> General Discussions
A seemingly stupid question
aqrinc:
--- Quote from: ez2u on September 11, 2009, 11:04:12 PM ---
2Co 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.
This is why Jesus Christ die for our sins
that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him Praise God!
--- End quote ---
Hi Peggy,
This is the proper translation for that verse, Christ was not made sin; He was a sin offering.
2Co 5:21 (CLV)
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."
See Was Christ made sin?
Excerpt from: http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,6719.0.html
Yes sin was imputed to Him in that… like this, did Christ sin? No. Did we sin? Yes. Is there a penalty? Yes. Christ said, I’ll take your sin and I’ll pay your penalty. Did now, Christ sin? No. Is He guilty of sin? No. He just said I’ll pay the penalty for them. He died FOR us, the Bible says. He didn’t die in our place instead. He didn’t die so we don’t have to die. He died FOR us. That is a positive act.
OFFERINGS
Years ago I learned that that Scripture is not proper. Yes it does translate the word for word, like we find it in the manuscript. But that’s not a proper translation. I just showed you word for word is not a proper way to translate. That will not fill the bill. In some areas it will fill the bill and in some areas it will not. I didn’t take the time to get the examples where you could plainly see that there are other words needed or you are not translating at all.
So I learned that this means ‘to be made a sin offering’ and not to be made sin itself. There's a difference between sin and a sin offering.
Now let me make this as simple as I can make it.
If a man beat his child let’s say, mercilessly. Two witnesses, in the Old Testament… so somebody says, ‘you can’t beat your child like that.’
Somebody else steals something or somebody did something (not of a capital punishment, because then they would stone them to death) let just say it infringes in some area, maybe they spoke harshly to their wife (there was no death penalty for that), but it was a sin.
Now there was such a thing as a sin offering, even though you were guilty for sin (beating your child - stealing - spoke harshly to your wife) you could give an offering to God and He would forgive you that sin. Why? Because you didn’t commit it? No, you did commit it. Well then why, if you commit a sin and you are guilty of the sin, why doesn’t He hold it against you? Because of the sin offering!
Now they offered every morning of everyday a lamb or a goat, it was a sin offering. That goat was offered in behalf of somebody’s sin or everybody’s sin, whatever the case might be. It might be an individual offering, it might be the morning offering for the whole congregation, the animal is OFFERED for the sin. Now when that animal is offered for the sin is that animal guilty of speaking harshly to it’s wife? Come on this is not rocket science. It’s a sin OFFERING, it’s not ‘the’ sin. Jesus Christ is not ‘the’ sin of the world. This is rank heresy. This is the worse kind of teaching I have ever heard in my life. This is the bottom of the barrel, the dredges, this is dirty religion.
Jesus Christ was not ‘the sin’ of the world offered on the cross, He died on the cross FOR our sins. Can you not understand simple words? An offering was a sacrifice back in Israel ‘for’ the sin. That’s why it was not called sin, it was called a SIN OFFERING.
Here is 2 Cor. 5:21 translated;
“For Him who knew no Sin, He made a Sin-offering on our behalf, that we might become God’s Righteousness in Him” (Emphatic Diaglott).
“For the One not knowing sin, He makes [Gk. Aorist - not past tense] to be a sin offering for our sakes that we may be becoming God’s righteousness in Him” (Concordant N.T.).
This is the proper order too. It should not be “for He made Him sin,” the first phrase is “For Him who knew no Sin.”
george :).
Marky Mark:
--- Quote ---2Co 5:21 (CLV)
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."
--- End quote ---
George,thanks for posting the correct translation. Some of the newcomers may have been confused on that particular verse.
Peace...Mark
Astrapho:
--- Quote from: from various people ---2Co 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.
--- End quote ---
Btw, in the catholic church we're playing this song called "here I am to worship" (most of you should have heard of it by now :D ), and one of the verses say:
I'll never know how much it cost
To see my sin upon that cross
Shows how much difference one error in translation makes... :(
yudonsay:
wonderment, good question. I would also like to know the same. The answers so far are the regular stuff I get from pastors and others that I ask. Quoting scriptures with explanations that still do not tell me the necessity or value (as apposed to say, Jesus deciding not to go through with his death) of dieing. I would understand this as an example only, a statement of the passion God has for us to set up such an example for us to follow as a standard of excellence necessary for us to be called righteous but this would be problematic with being saved by works. Stating he died for my sin is a quote and I see the obvious correlation to the sacrificial laws but still do not see the necessity of any person dieing to remove anything. The animals paid for nothing, they were for an example, prophecy and staging of what was to take place with Jesus. Except for the Israelites obedience to the laws the animals and sacrifices did nothing, there blood was of no value to forgive or remove any sins. Why would God require Jesus' blood? How does this material or act rescind my Sin?
Akira329:
--- Quote from: yudonsay on September 13, 2009, 08:00:03 PM ---I would understand this as an example only, a statement of the passion God has for us to set up such an example for us to follow as a standard of excellence necessary for us to be called righteous but this would be problematic with being saved by works.
--- End quote ---
Explain how this is problematic?
As for your other statement:
--- Quote from: yudonsay on September 13, 2009, 08:00:03 PM ---Why would God require Jesus' blood? How does this material or act rescind my Sin?
--- End quote ---
I think your asking why Christ is the perfect sacrifice?? I might be wrong? Hope these verses help:
Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Rom 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Rom 6:8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Antaiwan
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version