Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
DID JESUS PAY SATAN?
The text in 1 Corinthians 7:23 is key to understand the allegory of redemption and the paying of a price. "You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings." In Titus we read that Jesus: "... gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness"
When you wanted to free a person from slavery, you bought that person to the owner. The money given to the owner was the ransom, the price.
Scripture shows in many places that we were slaves of sin. Who was our owner? Sin, wickedness, the flesh, spiritual death, "Satan".
Jesus redeemed us from that slavery. He paid the price to the owner.
So, if we want to follow the metaphor to its consequence, we could say that Jesus paid the price to Satan so that Satan could let us free.
Of course, this is all a metaphor: When Jesus wanted to cast demons out of a person, He just did it with a word, with the authority given by His Father. He didn't need to "pay" any price to the demons. By the same token, when He wanted to forgive a person, He did it with a word, without having to pay any price.
I'm trying to make you aware what is the consequence of taking allegorical language as if it was literal.
Let's now suppose we make up a soteriology based on this allegory. Let's call it the "Slave Purchase Model" or SPM.
While in PSA the thesis is that God became flesh to suffer the punishment that people deserved for their sins, in SPM the thesis is that God became flesh to pay the devil the price for our freedom. Both models derive from a literal interpretation of corresponding allegories.
As didactic tools, they both are beautiful and powerful. But when taken literally, both are absurd.
The text in 1 Corinthians 7:23 is key to understand the allegory of redemption and the paying of a price. "You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings." In Titus we read that Jesus: "... gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness"
When you wanted to free a person from slavery, you bought that person to the owner. The money given to the owner was the ransom, the price.
Scripture shows in many places that we were slaves of sin. Who was our owner? Sin, wickedness, the flesh, spiritual death, "Satan".
Jesus redeemed us from that slavery. He paid the price to the owner.
So, if we want to follow the metaphor to its consequence, we could say that Jesus paid the price to Satan so that Satan could let us free.
Of course, this is all a metaphor: When Jesus wanted to cast demons out of a person, He just did it with a word, with the authority given by His Father. He didn't need to "pay" any price to the demons. By the same token, when He wanted to forgive a person, He did it with a word, without having to pay any price.
I'm trying to make you aware what is the consequence of taking allegorical language as if it was literal.
Let's now suppose we make up a soteriology based on this allegory. Let's call it the "Slave Purchase Model" or SPM.
While in PSA the thesis is that God became flesh to suffer the punishment that people deserved for their sins, in SPM the thesis is that God became flesh to pay the devil the price for our freedom. Both models derive from a literal interpretation of corresponding allegories.
As didactic tools, they both are beautiful and powerful. But when taken literally, both are absurd.
- PSA cannot explain why God cannot just decide to punish, not punish, punish more or less, depending on his justice and mercy. Why someone has to take the place of the sinner. In the end of the day, Jesus did not spent eternity in hell, which is supposed to be the punishment that men deserved.
- SPM cannot explain why Satan would be interested in the blood of Jesus, when he is interested in the suffering of men.
Last edited: