Excellent question. I haven’t studied that passage in depth enough to give a confident answer, but my suspicion is that it means he took on the human condition of being “less than”. Sin doesn’t always mean transgression (doing the wrong thing), it means “missing the target”. The fact that in Leviticus many cases where a “sin offering” is required had nothing to with moral transgression but were more related simply to mortality suggests to me that in becoming mortal, Jesus “became sin”. What do you think?
In the Septuagint, the word for 'sin offering' is just 'sin', hamartia. That's the word Paul, who was very well acquainted and influenced by the LXX used in 2 Cor 5:21. To me this is the best way to understand this verse, that Paul just wanted to say Jesus fulfilled the sin offering, just like when he refers to him as our Passover lamb etc.
Yes that might be the best translation. But then my question is, how does that relate to us “becoming the righteousness of God”? A sin offering didn’t produce righteousness, only purification. I tend to think this verse is saying something similar to what Irenaeus said - He became what we are, so that we might become what he is.
@@thestoryandtheshape Yes, you might be right, I definitely like your idea, too. And I concede the point that it probably makes more sense looking at the logic of the verse. Can I ask you what's your take on Galatians 3:13? How did Christ become a curse and how is that not Penal Substitutionary Atonement?
@@timothy6828 Similar to the above. It's not substitutionary because the evidence of Christ being a curse was his crucifixion, which Paul says multiple times in Galatians that he shares in. Again, "for" doesn't mean "instead of".
The robot in the background chimed in at a great red flag moment when you were making light of sin in one of your comments. Did not God provide a sacrifice lamb for Abraham’s son? You are not presenting a clear case for your argument and keep telling people to go look up the scriptures themselves. I see lots of red flags in your presentation. You are a false preacher because you replied to someone below saying. To answer his question about 1 Corinthians 5:21 “In being mortal Jesus became less than -so he became sin.” Then you asked if it makes sense? No it does not, and this is where you have proved to me you are preaching a false gospel. BUSTED!
Thanks for your comment Dawn. I would argue that just because something doesn’t make sense to you it doesn’t mean I’m a false teacher. Perhaps it’s your understanding that is lacking. If you’d like to bring specific criticisms I’d be happy to respond. What about my comment to the question on 1 Corinthians 5:21 doesn’t make sense to you?
@@thestoryandtheshape Hello! Well, it is not what I think, but what scripture says. For 1 Corinthians 5:21, your reply was not according to scripture. No where does the Bible state that Jesus is “less than” because he is human, so therefore he became sin. This is not an accurate interpretation of that scripture. You lost credibility with me here implying he became sin because he was human!! If you meant something else please clarify it. You may be referring to where the bible says he was made lower than the angels, but that does not fit here in the context you have it in. You say you do not believe in the substitutional death of Christ for our sins? Your answer makes me wonder if you believe in the diety of Christ for you to make the above statement, we should start there. Some scriptures that prove that sin does incur God’s anger. Scripture interprets scripture. This is not my opinion or interpretation. These scriptures prove God’s anger at sin, and substitutionary atonement for sin. Psalm 7:11 God is a just judge, and God is angry with the wicked every day. Substitutionary atonement Genesis: 22:2. Then he said, take now your son, your only son Issac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I tell you.” Genesis 22:13. Then Abraham lifted his eyes and looked, and there behind him was a ram caught in a thicket by its horns. So Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up for a burnt offering instead of his son. Genesis 22:12. And he said , do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God , since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” Here are some scriptures and I have a lot more. Especially about God’s wrath about sin. Isaiah 53 Exodus 29:18 Ephesians 5:2 Hebrews 2:9 Hebrews 3:7-19 1 Peter 2:24 Hebrews 2: 16, 17, 18 Hebrews 2 17 and whom was he angry with for 40 years? Was it not with those who sinned whose bodies perished in the wilderness? The reason I called you false is because your comments are not lining with scripture and you are publicly teaching other people as an authority figure. I do have one more comment. You said that Christ’s death was not to appease the Father but (from memory) to cleanse man. Please see Isaiah 53 He was cut off for our sins just as the Old Testament foreshadows. Isaiah 53:8 for he was cut off from the land of the living for the transgression of my people he was punished. This scripture says “the Lord makes his life an offering for sin”, not for just human cleansing as you mentioned. Isaiah 53:19 yet it was the Lords will to crush him and cause him to suffer. And though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days. Isaiah 53:12 for he bore the sin of many and made intercession for the transgressors.
Dawn I’m not sure where you got the idea that I don’t believe that God is angry with sin, or that I don’t take sin seriously. What I have said in these teachings is that God doesn’t HAVE TO punish all sin, and that he would rather transform us than punish us. You are correct that the Bible frequently shows Gods anger with sin, I don’t disagree with that at all. But God doesn’t have to punish sin, and he’s able to forgive without payment or someone having to be punished. The passages you have quoted as supporting substitution don’t actually support substitution. With regards to Abraham and Isaac: yes the ram was provided as a substitute for Isaac. But this story doesn’t support Penal Substitutionary Atonement for several reasons: - Isaac was not going to die on the altar because of his sins, and therefore the ram wasn’t dying for Isaacs sins in his place - Likewise, Isaac wasn’t being offered as a substitute for Abrahams sins - The offering was not a sin offering and had nothing to do with atonement - The New Testament never references this story in relation to Jesus. He is related to other sacrifices (Passover and Covent especially) but never this one. Regarding 2 Corinthians 5:21, I gave a fuller rationale in the other comments that you read. How do you interpret the verse? Because it’s not a matter of saying “what the Bible says”, we have to actually interpret it. What do you think it means that Jesus “became sin”? Do you think it means he became the metaphysical entity known as “sin”? Or that he became a “sinner”? What does it mean?
@@thestoryandtheshapeI commend you for your patience- answering with gentleness and humility 👍 Jesus’ love surpasses all knowledge- and His power all we can imagine 👍
Thank you for these videos. Every single one continues to be a major blessing!
I've almost finished watching all of your videos.
When are you going to upload another one?
Haha that’s a good kind of pressure! They take a lot to make with all the art etc, but next one should be out in a couple of weeks
Thank you so much for putting out these messages. Question: How would you interpret the meaning of 1 Cor. 5:21 saying Jesus became sin?
Excellent question. I haven’t studied that passage in depth enough to give a confident answer, but my suspicion is that it means he took on the human condition of being “less than”. Sin doesn’t always mean transgression (doing the wrong thing), it means “missing the target”. The fact that in Leviticus many cases where a “sin offering” is required had nothing to with moral transgression but were more related simply to mortality suggests to me that in becoming mortal, Jesus “became sin”.
What do you think?
In the Septuagint, the word for 'sin offering' is just 'sin', hamartia. That's the word Paul, who was very well acquainted and influenced by the LXX used in 2 Cor 5:21. To me this is the best way to understand this verse, that Paul just wanted to say Jesus fulfilled the sin offering, just like when he refers to him as our Passover lamb etc.
Yes that might be the best translation. But then my question is, how does that relate to us “becoming the righteousness of God”? A sin offering didn’t produce righteousness, only purification. I tend to think this verse is saying something similar to what Irenaeus said - He became what we are, so that we might become what he is.
@@thestoryandtheshape Yes, you might be right, I definitely like your idea, too. And I concede the point that it probably makes more sense looking at the logic of the verse.
Can I ask you what's your take on Galatians 3:13? How did Christ become a curse and how is that not Penal Substitutionary Atonement?
@@timothy6828 Similar to the above. It's not substitutionary because the evidence of Christ being a curse was his crucifixion, which Paul says multiple times in Galatians that he shares in. Again, "for" doesn't mean "instead of".
The robot in the background chimed in at a great red flag moment when you were making light of sin in one of your comments. Did not God provide a sacrifice lamb for Abraham’s son? You are not presenting a clear case for your argument and keep telling people to go look up the scriptures themselves. I see lots of red flags in your presentation. You are a false preacher because you replied to someone below saying. To answer his question about 1 Corinthians 5:21 “In being mortal Jesus became less than -so he became sin.” Then you asked if it makes sense? No it does not, and this is where you have proved to me you are preaching a false gospel. BUSTED!
Thanks for your comment Dawn. I would argue that just because something doesn’t make sense to you it doesn’t mean I’m a false teacher. Perhaps it’s your understanding that is lacking. If you’d like to bring specific criticisms I’d be happy to respond. What about my comment to the question on 1 Corinthians 5:21 doesn’t make sense to you?
@@thestoryandtheshape Hello! Well, it is not what I think, but what scripture says.
For 1 Corinthians 5:21, your reply was not according to scripture. No where does the Bible state that Jesus is “less than” because he is human, so therefore he became sin. This is not an accurate interpretation of that scripture. You lost credibility with me here implying he became sin because he was human!! If you meant something else please clarify it. You may be referring to where the bible says he was made lower than the angels, but that does not fit here in the context you have it in.
You say you do not believe in the substitutional death of Christ for our sins? Your answer makes me wonder if you believe in the diety of Christ for you to make the above statement, we should start there.
Some scriptures that prove that sin does incur God’s anger.
Scripture interprets scripture. This is not my opinion or interpretation. These scriptures prove God’s anger at sin, and substitutionary atonement for sin.
Psalm 7:11 God is a just judge, and God is angry with the wicked every day.
Substitutionary atonement
Genesis: 22:2. Then he said, take now your son, your only son Issac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I tell you.”
Genesis 22:13. Then Abraham lifted his eyes and looked, and there behind him was a ram caught in a thicket by its horns. So Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up for a burnt offering instead of his son.
Genesis 22:12. And he said , do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God , since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.”
Here are some scriptures and I have a lot more. Especially about God’s wrath about sin.
Isaiah 53
Exodus 29:18
Ephesians 5:2
Hebrews 2:9
Hebrews 3:7-19
1 Peter 2:24
Hebrews 2: 16, 17, 18
Hebrews 2 17 and whom was he angry with for 40 years? Was it not with those who sinned whose bodies perished in the wilderness?
The reason I called you false is because your comments are not lining with scripture and you are publicly teaching other people as an authority figure.
I do have one more comment. You said that Christ’s death was not to appease the Father but (from memory) to cleanse man. Please see Isaiah 53
He was cut off for our sins just as the Old Testament foreshadows.
Isaiah 53:8 for he was cut off from the land of the living for the transgression of my people he was punished.
This scripture says “the Lord makes his life an offering for sin”, not for just human cleansing as you mentioned.
Isaiah 53:19 yet it was the Lords will to crush him and cause him to suffer. And though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days.
Isaiah 53:12 for he bore the sin of many and made intercession for the transgressors.
Dawn I’m not sure where you got the idea that I don’t believe that God is angry with sin, or that I don’t take sin seriously. What I have said in these teachings is that God doesn’t HAVE TO punish all sin, and that he would rather transform us than punish us. You are correct that the Bible frequently shows Gods anger with sin, I don’t disagree with that at all. But God doesn’t have to punish sin, and he’s able to forgive without payment or someone having to be punished. The passages you have quoted as supporting substitution don’t actually support substitution.
With regards to Abraham and Isaac: yes the ram was provided as a substitute for Isaac. But this story doesn’t support Penal Substitutionary Atonement for several reasons:
- Isaac was not going to die on the altar because of his sins, and therefore the ram wasn’t dying for Isaacs sins in his place
- Likewise, Isaac wasn’t being offered as a substitute for Abrahams sins
- The offering was not a sin offering and had nothing to do with atonement
- The New Testament never references this story in relation to Jesus. He is related to other sacrifices (Passover and Covent especially) but never this one.
Regarding 2 Corinthians 5:21, I gave a fuller rationale in the other comments that you read. How do you interpret the verse? Because it’s not a matter of saying “what the Bible says”, we have to actually interpret it. What do you think it means that Jesus “became sin”? Do you think it means he became the metaphysical entity known as “sin”? Or that he became a “sinner”? What does it mean?
@@thestoryandtheshapeI commend you for your patience- answering with gentleness and humility 👍
Jesus’ love surpasses all knowledge- and His power all we can imagine 👍