An Atonement For Many
by MBPSTB
Friday, 7 August, 2015
18th day, 5th month
Mat_20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
Mar_10:45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
We find two occurrences of this declaration made by EHYEHshua. This meets the requirement of the Torah commandment that two witnesses must establish a truth.
There are altogether thirteen verses where we find the word "ransom". What does this have to do with "atonement"?
The Hebrew word that has been replaced (11 times) with "ransom", is Strong's H3724:
H3724 "ransom"
כּפר
kôpher
ko'-fer
From H3722; properly a cover, that is, (literally) a village (as covered in); (specifically) bitumen (as used for coating), and the henna plant (as used for dyeing); figuratively a redemption price: - bribe, camphire, pitch, ransom, satisfaction, sum of money, village.
In the KJV, this word is footnoted only one time (as "atonement"), found in Job 33:24. Yet it is used in ten other verses in the same context. Searching the Strong's also bears this out. Yet the above H3724 which we find in all these eleven cases, doesn't clearly say "atonement". It might infer it if we look specifically at the above underlined parts of the definition, but it's not the whole story. But we are given a better clue in the word from which it is derived; H3722:
H3722
כּפר
kâphar
kaw-far'
A primitive root; to cover (specifically with bitumen); figuratively to expiate or condone, to placate or cancel: - appease, make (an) atonement, cleanse, disannul, forgive, be merciful, pacify, pardon, to pitch, purge (away), put off, (make) reconcile (-liation).
This then begs the question, why would the single KJV footnote with the word "atonement" (clearly stemming from the secondary definition, which appears to be more fitting than the first Hebrew definition) be found at all?
This appears to be yet another case of hiding the truer word and this leads to confusion. Given that the secondary definition is most likely the primary definition, recalling then, EHYEHshua's own words, that He is a RANSOM for many, can now be said:
I give My life, an atonement for many.
When we read His words using "ransom" we slide right past what He actually meant. Even in the Greek definition of the word "ransom", we find "atonement":
G3083 "ransom"
λύτρον
lutron
loo'-tron
From G3089; something to loosen with, that is, a redemption price (figuratively atonement): - ransom.
In fact, we can see that it actually ties together both Hebrew words; H3724 and H3722 by including both "atonement" and "redemption price".
The other insight is that the Hebrew family of words H3724, H3722, H3725 all have Tabernacle implications such as, Mercy, Sacrifice, Propitiation, The Wedding and the Bride being redeemed by her Bridegroom, her Husband.
Applying the rule of the "law of first mention" within the context of the passage, we can now plug in the word atonement where we find it translated as ransom :
Exo 30:12 When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man an atonement for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.
Job 33:24 Then he is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found an atonement.
Job 36:18 Because there is wrath, beware lest he take thee away with his stroke: then a great atonement cannot deliver thee.
Psa 49:7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God an atonement for him:
Pro 6:35 He will not regard any atonement; neither will he rest content, though thou givest many gifts.
Pro 13:8 The atonement of a man's life are his riches: but the poor heareth not rebuke.
Pro 21:18 The wicked shall be an atonement for the righteous, and the transgressor for the upright.
Isa 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy atonement, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.
Some might argue that we cannot do this, but the original Hebrew is made
up of consonants and BOTH words used for ransom; H3724 and the one it's
derived from H3722 are EXACTLY ALIKE. There is NO difference.
Divine Eternal Blood vs. Corruptible Temporary Animal Blood
Once we understand that the word ransom is the translation for the actual
Hebrew word atonement, we must then look further into what EHYEHshua
actually did by His Blood.
Was the original covenant removed, abolished, done away with? Or was it
more correctly, renewed ? If we are to REconsider EHYEHshua's own words:
Mat_5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Nothing really changed except the TYPE of Blood that was offered up.
Changing only the corruptible animal blood that atones temporarily, for the
Father's Divine, Eternal Blood which atones forever, covering all sin debt
past, present and future. This does away with the atonement sacrifice that
Israel counted on to absolve them from their sins, both known and unknown.
This was important because Israel would be scattered to the four corners of
the earth, forgetting their heritage, yet still of Israel. They would assimilate
into other cultures, adopting their traditions, eventually all trace of their
memories of who they were would be replaced by who they had become.
Only EHYEHshua's one time blood atonement, that ransom given for many,
would be able to cover (propitiate) the mercy seat thereby keeping Israel from
DEATH through sin.
Replies