienate us from Him.
He will hold us accountable for the sins we commit 'in the body' but not for having the body itself! This is because there is not much we can do about that. We are born that way. He actually gets that. (Psalm 103:14)
In this way, it is possible to understand how Jesus was able to bear our nature (with its consequence - death) and yet be sinless remaining 'one' with his Father.
I think its around this area that confusion has arisen about what people are actually saying about Christ. He was perfect. He was sinless. The fact that he was made 'like us' and 'bore our nature' which is the product of sin and death, does not make him a sinner and morally repugnant to the Creator.
Yes I understand. But my point was responding to the constant inference that Jesus was sinful and needed redemption. As I have said earlier, I have been studying this for MANY years. Some of the statements that have been made about Jesus are truly sickening. One very popular preacher said that Jesus died spiritually. Sinners are dead spiritually.
Robbie
New Member
I could see how someone could believe that Jesus died spiritually in that He was cut off from the Father for a time for our sins (Key point being ours and not His.. He's Holy) before He was resurrected and went to sit at the Father's right hand... I could see how someone would take that out of scripture...
Similar threads
