Matthew 26: 26 14 15 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, "Take and eat; this is my body." 27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, 16 and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.
Here, the distribution of His Body and the drinking of His shed blood means His Death, of course - for the forgiveness of sin.
Matthew 26: 50 Jesus answered him, "Friend, do what you have come for." Then stepping forward they laid hands on Jesus and arrested him. 51 And behold, one of those who accompanied Jesus put his hand to his sword, drew it, and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his ear. 52 Then Jesus said to him, "Put your sword back into its sheath, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. 53 Do you think that I cannot call upon my Father and he will not provide me at this moment with more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But then how would the scriptures be fulfilled which say that it must come to pass in this way?"
It MUST come to pass in this way.
John 11: 49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, 11 said to them, "You know nothing, 50 nor do you consider that it is better for you that one man should die instead of the people, so that the whole nation may not perish." 51 He did not say this on his own, but since he was high priest for that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, 52 and not only for the nation, but also to gather into one the dispersed children of God. 12 53 So from that day on they planned to kill him.
Impressive. Even Caiaphas got in on the act of prophesy.
John 15: 11 "I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and your joy may be complete. 12 This is my commandment: love one another as I love you. 13 5 No one has greater love than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends.
This kinda leans on the other verses and probably wouldn't stand on its own.
The ransom is in the NT, Mark. Origen didn't come up with it. It's straight out of the Gospels.
Origen, writing after Irenaeus, and Augustine (in his mouse-trap analogy) expounded on the ransom paid to satan. Gregory Nanziazus objected to it, and various Church Fathers worked away at it until Anselm and Abelard (!) of all people rejected the notion that anything was due satan and that it was due to God instead.
Most of this came from various chapters of the Catholic Encyclopedia, with additional information from various sources.
Anselm "forgot" that the Incarnation and death on the cross was an act of mercy, out of love, and not an act to satisfy Zeus' anger.
Don't confuse Anselm with the penal substitution developed in the 16th century. If a ransom is paid, it is paid to somebody. Who was the ransom paid to here?
Well, the reformers only took Anslem's pagan idea of an angry Zeus, and made it more pagan, the way they took +Augustine and made him into a "Calvinist." Remember, the correct name is not Reformation, but Deformation.
From what I've read of Anselm, I don't get angry Zeus.
No, Mark, the east does not believe that. In the east, fasting is atonement (Greek: nesteia). The idea of appeasing an angry Zeus (Greek: hilasterion) is entirely Pauline in origin (Romans 3:25), and those who wrote in Pauline-like style (i.e. Hebrews 9:5, 1 John 2:2, 4:10). In other words it is foreign to the Church which follows the words of Christ in the Gospels, because Christ did not teach that.
Irenaeus and then Origen after him, and Augustine after him, did.
Thanks, you are right. My only objection is that the oldest copy is 3-4th century, and no earlier fragments exist, so I consider it questionable because there is enough reason to suspect doctrinal alteration, the way "fro many" and "for all" are curiously conflicting. The same goes for John 11.
Who was the ransom paid to here?
No one. The ransom was never paid as far as I know.