RUIN & REDEMPTION

Our Recent Posts

Tags

Jesus our Mediator, Surety, and Kinsman-Redeemer (Lesson 10.5)




2. The TASK of JESUS: What did Christ come to do?


A) Jesus came to be our MEDIATOR: In the book of Hebrews we're told that Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant (12:24). But what exactly does that mean? Well, the best way to understand the function of mediator in the new covenant is to understand that same function in the old covenant. In Galatians 3:19, we're told that the old covenant also had a mediator; and it was Moses. This passage also helps us understand the first function of a mediator, for it says that it was “in the hand” of Moses that God gave His people the Law. In other words, when God gave His people the Law—it was only in and through Moses. We remember the story: God came to all Israel at Sinai, but it was too much for them to bear. They trembled, and stood at a distance, and said to Moses: “Speak to us yourself and we will listen; but let not God speak to us, or we will die.” (Exodus 20:19). And so, Moses stood between God and Israel; God spoke to Moses, and Moses declared His Word them (Deuteronomy 5:5). What we see is that a mediator REPRESENTS GOD to the people. Like Israel, we can't bear to hear or see God face to face outside of a mediator. He's too holy. Most of us would never want to come face to face with a lion in the wild—it's far too dangerous. But we take our children to see them at the zoo, because there's all the difference in the world between seeing a lion face to face, directly; and seeing that same lion through the safety of a protective, middle glass window. John 1:18 tells us: “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.” This is who Jesus is for us in the new covenant. Outside the agency of a mediator, we're undone. It's only in and through Christ that we can safely behold the Living God face to face.1


As the mediator of the old covenant, Moses represented God to the people. But that wasn't the only thing he did. He came before the people on behalf of God—but he also came before God on behalf of the people. We often find Moses up on the mountain, pleading with God to turn from His anger and forgive the sins of His people. At one point, Moses even says: “But now, if You will, forgive their sin—and if not, please blot me out from Your book which You have written!” (Exodus 32:32). What this tells us is that a mediator doesn't just represent God to the people; he also RECONCILES THE PEOPLE to God. He stands in the gap on behalf of sinners. Or, perhaps more accurately, he stands in the middle—between God and sinners—offering up his own body as a shield to take the blow that's due for sin. This is the truth that Paul seems to be emphasizing about Christ our Mediator when he writes in 1 Timothy 2:4-5, “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all. . .” Apart from a mediator, there can be no peace with God; for by nature we're at war with Him. We need someone to stand in the gap on our behalf; and this is exactly what Christ has come to do for us as mediator of the new covenant. Jesus is in every way “in the middle” between God and man; for He himself is, in one person, the God-man. No mere man could ever stand as a mediator before God; nor could God draw near to man outside the agency of a mediator. But like Jacob's ladder, Christ reaches both heaven and earth. It's in Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant, that a way has been opened for sinners to be reconciled to God.2

B) Jesus came to be our SURETY: We saw that one of the primary tasks of Christ as our mediator is to reconcile a sinful people to God. But how does Jesus do this? Well, if the last section teaches us about what Christ came to do; here we learn how it is He would do it. Jesus came as our mediator to reconcile us to God. But it's in becoming our Surety that He accomplishes this task. There's only one passage in the New Testament that speaks of Christ as our surety. Hebrews 7:22 says: “so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee [or surety] of a better covenant.” But though this word is just used once in the entire New Testament, it has a rich heritage in the Old Testament Scriptures. When Jacob was afraid to send Benjamin along with his other sons to go back to Egypt to purchase grain, it was Judah who stepped forward and said: “Send the lad with me and we will arise and go. . .I myself will be surety for him; from my hand you may require him. If I do not bring him back to you and set him before you, then let me bear the blame before you forever.” (Genesis 43:8-9). What was Judah saying? He was taking it upon himself to do anything and everything that was needed in order to bring Benjamin safely back home to his father. From that moment on, Benjamin's well-being was Judah's responsibility. Benjamin's safe return was entirely dependent on his older brother. Judah was single-handedly taking upon himself complete responsibility for bringing Benjamin safely back home. And friends, this is exactly what Jesus does for us as Surety of the new covenant. Just like Judah, He's bound himself to us in such a way that whatever is needed for our salvation is now required of Him.3


Often, when someone becomes surety for another, it has to do with taking on a debt. And this aspect also helps to further clarify what Jesus has undertaken for us in the new covenant. Proverbs uses the same word that Judah had used in warning of the dangers of becoming a surety for a stranger's debts (22:26); for when you do so, you're pledging to pay that debt yourself. And in Philemon, when Paul writes with his own hand that he will repay any debts that Onesimus had owed, he was becoming his surety (v19). In the new covenant, Jesus has bound himself as our surety to do whatever is required for our salvation; and in pledging himself to do this, He's taken on himself the sole responsibility of making payment for two debts we could never pay ourselves: 1) Jesus became surety for our DEBT OF PUNISHMENT. There was a debt of blood that was owed to God, on account of our sins. But when Christ became our surety, that debt was charged to His account. And this is, indeed, the reason it was necessary for Him to make such a payment at the cross. The reason that our debts were being so strictly required of Him, was that our debts had been, in fact, legally transferred to Him. Indeed, the payment of blood was demanded of Christ because He himself had become our Surety. 2) Jesus became surety for our DEBT OF OBEDIENCE. In Galatians 5:3, Paul tells us that we are debtors to the whole Law. For indeed, the Law requires dying as the penalty for sin, but it also requires doing as the condition for life. Because of our sin, there was now an added debt of passive obedience—but the Law has always bound its hearers to a personal, perfect and perpetual active obedience. If Christ had paid the debt of our punishment but not the debt of our obedience, He would have left us in the same condition as Adam in the garden before the fall: Our sin would be removed, but our condition would be perilous! He would have given us a second chance—but in no way brought us safely home. Praise God that as our surety,Christ didn't just pay the debt for our sins, but He paid the debt for our obedience. In the new covenant, Jesus didn't just make salvation possible again—He made it certain.4

C) Jesus came to be our KINSMAN-REDEEMER: In the Old Testament, if someone among God's people had become destitute and weren't able to help themselves, there was provision in the Law for a close relative to stand in their place and act on their behalf. In the original Hebrew, this person was called a Goel; which properly signifies kinsman-redeemer. Sometimes, this word is simply translated “kinsman” or “relative”, such as in Ruth 2:20, where Naomi reveals to Ruth that Boaz is one of their “closest relatives.” Other times, this same word is translated “redeemer”, such as in Job 19:25, where Job declares, “As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives. . .” A Goel was a kinsman; and a Goel was a redeemer; indeed, a Goel was a kinsman who redeems. And in Old Testament Israel, there were primarily three ways that a kinsman-redeemer acted on behalf of his brother: 1) If anyone became so poor that he had to sell the land of his inheritance, his kinsman would REDEEM it; that is, he would purchase it and return it back to him (Leviticus 25:25). 2) If anyone became so impoverished that, it would seem, after he had already sold away his inheritance, he was then forced to sell himself away as a slave into the hand foreigners; then his kinsman would RANSOM him; that is, he would buy him back from bondage, restoring his freedom (Leviticus 25:47-49). 3) If two brothers lived together, and one of them died without having a son, then the wife of the deceased was to be given to the husband's brother (or the nearest kinsman). It was the kinsman's responsibility to then RAISE UP a son for the deceased brother, to establish for him a name and preserve his covenant line (Deuteronomy 25:5-7).


Jesus is our kinsman-redeemer in the new covenant. He looked down from heaven, and saw that we were destitute. Adam's sin had plunged us into ruin, and we were unable to help ourselves. And so, Christ himself came into the world as our kinsman-redeemer, to do for us what we were powerless to do for ourselves: “I looked, and there was no one to help, and I was astonished and there was no one to uphold; so My own arm brought salvation to Me” (Isaiah 63:5). No other could help, for all of us alike are under the same bondage. Only God could redeem; for only He is able to pay such a price. And yet, only man could redeem, for our redeemer must be a near kinsman. “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law. . .” (Galatians4:4-5). Jesus came as our kinsman and He has redeemed us at the cost of His own blood (1 Peter 1:18ff). 1) Christ has REDEEMED OUR LOST INHERITANCE. Our father Adam had in his possession the inheritance of eternal life, but he sold it away for a bite of forbidden fruit. And when he did so, we were left destitute. But Christ has come into the world as our kinsman-redeemer, to purchase back for us the inheritance that Adam had lost (1 Peter 1:4). 2) Christ has RANSOMED US FROM SLAVERY. For just as Adam sold away our inheritance—he also sold us into bondage. When he sinned and became the slave of sin, we too were sold into bondage together with him as his children. So that, by nature, we have become the slaves of sin. But Christ has come into the world as our kinsman-redeemer, to pay the price of our ransom, in order to “set us free” (Galatians 5:1). 3) Christ has RAISED UP FRUITFULNESS for God. When Adam sinned, and spiritually died, there was a pervasive infertility that swept across the entire human race, so that we were left desolate and barren. But Christ has now come as our kinsman-redeemer, taking us as His own bride; so that, joined with Him, we might yet bear fruit for God (Romans 7:4).5





1 As Roberts says: “Israel extremely terrified by God's immediate voice and presence, could not endure it, but desired Moses to pass between God and them, and God approved their desires, and so the Law was ordained in the hand of a mediator; [IE,] Moses. In which Mediatory office Moses typified Christ the true Mediator. . .” (Francis Roberts, Mystery and Marrow, p782). And again: “[L]apsed sinners cannot endure a covenant fellowship with the Great, the dreadful, the holy and righteous God, immediately, without a Mediator. This is evident in Israel; for, when God immediately by his own voice promulged and uttered his covenant out of the midst of the fire on Mount Sinai, Israel trembled and fled back afar off, being unable to endure that which was commanded, and fearing that they should be consumed by that great fire. And therefore they desire Moses to speak from God unto them. . .They could not bear God's manifesting his Covenant to them immediately by himself alone. But mediately, by a Mediator.” (Roberts, p806). Lastly, Roberts notes: “Israel's extreme fear and terror, by reason of God's mighty voice and dreadful promulgation of His Law, so that they removed and stood afar off; and being unable to hear the voice of God any more immediately, they desired that God would speak to them by a Mediator. . .Thus [the people] are brought to see the necessity of a Mediator between God and them, and pitch upon Moses for that Mediator. Hence, the sinful creature is not able to approach to God, or to converse with God immediately, without the intervention of a Mediator. The distance and disparity between God and sinners is so infinite. God is holiness and purity in the highest; sinners are mere lumps of impurity. They are as chaff or stubble; but God, without a Mediator, is to them a consuming fire.” (pp910-911).

2 On the mediator reconciling man to God, Boston says, “The breach between God and man was greater than to be done away by a mere inter-messenger, who traveling between parties at variance, reconciles them with bare words. There could be no covenant of peace between God and sinners, without reparation. . .done to the honor of God through sin. . .Now, the effect of this was, that [Christ] was constituted. . .official mediator, or mediator in respect of office, between God and man: 1 Timothy 2:5-6,'There is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all'. . .The two families of heaven and earth being at war, there could be no peace between them, but through a mediator.” (p39). Roberts writes: “A true, fit and sufficient Mediator was necessary under the New Covenant. True; that is, more than typical; fit, that is, equally middle between God and man; sufficient; that is, being every way able to reconcile God and man. Moses under the Old Covenant was Mediator; but neither true, fit, nor sufficient. Not true, but typical; being herein a dark type and figure of Christ. Not fit, but very unfit; being no equally middle person, but a mere man, nearer to man than to God. Not sufficient, but very insufficient; being utterly unable to reconcile God and the people, yea himself needing reconcilement to God by a higher Mediator.” (p1566). Roberts also notes that all the promises in Scripture “are either promises of a Mediator, or promises in and through a Mediator; in whom all the promises of God are yea, and Amen.” (p1567). On the Mediator needing to be both God and man, Roberts says: “Jesus Christ is the Mediator of the New Covenant. . .The Greek word in all these places [of Scripture] does most properly signify, a mediator; or, a middler (that I may so express it) because he is, both a middle person, and a middle officer between God and man, to reconcile and reunite God and man. . .[Jesus Christ] is the only middle person between God and man, being in one person God-man. And he is the Middle Officer, intervening, or interposing, or coming between God and man by office, satisfying God's justice to the full for man's sins by his obedience to the death, and continually interceding for his elect; to whom he reveals and effectually applies this his satisfaction, intercession, [and] redemption. . .for their actual reconciliation unto God. Hence (as one observes) 'Jesus Christ as a true Mediator. . . suffered in the middle of the world, that is, at Jerusalem. . .He was crucified in the midst between the two thieves; [and] He died in the air on the cross, in the midst between heaven and earth'. . .Thus Jesus Christ is the Mediator between God and man; middle in person, and middle in office. Yea Jesus Christ is Mediator of the New Covenant, and that more peculiarly and eminently than of any other covenant. Moses was a typical mediator under the Old Covenant; he went between God and Israel, he typed out Christ the only true Mediator (1 Timothy 2:6; Hebrews 13:8; Galatians 3:19). But Christ is the true Mediator of the New Covenant, the better Covenant most eminently and singularly. . . ” (pp1589-90). And Boston notes, “the Son of God was constituted substantial Mediator, or Mediator in respect of nature, between God and man. Being from eternity God equal with the Father, he so stood related to heaven; and having from eternity consented to become man, he so stood related to earth. . .A type of this his substantial mediation was Jacob's ladder, which was set upon the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven (Genesis 28:12). A clear emblem of the divine and human nature in Christ, through whom, as substantial Mediator, there was a way opened, towards a communication for peace, between heaven and earth.” (p38). And again: “The two families of heaven and earth being at war, there could be no peace between them, but through a mediator. But where could a mediator be found, to interpose between such parties, who would not either have been too high, or else too low, in respect of one of the parties at variance? Man or angel would have been too low, in respect of God; and an unveiled God would have been too high, in respect of sinful men, unable to bear intercourse with such heavenly majesty. Wherefore, the Son of God, that he might be fit to mediate; as he being God equal with the Father, was high enough in respect of the party offended; so he consented to become low enough, in respect of the party offending, by his becoming man.” (Boston, p39).

3 The NASB text translates Genesis 43:9 as: “you may hold me responsible for him”; but it notes in the margin that the literal translation is indeed the same wording that we have rendered above; namely, “from my hand you may [or shall ] require him.” Thomas Boston has a very insightful chapter on Jesus' suretiship in his View of the Covenant of Grace, pp46-58. Towards the beginning of this section, he notes: “In. . .Hebrews 7:22, the only text wherein Christ is expressly called a surety, it is evident, that his suretiship therein mentioned, respects his priestly office, wherein he deals with God for us. . .the suretiship is not to the sinner, but for him. . .as in the case of Judah's suretiship for Benjamin, to his father (Genesis 43:9 and 44:32).” (pp46-47).

4 Roberts says: “A surety is properly one that willingly promises and undertakes to pay and discharge the debt, if the debtor fail and be not able to make satisfaction himself. Thus Paul willingly and spontaneously, from the love that he had to his converted Onesimus, promised and undertook to make satisfaction to Philemon for any wrong that Onesimus had done to him: 'If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account. I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it.'” (p1591). And Boston writes: “A surety is one who undertakes for another, obliging himself whether for paying his debt, civil or criminal, or for his performing a deed.” (p46). Boston lays out the two ways Christ has become our Surety: “1) He became surety for their debt of punishment, which they, as sinners, were liable in payment of. . .That was the debt owing to the divine justice, for all and every one of their sins, original or actual. . .This was their debt of punishment; a debt which they themselves could never have cleared, though paying to the utmost of their power, through ages of eternity. But this their debt Christ became surety for. . .Here is a suretiship that never had a match! David, in a transport of grief for the death of his son Absalom, wishes he had died for him (2 Samuel 18:33); Reuben will venture the life of his two sons for Benjamin (Genesis 42:37); and Judah will venture his own son for him (43:9) while yet there was hope that all would be safe. But our Lord Jesus deliberately pledges his own life for sinners, when it was beyond all peradventure, the precious pledge would be lost in the cause, and that the death he would suffer, would be a thousand deaths in one. . .Now, in the second Adam's suretiship for the criminal debt of his spiritual seed, there was not an ensuring of the payment thereof one way or other only. . .but there was an exchange of persons in law; Christ substituting himself in their room, and taking the whole obligation on himself. . .And, in virtue of that substitution, Christ became debtor in law, bound to pay that debt which he contracted not; to restore that which he took not away (Psalm 44:4). For, becoming surety for them, to the end there might be laid a foundation, in law and justice for exacting their debt of punishment from him, their guilt was transferred on him (Isaiah 53:6, 'The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all'). This was pointed at, in the laying of the hand on the head of the sacrifices under the law, especially on the head of the scape-goat (Leviticus 16:21). . .All the sins of all the elect were at once imputed to the Surety, and so became his, as his righteousness becomes ours, namely, in law-reckoning. . .He was indeed without sin inherent in him, but not without sin imputed to him. . .This relation of our sin to Christ, is necessary from the nature of suretiship for debt; in which case, nobody doubts but the debt becomes the surety's, when once he has stricken hands for it. And how else could the law have justly proceeded against Christ? How could our punishment have been, in justice, inflicted on him, if he had not had such a relation to our sin? If the law could not charge our sin on him, in virtue of his own voluntary undertaking, it could have no ground in justice to inflict our punishment on him. 2) He became surety for their debt of duty or obedience, the which also is a debt according to the style of the holy Scripture; Galatians 5:3, 'A debtor to do the whole law.' The law as a covenant of works, though it was broken by them, and they had incurred the penalty thereof, yet had neither lost its right, nor ceased to exact of them the obedience which at first it required of man, as the condition of life. . .Christ became surety for this debt of theirs too, namely, the debt of obedience to the law as a covenant, which was, and is the only obedience to it for life; obliging himself to clear it, by obeying in their room and stead, and fulfilling what the law [did] demand of them. . .” (Boston, pp49-51). As it was necessary for our Mediator to be both God and man, this is true of our Surety as well. Our Surety had to be God, for no mere creature could be trusted by the Father with the task of doing all His will perfectly, as it was required of the Surety to do. And because no mere creature's blood was valuable enough to save its own soul, let alone billions of other souls. Further, salvation could not come through man, for salvation is from the Lord (Jonah 2:9). Boston explains: “The demands in this covenant were high, and quite above their ability to answer; and besides, they themselves were false and fickle. They broke their word in the first covenant, when able to have kept it; how could they be trusted in this new bargain, when their ability was gone? So there was an absolute necessity of a surety for them in it.” (p48). And Witsius says: “for man to glory in anyone, as his Savior, and give him the honor of the new creation, to resign himself to his pleasure, and become his property, and say to him, 'thou art lord of my soul'; is an honor to which no mere creature can have the least claim. 'In Jehovah shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory,' (Isaiah 45:25). 'My spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior,' (Luke 1:47). . .It appears then, that none but he who is true God, could possibly be Surety. . .it is necessary. . .that 'his own arm should bring salvation unto him' (Isaiah 63:5).” (V1, pp199, 201). Our Surety had to be man, for His task as Surety was to obey the same covenant of works—as a man, born under the Law—which Adam had failed to obey. As Calvin writes: “The second requirement of our reconciliation with God was this: that man, who by his disobedience had become lost, should by way of remedy counter it with obedience, satisfy God's judgment, and pay the penalties for sin. Accordingly, our Lord came forth as true man and took the person and the name of Adam in order to take Adam's place in obeying the Father. . .to pay the penalty that we had deserved.” (Institutes, 2.12.3). And Witsius notes: “The legal covenant entered into with the first man [IE, as the head of the Covenant of Works], is founded on the very nature of God. . .So that it would be a contradiction if these precepts of the law of nature should not be proposed to [the second] man [IE, as the head of the Covenant of Grace]. . .I therefore proceed. . .[it] can be nothing else but the performing the same precepts. . .I add, that as those precepts were given to man, so no creature but man could perform them. This appears, 1) Because the law, which is suited to the nature of man, requires, that he love God with all his soul, and serve him with all the members of his body. . .None can do this but man. . . 2) The same law requires the love of our neighbor; but none is our neighbor but man, who is of the same blood with us. . .All these things put together, incontestably prove that our Surety ought to be man; that he might satisfy the law for us. This is what the apostle means when joining these two together by an inseparable connection, Galatians 4:4, 'made of a woman, made under the law.' For he intimates, that the principal and immediate scope and end of Christ's incarnation was, that in the human nature he might be subject to the law, to which it is under obligation; and so that God, according to the same right, might renew with him the same covenant which he had before entered into with the first man. . .” (V1, pp193-94). And so our Surety had to be both God and man; for, as Calvin says, “neither as God alone could he feel death, nor as man alone could he overcome it.” (Institutes, 2.12.3). And as Witsius declares, “Had he been God only he could neither have been subject, nor have obeyed, nor suffered; if mere man, his obedience, subjection, and suffering, would not have been of sufficient value for the redemption of the elect. . .And therefore it behoved our Surety to be man, that he might be capable to submit, obey, and suffer; and at the same time God, that the subjection, obedience, and suffering, of this person God-man, might on account of his infinite dignity, be imputed to others, and be sufficient for saving all, to whom it is imputed.”(V1,p200). And indeed, as Roberts likewise declares, “He must be man, that he might as our Surety suffer for us, shed his blood and die for our offenses, become a curse and sin for us, it being most congruous that he should have some communion with us, who suffers for our faults; this he could not do as God; He must be God, that he might undergo the wrath of God without sinking, satisfy God's justice to the full by his suffering; obtain eternal redemption for us, reconcile us to God by his death, put away our sin by the sacrifice of himself, purge our conscience from dead works, redeem us from the curse and wrath of God, [and] that the blessing of Abraham might come upon us. . .this he could not do as mere man.” (Roberts, Mystery and Marrow, p1579).

5 Boston writes: “Under the law, when a man was not able to act for himself, to assert and use his own right, one that was akin to him, had a right to act for him, coming in his room, and standing up in his right. And such a one was called his Goel; which properly signifies a kinsman-redeemer. Hence that word is sometimes rendered a kinsman; as Numbers 5:8, 'If the man have no kinsman (Goel) to recompense the trespass unto'; Ruth 3:12, 'I am thy near kinsman(Goel); howbeit there is a kinsman (Goel) nearer than I.' Sometimes it is rendered a redeemer; as Proverbs 23:11, 'Their Redeemer (Goel) is mighty'; Isaiah 47:4, 'As for our Redeemer (Goel), the Lord of hosts is his name.' One's acting in that capacity is called 'doing the kinsman's part,' or 'redeeming', to wit, by right of kin (Ruth 3:13 and 4:6). However, such a one might refuse to do the kinsman's part; as Ruth's kinsman-redeemer did, who resigned his right to Boaz, and in token thereof drew off his own shoe, and gave it to him (Ruth 4:6-8). Now, Christ the second Adam saw sinners, his ruined kinsmen, quite unable to act for themselves. Not one of them all was able to redeem himself, and far less his brother. . .If he should have declined it, and drawn off his shoe to them. . . there was none who durst have ventured to receive it, or put his foot in it. 'I looked,' says he, 'and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold; therefore mine own arm brought salvation' (Isaiah 43:5). He took on himself the character of their kinsman-redeemer. . .” (Boston, p42). And later, Boston notes the following things which “the kinsman-redeemer was to do for his kinsman, unable to act for himself; all which Christ the second Adam undertook in the covenant: 1) He was to marry the widow of his deceased kinsman, to raise up seed to his brother [Ruth 3:9; 3:10-13 and 4:10 with Ezekiel 16:8. . .Our nature was in a comfortable and fruitful condition, while the image of God, impressed thereupon in Adam, remained with it; but that image being removed, in the spiritual death caused by his sin, there ensued an absolute barrenness, as to the fruits of holiness, in our nature thus left. But our kinsman-redeemer consented to marry the widow. . .It was a low match indeed for him; and would have been so, even if the family of Adam had been in its primitive state and splendor; but now it was considered as in the depth of poverty and disgrace. . .And the great end, in subordination to the glory of God, for which this more intimate union and match with our nature was gone into by our kinsman-redeemer, was to render it yet again fruitful in the fruits of true holiness. . . 2) He was to redeem the mortgaged inheritance of his poor kinsman [Leviticus 25:25]. . .Our father Adam waxing poor, through the deceitful dealing of the tempter with him, quite sold away the inheritance of eternal life, for a morsel of forbidden fruit; and his children waxen more poor still, through their own personal fault, had set themselves farther and farther from it. They could not have raised, amongst them all, what would have redeemed so much as one man's part of it. . .Wherefore the second Adam, as kinsman-redeemer, took the burden of the redemption on himself, and agreed to pay the price of that purchase; dying for us, that we might live together with him (1 Thessalonians 5:10). 3) He was to ransom his poor kinsman in bondage, paying the price of his redemption [Leviticus 25:47-52]. . .Being sold in the loins of our first father, we were brought into bondage under the curse of the Law. So we are by nature the Law's bondmen, and consequently slaves to sin and Satan; never to have been released without a ransom, the full worth of so many souls. This ransom was stated in the covenant; to wit, that the kinsman-redeemer should give himself a ransom for his poor kinsmen; and he agreed to it, for purchasing their liberty (1 Timothy 2:5-6). The ransom was great, soul for soul, body for body; a person of infinite dignity, for his poor kinsmen in bondage. . .” (Boston, pp43-45). Ball notes: “He must be God that he might bear the weight of God's wrath without sinking under it. . .He must be man, our near kinsman, that he might have right of redemption . . .” (Ball, p265). And Roberts writes: “He must be man, our near-kinsman, that he might have the right of redemption, be a merciful and faithful high priest, being in all things like his brethren; and he must be God, that he might be fully able to redeem us, to destroy death, and him that had the power of death, the devil, deliver us from the guilt of sin, and curse of the Law, and preserve us safe to his heavenly kingdom.”(Roberts, Mystery and Marrow, p1579).

©2018 by Jay Todd.                        Getting the best of Covenant Theology into the hands of God's people.                        ruinandredemption@generalmail.com