I hope this is not repeating former forum discussions. But it is an issue worth discussing.
Was Jesus made sin? Was the sin of the world on Jesus? The King James Bible and in many other modern Bibles that says "Christ was made sin." That is not a totally accurate translation of the Scripture. Why? Because even though a word for word translation from the original can render it that way, that is not the entire story concerning this verse.
2 Cor. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. (NKJ)
Using one scripture to prove a point is not accurate scriptural analysis (exegesis). All associated scriptures must be referred to when deciding on the meaning of something. There is no other scripture that is translated that Christ was made sin. No where. 2 Cor 5:21 is the only one. So what do we conclude? Scripture tells us this:
2 Cor. 13:1 ... In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. (KJV)
2 Peter 1:20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture at all is becoming its own explanation. (CLV)
The word "private" means ones own or from self. It means no Scripture is it's own explanation. No single Scripture explains itself. Not that it might not partly explain it, but you've got to dig deeper for an explanation of it. We cannot we throw these basic principles on discerning scriptures away. One scripture alone cannot be used to prove doctrine.
Lets look at this subject scripture from the King James:
2 Cor. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. (NKJ)
From the Concordant Version:
2 Cor 5:21 For the One not knowing sin, He makes to be a sin offering for our sakes that we may be becoming God's righteousness in Him. (Concordant Literal version)
Notice that the Concordant translate the key words as "sin offering" not sin, as the KJV has it. Why?
How could Christ who knew not sin be made sin? If He was made sin, then He would have known sin. But He knew no sin. For example, if I am made angry, I am angry. If I know not anger, then I am not angry. There is no compatibility between being made angry and not knowing anger Therefore there is no compatibility between "made sin" and "knew no sin. And even if this was true, and it is not, who made Him to be sin? The Father? No! He was not made sin.
He died FOR us, the Bible says. He didn't die in our place by becoming sin.
As an example - if I break the law (sin) by speeding, I get a speeding ticket and am given a $100 fine (penalty). I am obligated to pay the penalty. But a friend steps forward and says he will pay the penalty which I incurred by breaking the law. My friend paid the penalty but was not the guilty one. What can I say except, thank you friend for paying the penalty even though you are innocent.
Jesus Christ was not 'the sin' of the world offered on the cross, He died on the cross FOR our sins
What is the purpose of a sin offering anyway? Why was it so important under the old covenant? It was a shadow pointing to the reality of the saving work of Jesus. Mosaic Laws are a shadow of the Spiritual Laws Jesus brought to us.
Can we see the same pattern in the Old Testament revealed in Leviticus 16?
From the Web site http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2203-azazel
In Lev. xvi. the single allusion to Azazel is as follows: On the tenth day of Tishri (see Atonement Day) the high priest, after first performing the prescribed sacrifices for himself and his family, presented the victims for the sins of the people. These were a ram for a burnt offering, and two young goats for a sin-offering. Having brought the goats before Yhwh at the door of the tabernacle, he cast lots for them, the one lot "for Yhwh" and the other "for Azazel." The goat that fell to Yhwh was slain as a sin-offering for the people. But the goat of Azazel (now usually known as the "scapegoat") was made the subject of a more striking ceremony. The high priest laid his hands upon its head and confessed over it the sins of the people. Then the victim was handed over to a man standing ready for the purpose, and, laden as it was with these imputed sins, it was "led forth to an isolated region," and then let go in the wilderness.
Yhwh is Yahweh or Jehovah or Jesus (NT)
In the Old Testament sins were atoned for by a sin offering. The word sin in the Old Testament is Strong's H2403 meaning:
Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions http://studybible.info/strongs/H2403
1. sin, sinful
2. sin, sin offering
a. sin
b. condition of sin, guilt of sin
c. punishment for sin
d. sin-offering
e. purification from sins of ceremonial
Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
Heb 10:3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Heb 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Heb 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Heb 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Finally
1Pe_2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
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.
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
There is no doubt the debate on whether Christ was MADE sin or not is one that will continue. From what is here in this post, I just do not see how we can accept that Jesus was made sin. If He was made sin He died for His sins and not for those of all humanity.
Even the learned scholar A.P. Adams and believer in the salvation of all took the meaning as MADE sin as he writes in this link (forth paragraph down):.
http://www.theheraldofgodsgrace.org/Adams/Spirit/015TheManChristJesus.htm
I disagree with him on this point. More can be said but I will leave it there for now.
Yes we still see through a glass darkly but as we study and meditate it becomes less blurry.
For me , I believe you have to define sin first before you can even say,
made sin for us
or sin offering [Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world ]
I believe ''sin offering'' is a better understanding of this .
The first mention of sin was in Gen 4
Gen 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
Strong's H2403 - chatta'ath חַטָּאָת
Transliteration
chatta'ath
Pronunciation
khat·tä·ä' (Key)
Part of Speech
feminine noun
Root Word (Etymology)
From חָטָא (H2398)
TWOT Reference
638e
Variant Spellings Variant spellings for this word: חטאת (Strongs and Gesenius) חטאה (Strongs)
[What are these variants?]Outline of Biblical Usage sin, sinful
sin, sin offering
sin
condition of sin, guilt of sin
punishment for sin
sin-offering
purification from sins of ceremonial uncleanness
But to clarify my point here sin is tresspass /error
and we know that Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil [TOKOGAE]
and disobeyed a direct command God said with consequence , the Day you eat , you will die
the TOKOGAE told them they were naked before God , something they never knew before they tasted sin = death
Jesus to me is the way back to the Tree of life [TOL]
The Tree of Knowledge of Good and evil was alway there but hidden and was revealed by the Law and prophets ,just as the Tree of Life is revealed by the Lord Jesus Christ
Paul explains this some in other places in the New Testament
So your point taken , I do see the better way to describe Jesus as the sin offering and NOT sin of its self being tresspass and error or the guilt from sin .
Just my own point of view at this time to share with you Joeteekay , thanks for sharing yours .
Perhaps it was just a manor of speaking - "made sin" was to mean made as though he had sinned, or dealt with as though he had sinned. They had different ways of saying things in those days (Paul's lifetime). I have heard it said, "He made me out to be a liar," not meaning that I lied, but that someone treated me as though I had lied. So I don't believe Paul was saying that Jesus literally became sin. How can a person become an intangible thing? I mean what was that supposed to mean anyway? I was simply a manner of speaking, in my opinion. :2c:
Also,
I define evil as: a destructive force.
I define sin as: (1) a willing evil act. (2) the collective entirety of the willing evil acts of humanity.
IMO, these two words should not be used interchangeably.
By this definition, Jesus was definitely NOT made to be the "collective entirety of the willing evil acts of humanity." He DEFINITELY WAS treated as though he were guilty of the "collective entirety of the willing evil acts of humanity."
Good thoughts, Joe! :thumbsup:
Quote from: jbertonbounds on October 28, 2013, 01:57:51 AM
Also,
I define evil as: a destructive force.
I define sin as: (1) a willing evil act. (2) the collective entirety of the willing evil acts of humanity.
IMO, these two words should not be used interchangeably.
By this definition, Jesus was definitely NOT made to be the "collective entirety of the willing evil acts of humanity." He DEFINITELY WAS treated as though he were guilty of the "collective entirety of the willing evil acts of humanity."
Good thoughts, Joe! :thumbsup:
Yes Jesus Christ exposed sin in the flesh !
Rom 8:1 There is, then, now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit;
Rom 8:2 for the law of the
Spirit of the life in Christ Jesus did set me free from the
law of the sin and of the death;
Rom 8:3 for what the law was not able to do, in that it was
weak through the flesh, God,
His own Son having sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, did condemn the sin in the flesh, Its seems the Lord Himself judged sin in the flesh that death has lost its power over sin By being made righteous in the SPIRIRT OF GOD and Christ though Jesus Christ Himself
This act causing the new testament to come into effect , fulfilling the old one , by Jesus
Rom 8:4
that the righteousness of the law may be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh,
but according to the Spirit.
Made sin doesn't mean He personally sinned.
It just means He paid the price of sin. ==> Wages of sin is death
He carried the burden of sin. ==> As did the goat during Atonement day*
The goat never sinned because it wasn't even under any of God's laws.
He was the redeemer. ==> Redeemer isn't something new introduced by Jesus. If a wife broke the law, the husband could take her punishment.So he could for example take 20 lashes for on his wife behalf. He was called her redeemer. So, yep "redeemer' is wedding talk. (again). It was quite risky to become a redeemer because from that point on during the whole marriage the husband had to take all future punishments for his wife.
The redeemer was punished for the crimes of his wife. No his own crimes.
* I have a little theory Passover and Atonement day are the same, in a "weird" pattern way.
Amen.. (surely?) all the Holy Days are (and were/will be) fulfilled by Jesus! :smile: ((Especially Passover and Atonement!? As surely He is our atonement.. and is the atonement for all..)) :smile:
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 28, 2013, 10:20:26 AM
Made sin doesn't mean He personally sinned.
It just means He paid the price of sin. ==> Wages of sin is death
He carried the burden of sin. ==> As did the goat during Atonement day*
The goat never sinned because it wasn't even under any of God's laws.
He was the redeemer. ==> Redeemer isn't something new introduced by Jesus. If a wife broke the husband could take her punishment.So he could for example take 20 lashes for on his wife behalf. He was called her redeemer. So, yep "redeemer' is wedding talk. (again). It was quite risky to become a redeemer because from that point on during the whole marriage the husband had to take all future punishments for his wife.
The redeemer was punished for the crimes of his wife. No his own crimes.
* I have a little theory Passover and Anonementday are the same in "weird" way.
:thumbsup:
Amen,,,,,, sure see this as well , the kinsman redeemer see this illustrated in Ruth
Boaz Boaz = "fleetness"
ancestor of David, kinsman-redeemer to Ruth, daughter-in-law of Naomi
name of the left of two brazen pillars, 18 cubits high, erected in the porch of Solomon's temple
Joteekay, I see it the same way. I think "sin offering" is the right translation given the surrounding new testament context.
Quote from: Seth on October 28, 2013, 04:47:07 PM
Joteekay, I see it the same way. I think "sin offering" is the right translation given the surrounding new testament context.
:thumbsup: