How Christ Was "Made Sin"

2 Cor 5:2 for him who did not know sin, in our behalf He did make sin, that we may become the righteousness of God in him.
Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Phil 3:8-11 yes, indeed, and I count all things to be loss, because of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, because of whom of the all things I suffered loss, and do count them to be refuse, that Christ I may gain, and be found in him, not having my righteousness, which is of law, but that which is through faith of Christ [insert Gal 3:2] -- the righteousness that is of God by the faith, to know him, and the power of his rising again, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being conformed to his death, if anyhow I may attain to the rising again of the dead.

Let's flipflop a work of faith,

 

Romans 4:6-8 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, saying,

Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

(emphasis mine)

Matthew 6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

Matthew 18:27 Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt.

Matthew 18:30 And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt.

Matthew 18:32 Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me.

(emphasis mine)

 

How can it be heresy when the verse says it?

 

Are you saying that you think that God became an actual sinner?

 

Jesus was the Lamb of God, thus God's sin offering. Full Stop.

Pay no attention to those who claim Jesus was not sinless, but was sin, when He died as the Lamb of God without blemish.

 

Are you rubbing your hands in hope of your heresy radar lighting up?

I said only what the verse said. He hath made him to be sin for us.

Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't add to the word of God the word "offering", I don't change the word of God to "sinner".

 

Nope. Just trying to see if you would clarify your rather cryptic comment.

JonC wrote: "I know nobody here takes the verse as Christ being made literal sin (which would be a heresy)."

You wrote in reply: "How can it be heresy when the verse says it?"

Thus, it sounds like you are disagreeing with JonC's statement, that you are saying that you think Christ was not made sin by imputation, but became literal sin(or a literal sinner).

 

When it comes to such dreadful topics, all I am sure of is what the verse says: Christ was made sin for us.
I know that, in the context of the cross, the Lord likened his body to Moses' serpent on the pole and to a worm.

 

There is no "offering" in the verse.

2Co 5:21 τον γαρ μη γνοντα αμαρτιαν υπερ ημων αμαρτιαν εποιησεν ινα ημεις γινωμεθα δικαιοσυνη θεου εν αυτω

Pulpit Commentary: "Many have understood the word "sin" in the sense of sin offering (Le Gal_5:9, LXX.); but that is a precarious application of the word, which is not justified by any other passage in the New Testament. We cannot, as Dean Plumptre says, get beyond the simple statement, which St. Paul is content to leave in its unexplicable mystery,"

Jamieson, Faussett, Brown: "not a sin offering, which would destroy the antithesis to “righteousness,” and would make “sin” be used in different senses in the same sentence:"

Indeed, this is not unlike being made a curse for us (Gal.3:13). There is no "curse offering" escape there.

Cambridge Bible: "The word sin has been variously explained as a sin-offering, a sinner, and so on. But it is best to take the word in its literal acceptation. He made Him to be sin,"

The whole "sin offering" goes back to Ambrosiaster who argued that in view of the fact that he was made an offering for sins, it is not wrong for him to be said to have been made “sin,” because in the law the sacrifice which was offered for sins used to be called a “sin.”
Ambrosiaster's justification of the word "sin" became an unwarranted alternate translation with time.

The text said "sin" not "sin offering". The theology will have to match the text, not vice-versa.

 

Yes, it is. I provided verses to prove it.

 

Yes, there is. I provided a passage to prove it.

 

Yes, it is.

 

Are you saying that you don't think that the sins of God's elect were imputed to Christ? If not, how do you think they were placed on Christ?