cross_1.gifWhile He Tarries Ministriesbible4.gif
Did Jesus become sin on the cross?

bluebar.gif
Did Jesus become sin on the cross?
Now that we have covered the Blood Sacrifice and the Passover in previous articles, we can now address another false teaching that is floating around.

1. Did Jesus become sin on the cross?
a. The Theory
b. Related verses
2. Background Reference
3. The real meaning of the verses.
4. The implications of the theory.
5. Summary:

1. Did Jesus become sin on the cross?
The theory:
This theory and old heresy comes mostly from two or three verses in the bible.
Isaiah 53:6 "the Lord laid on Him the iniquity of all."
and
2 Corinthians 5:21 "He who knew no sin was made sin for us."
or perhaps they might use Galatians 3:13 "having become a curse for us"

Using these 3 verses they try to support that Jesus became sin on the cross. This shows the hazard of taking three verses out of context and making the bible say something that it does not say. What we need to do is take what the entire bible says on the subject and discern what really is true. If you take various verses that seem to contradict each other, then you simply don't understand that subject.

Related verses:
Let us look at some other background verses and then we will return to these three verses and see what they really mean.
1 Peter 2:22 "Who committed no sin." (Jesus was sinless.)
Hebrews 4:15 "..was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin."
Remember in prior lessons where we saw that God was manifested in the flesh as Jesus. (John 1:14)
In John 5.18 it indicates that Jesus was equal to God.
In Hebrews 1:3 it says that He had by himself purged our sins.

Are they trying to suggest that Jesus (who is God in the flesh) became sin on the cross?? Does this make sense?? That seems to be what they are implying! It gets worse, but we will get to that in a few minutes.

LET'S GO ON:
2. Background Reference:
1 Peter 2:24 "who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree."

This means that he bore our sins in his body as a sacrificial substitute for us. This is the sacrificial system in the Old Testament where the Lamb was offered as a substitute to atone for our sins. The Lamb did not bear our sins itself (It was symbolic), but the shed blood of the lamb was offered as a sacrifice for atonement. The Priest laid his hands on the lamb to impute (PUT) our sins onto the lamb (symbolically) and by the shed blood of the lamb, the righteousness of Christ was imputed (CREDITED) to us (symbolically). [Romans 4:5-8; 2 Corinthians 5:21b] We covered this in a prior article.

This says that even though he took away our sins by way of his blood sacrifice for us, there was in Himself no sin. The sacrifice under the law had to be perfect, without spot or blemish. On top of that He is God. Remember our lesson where numerous places Jesus was shown to be equal to God. Are you beginning to see how silly this idea of Jesus becoming sin is! How could God become sin!

Ephesians 1:7 "In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins."
You see, becoming sin is not part of the transaction. It is the shed blood of Jesus that atones for our sins.
Ephesians 2:13 "But now in Christ Jesus, you who once were far off have been made near by the blood of Christ."
Once again, the blood of Jesus is the key ingredient, not our sins. or Jesus becoming sin.

3. THE REAL MEANING OF THE VERSES.
With this background let us see what the first 3 verses really mean.

Once again we are talking about Jesus redeeming us by his blood sacrifice on the tree as an atonement to God for our sins. The curse of the law was its demands that no one could keep. Obedience to the law must be absolute in all details and must be continuous. Through His death, Jesus did for us what we could not do ourselves. His work, not ours, removed the curse upon us because of our disobedience to the law. He did this by hanging on the tree (Cross) and shedding His blood as our substitute. So when you take all the verses in context, there is no conflict and they all say the same thing. And NONE of them support the theory that Jesus became sin on the cross.

4. THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE THEORY:

What this theory really says is that if Jesus was made sin for us, then He became a sinner just like us on the cross. If he became a sinner like us, then how could his death pay the penalty for sin? For the sacrifice must be perfect as we discussed in other articles.

This is an old heresy that started in the second century that tried to make Jesus less than he is and tried to make his sacrifice less than it was, which was a perfect sacrifice. It was abandoned due to lack of intellectual support but the old heresy is back again today.

5. SUMMARY:,br> In summary let us read Heb 10.19: "Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus."

If you don't believe that Jesus was the perfect sacrifice that fulfilled the complete requirements to atone for our sins, then you have the start of other heresies which try to say that it had to be the blood sacrifice plus something else in order to atone for our sins.

You need to question anything you read or anyone who says it takes the blood of Jesus PLUS something else to atone for your sins or get right with God or to draw closer to God.

Actually, you need to run from anyone who supports this false teaching. this is false teaching of the worst kind. if they are teaching this, it means they are wrong on a lot of other things also.

In another article we will talk about some other related theories that also do not hold up when examined closely.

bluebar.gif