The Notion that Christ was made Sin at His birth

This has no ground in scripture.  ‘He hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin’ (2 Cor 5:21).  It is terrible to confuse the most wonderful, act of love of that blessed One – the sufferings and death of Christ, His bearing God’s wrath, His His soul Made an offering for sin, with any thought of His proving Himself sinless during His life on earth.  Good men, such as the editor of the Christian Examiner (maybe the Unitarian James Walker – 1794-1874) often carried rationalist views.

 

This is a addition itemof a paper  by John Nelson Darby.

The Pauline Doctrine of the Righteousness of Faith

It is published in Collected Writings Volume 7 (Doctrinal 2) page 349. 

Sosthenes

January 2017

2 comments

  1. Yes, Sosthenese, the error you mention is part of a plethora of errors concerning our precious Savior. The very fact that He could not sin is at the root of.it. Also the claim that as an Israelite He had to suffer for His own sin. Unfortunately the KJV Bible makes room for this in the way it renders Hebrews 4:15. I am glad you raised this. My Savior bore my sins vicariously on the cross, but was sinless and could not sin.
    Affectionately,
    Aquilla

  2. Dear Aquilla

    This has caused me to look at the translations a bit

    KJV – For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
    NIV – For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are–yet he did not sin.
    Darby – For we have not a high priest not able to sympathise with our infirmities, but tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart.

    Looking at the above, the last clause in the Greek is χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας/chōris hamartias/Strong 5565 266 – the first word means separately or separate from, not without in the normal sense, or even mores so not doing. Read also the note below by JND. Scripture makes it clear that any thought of sin had no part with our blessed Lord. He did no sin, of course, but was quite apart from it.
    The KJV does not make it totally clear that the Lord was not totally apart – though it is very close – He was without sin.
    I think the NIV (I guess the most popular modern translation in evangelical circles) has the question dangerously wrong. It would be inferred that the Lord was tempted just like we would be (because of our nature), but unlike us did not sin. That would suggest that He was of our order. He was NOT.
    It has also been pointed out that in Her 2:14 the Lord did not partake with us in the same manner – it was in a like manner – παραπλησίως/paraplēsiōs/Strong 3898 – a word used only in this passage.

    Darby writes in his Synopsis – http://biblehub.com/commentaries/darby/hebrews/4.htm

    He has, in all things, been tempted like ourselves, sin apart; so that He can sympathize with our infirmities. The word brings to light the intents of the heart, judges the will, and all that has not God for its object and its source. Then, as far as weakness is concerned, we have His sympathy. Christ of course had no evil desires: he was tempted in every way, apart from sin. Sin had no part in it at all. But I do not wish for sympathy with the sin that is in me; I detest it, I wish it to be mortified judged unsparingly. This the word does. For my weakness and my difficulties I seek sympathy; and I find it in the priesthood of Jesus. It is not necessary, in order to sympathize with me, that a person should feel at the same moment that which I am feeling rather the contrary. If I am suffering pain, I am not in a condition to think as much of another’s pain. But in order to sympathize with him I must have a nature capable of appreciating his pain.

    Sosthenes
    February 2017

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.