The Memory Text, quoted below, tells us why Christ came to this sinful planet:

"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" (Mark 10:45, NIV).

Christ came for two reasons:

1 - To serve.
2 - To give His life as a ransom for many.

This week's study will be focusing on the second reason.

Here is the link to the lesson study material:

http://ssnet.org/qrtrly/eng/08b/less10nkjv.html

Some insights from the SOP:



The "whole purpose" of Christ's mission was "the revelation of God." Both serving and dying accomplished this. It would be a mistake to view these as two different reasons, since His giving His life for us was simply a form of service (actually service in its highest sense, for the love of God is manifest in Christ giving His life).

Christ speaks of His mission in John 17, which probably was EGW's inspiration for what she wrote. Continuing a little later from the above quote:



The reason Christ came was to reveal God. Christ's death supremely did this, in addition to every other aspect of Christ's life, character and teachings.

One more DA statement:

I agree that the two I listed go together as one, however, the focus of this week's lesson is on the meaning of His death.

Tom: what about the requirement of sacrifice of the Lamb of God to be the antitypical "shedding of blood for the remission of sin"? You emphasise "service" as the purpose of Christ's death...The accompanying book highlights the 'halftruth' of Abelard's "exemplary" or role model meaning of the atonement, clarifying the substitutionary suffering of God's wrath against sin in dying our death for us as he lived our life, too.

Now, I recall you on a previous occasion disassociating yourself from Abelard. Do you see no penal death for us which Jesus died for us as expressed in Rom 4:25 "He was delivered up for our offenses..."? Is it just that "the wages of sin is death" is not a penalty but a choice in your view?

So, you're aware of the straight line in Adams'lesson text and commentary book about Christ suffering our curse under the law. Just where do you differ with the church and lesson teaching on this topic?

My response to you was considering exactly this (the meaning of this death).

In the SOP, the chapter which most specifically and in detail considers the meaning of the death of Christ is "It Is Finished." The last quote I gave is from that chapter. The whole chapter is great.

Both Abelard and Anselm did not describe their views of the cross until a millenium after Christ's death. The them of Christus Victor was well known, however. Gustaf Aulen brought this to light in his book called "Christ Aulen." There are some good thoughts in Abelard's view, and I suppose something good could be found somewhere in Anselm's too, but they both are missing important features. I believe the Christus Victor idea comes the closest of any of the views which were formed before Ellen White came along.



I think the idea he had that the love of God is revealed by the cross is a wonderful and important idea. However, I think there are some problems I see with his presentation. For example, I'm not sure that the theme of grace comes across clearly in his view.



No. There's nothing penal implied there. Ah, I see how you could see something penal there. I had to look at it a couple of times to see where you are coming from. You see something penal there because of the phrase "for our offenses." This is clearly a reference to Isaiah 53, I think you would agree. Here are a couple of other related texts to Rom. 4:25.





The first passage speaks of how Christ was delivered up as well. It discusses how this was done ("ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.")

The second passage discusses the purpose for this action ("to bring us to God.") The second passage is also a reference to Isa. 53, and I think Peter correctly interprets the meaning of Isa. 53, and of Christ's death here.



Another version, Phillips, puts it this way "Sin pays its wages: death."

I see that there are two roads. One is the road of agape, which existed from eternity. The other is the road that Satan invented, the road of serving self, which leads to death, which is just another way of saying "the wages of sin is death." That is, if you go down the road of serving self, you will die. Not because God will kill you, but because the principle of life is love.

I agree there is a penalty for sin, but I think it is akin to the penalty for alcohol abuse or excessive cigarette smoking. If you drink excessively, God does not smite your liver, nor does He smite your longs with cancer if you smoke cigarettes. Can we say that there is a penalty for smoking cigarettes or excessive drinking? Certainly.



I don't know. I'd have to look. I'm teaching the juniors.

One thing I'll mention, without having looked, is that the themes brought out in the chapter "It Is Finished" (IIF) are often given short shrift. There are at least 7 pages in this chapter, and various themes are covered. The penal idea is barely covered, if at all. I'd be interested to see if these ideas brought out in IIF are covered.

Also something else I commonly see is that the death of Christ is treated as if it were something separable from his life and resurrection. I believe this is because the penal idea emphasizes Christ's death as a payment to God, as a type of transaction which makes us legally right with God. In Scripture you never see Christ's death treated like this. At least, I can think of no case where Christ's death is treated in this way (i.e. separated from his life and/or resurrection, as a payment which solves a penal problem).

For example, in the two passages I quoted above, His death is intimately tied into the resurrection. Under the idea of Christus Victor, this must be the case. You don't have a victorious Christ without the resurrection.

One last thought I'll mention is that I can think of no place in Christ's teaching where He presented the idea that His death was to enable God to be able to legally pardon us. However, I seem the themes I mention being presented often in His teachings.

One last, last thought is that it is common to understand Scripture according to one's own culture. Anselm did this in developing his view, that the death of Christ was necessary to maintain God's honor. Similarly Calvin did this in developing the penal view (I think he was the first one to discuss this). In Paul's time, and before, the ideas which Calvin presented did not exist. The Hebrew concept of justice was restorative, not retributive.

Sunday's study is titled Born to Die.

Was Christ really born to die?

In other words, as asked in Sunday's study, Was it something that had to happen?

No, Christ wasn't born to die. I remember that unfortunate heading from a similar study a few years ago. Jesus was born to "show us what God is really like." (John 1:18). In EGW's words, the "whole purpose" of His mission was "the revelation of God."

Now given the state of humanity, it was inevitable that Christ would be killed, so it was "something that had to happen."



This is a nice passage. Christ was killed by evil men, inspired by evil angels, but the powers of evil could not keep Him in the grave.

"Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin." This sums up the means and measures of the salvation of us by God using the blood of unblemished sacrifices: Jesus fufilled the entire sacrificial system, having to sacrifice himself. Dying was required for saving us from the same, death.

Hebrews 2 says we live in fear of death without Christ, whose death dealt with him who has the power of death, which we had otherwise feared. Jesus died for us for the sake of agape, but the value of agape is that God's only begotten Son was willing to die for us while we were yet enemies, that is sinful enough to crucify him himself.

Showing God's love by dying was for the purpose of delivering us from the condemnation to the eternal death we feared all our lives. Jesus expressed self-less love for us to save us from death due us by dying our death...he didn't just die to show us love by dying.

Jesus had to die to save us from death.

I certainly agree that Jesus had to save us from death. What is it that causes death? It's sin. So how does Jesus Christ save us from death? By saving us from sin.