As we have seen in previous posts, the Watchtower insists that “the ransom sacrifice” had to be provided by “a perfect man—nothing more, nothing less—and the exact counterpart of the once perfect Adam.” Only this way could Jesus give “‘himself a corresponding ransom for all,’ that is, for all of sinner Adam’s imperfect offspring. (1 Tim. 2:5, 6).” (The Watchtower, “Appreciating the Salvation of Our God,” 8/1/73, p. 465)

On page 50 of its book What Does the Bible Really Teach?, the Watchtower states its position:

How did Jehovah provide the ransom? He sent one of his perfect spirit sons to the earth. But Jehovah did not send just any spirit creature. He sent the one most precious to him, his only-begotten Son.” (Read 1 John 4:9, 10). Willingly, this Son left his heavenly home. (Philippians 2:7) As we learned in the preceding chapter of this book, Jehovah performed a miracle when he transferred the life of this Son to the womb of Mary. By means of God’s holy spirit, Jesus was born as a perfect human and was not under the penalty of sin.—Luke 1:35.

As I noted last week, the clear implication of this statement is that Jehovah could have chosen one of any number of obedient angels to come as a man and make the atonement (“ransom”) for our sins.

Today, I’ll go even further.

If—as is implied by Watchtower Christology—Jehovah had a large number of options, why would he have to choose an archangel or angel for his redemptive purpose?

If the key qualification was the Savior’s exact correspondence to Adam, why couldn’t Jehovah simply create a perfect second Adam out of the dust of the earth and ask him to make the ransom sacrifice?

That way, the correspondence would have been more exact than it could have possibly been with Jesus or an angel.

The second Adam would have been completely human.

He could have even begun life as an adult, as did the first Adam. Thus, he would not have had to spend more than 90 percentage of his earthly life growing up before he started his earthly ministry, as Jesus did.

Jesus’ growing from infancy to manhood may have had both advantages and disadvantages, but it was different that the experience of the first Adam.

Before he sinned, the first Adam had fellowship and conversations with Jehovah in Eden.

Since the second Adam would be created sinless, there would no reason why he couldn’t enjoy the same privilege.

Jehovah could explain to him all the things he would be expected to do in order to serve as the Savior for Adam’s offspring. God could then have given him a free choice as to whether to accept the assignment or not.

There would be no stigma or sin if he declined.

After all, the Watchtower notes that Jesus willingly chose to undertake his earthly mission. (What Does the Bible Really Teach? p. 50).

If the second Adam declined the assignment, Jehovah could provide a suitable place for him to live, whether on this earth, on some other planet, or in heaven.

If the second Adam chose to accept the assignment but tried and failed, Jehovah could create a third Adam from the dust and keep trying until there was a “last Adam” (1 Corinthians 15:45) who succeeded.

A second Adam created from the dust would also have avoided the problem Watchtower Christology has with Jesus’ advantage over the first Adam with regards to his pre-mortal memories.

According to the Watchtower, at the time of the start of Jesus’ earthly ministry—his baptism—a “flood of memories… came to mind as he recalled the countless millenniums he had served alongside his Father, as master worker, spokesman, prince of God’s army, and as the archangel Michael.” (The Watchtower, “Jesus—The Ruler ‘Whose Origin Is From Early Times,” 6/15/98, p. 25)

The first Adam had no such memories on which to draw, so it seems to me that there was a serious lack of correspondence between their resources.

Jesus had a massive advantage when it came to knowing Jehovah, understanding his will, understanding the temptations, deception, and tactics of Satan, and so on.

It might be argued that a second Adam created from the dust would not be a physical descendant of the first Adam, as is Jesus.

But I’m not aware of any scripture (except in prophecies about Jesus himself) or any logical reason which would require the person who made the “ransom sacrifice” to be a descendant of the first Adam.

In fact, the first Adam wasn’t a physical descendant of any human being, so in this regard the second Adam would have an even more exact correspondence to the first Adam than does Jesus.

I have never seen the Watchtower suggest a scenario like this one.

Nor am I claiming that it was an option God actually considered.

In fact, in an earlier post in this series, I agreed with Christian theologians’ arguments that the Savior had to be fully God and fully man.

My goal has been to demonstrate what happens when the Watchtower comes up with its unique rendering of a Bible phrase (“a corresponding ransom”) and then builds its Christology around it.

If you discuss these matters with Jehovah’s Witnesses, I hope you will be able to use some of these ideas to get them to think for themselves instead of simply accepting whatever the Watchtower tells them.