Iv. Redemption In Rabbinic Writings
c. ko
pher
The noun kopher means a ransom price, and upon every occasion on which it is used it can be shown that there is the thought of a payment to be made. In its biblical usage it refers to the sum paid to redeem a forfeited life. The only places where this meaning is not compelled by the context are I Samuel 12: 3 and Amos 5: 12, both of which refer to bribes. Even here, however, J. Herrmann keeps open the possibility that not bribes in general are meant, but the wrongful reception of ransom from those whose lives were forfeit.30
pher means a ransom price, and upon every occasion on which it is used it can be shown that there is the thought of a payment to be made. In its biblical usage it refers to the sum paid to redeem a forfeited life. The only places where this meaning is not compelled by the context are I Samuel 12: 3 and Amos 5: 12, both of which refer to bribes. Even here, however, J. Herrmann keeps open the possibility that not bribes in general are meant, but the wrongful reception of ransom from those whose lives were forfeit.30The first occurrence of the noun is typical. It tells us of the man whose ox has gored another man, and whose life is forfeit in accordance with the ruling: ‘the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death.’ He is permitted to redeem his life by paying a kōpher, a sum of money ‘laid on him’ (Ex. 21: 28ff.). We see the essential meaning also in the account of the institution of the half shekel tax at the census: ‘When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel, according to those that are numbered of them, then shall they give every man a kōpher for his soul unto the Lord’ (Ex. 30 : 12). Here the thought is that there would be plague among the people unless the command of Yahweh was complied with - the kōpher was accepted as substitute for the life that would otherwise perish in the plague. Similar examples are Job 33 :24, where the imagery points us to a kōpher which delivers from ‘going down to the pit’ (‘the price paid in lieu of forfeiting life’31); Job 36: 8, with the difference that the sufferings of the patriarch are here thought of as the payment which delivers (‘the severity of your sufferings, which form the ransom, or price (3324), which God will accept in lieu of your life’32); Proverbs 13: 8, where a man’s riches are thought of as the ransom of his life; and Proverbs 21: 18, where ‘the wicked is a ransom for the righteous’.33 There is one occasion where the word is used of Yahweh’s deliverance of His people: ‘I have given Egypt as thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. Since thou hast been precious in my sight.... will I give men for thee and peoples for thy life’ (Is. 43: 3f.). Here the ransom price is explicitly mentioned and the thought of substitution is plain. Herrmann brings out this latter point: ‘In Is. 43: 3, 4 the thought of substitution is clearly bound up with kōpher; Egypt and the neighbouring kingdoms serve as substitutionary ransom price (substitutives Lōsegeld for Israel; that life for life is thereby meant is expressly said in verse 4.’34
For the sake of completeness we must notice that there are some circumstances wherein no kōpher can avail. Thus ‘ye shall take no kōpher for the life of a manslayer, which is guilty of death: but he shall surely be put to death’ (Nu. 35: 31). Again, when a man who has fled to a city of refuge after an accidental killing wants to return to his possession, ’ye shall take no kōpher for him’ (Nu. 35: 32). That it is impossible for a man to find a ransom which will deliver from death is the thought behind the use of kōpher in Psalm 49: 8, while in a different sphere, an outraged husband will not accept a kōpher from the adulterer (Pr. 6: 35).
From these examples we see that this word necessarily involves thought of a ransom price, a substitute, this being demanded by every occurrence of the term. The force of this should not be overlooked in estimating the significance of λύτρον in the LXX, for, as Procksch remarks: ’As translation of kōpher, then, λύτρον (—α) always means a substitute-gift (Ersatzgabe), whose worth avails as covering for a debt, so that the debt is not simply struck out.’35
The investigation of the ideas conveyed by the three main word-groups which the λύτρον words translate in the LXX shows that redemption consistently signifies deliverance by payment of a price. There may be other ideas, like that of family obligation in g’l, or the element of grace in pdh, but as a stubborn substratum in every case there is the basic price-paying conception.
We saw that the idea of the price paid tends to fade when Yahweh is the subject of the verb, but that, nevertheless, it does not disappear. There is reference to price in the insistence that Yahweh’s redemption is at the cost of the exertion of His mighty power. Moreover it should not be overlooked that, now and then, the thought of the ransom comes to the surface as in Isaiah 43 which we have just noticed. So in Psalm 73 (74): 2, ’Remember thy synagogue which thou acquiredst (or perhaps, purchasedst, ἐ
τήσω) in the beginning; thou redeemedst the rod of thine inheritance’, and Isaiah 52: 3, ‘For thus saith the Lord, you were sold for nothing, and you will not be redeemed with money.’ In these last two passages it would seem that it is just as impossible to have redemption without a price as a sale. Both terms may be used metaphorically, but that should not blind us to their essential significance, which is what gives them their force in these metaphorical passages.
τήσω) in the beginning; thou redeemedst the rod of thine inheritance’, and Isaiah 52: 3, ‘For thus saith the Lord, you were sold for nothing, and you will not be redeemed with money.’ In these last two passages it would seem that it is just as impossible to have redemption without a price as a sale. Both terms may be used metaphorically, but that should not blind us to their essential significance, which is what gives them their force in these metaphorical passages.The general picture then is quite clear. The LXX usage is such as to leave us in no doubt but that λύτρον and its cognates are properly applied to redemption by payment of price, and though the idea of price may fade when God is the subject, it never disappears. Particularly clear is the connection of λύτρον itself with price, for there is no occurrence of the word in the LXX without a price being expressed or clearly implied. We can confidently say that, in as far as the New Testament writers were imbued with the LXX outlook, they must have had in their minds some idea of deliverance by payment of price when they used the words of this word-group.