We read in 2Corinthians 5:21; “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
Most believers if not all, believe the first part of the above statement without understanding how it came about; the second part of the above statement is just as mysterious. We know that faith without understanding is precious when we first began our Christian life, but in the long run it is not effective, for only he who gains understanding can mature and do the necessary works of faith without stumbling.
I believe that Jesus became flesh and consequently He was made sin, because the flesh and sin are one and the same.

simonelli said
We read in 2Corinthians 5:21; “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”Most believers if not all, believe the first part of the above statement without understanding how it came about; the second part of the above statement is just as mysterious. We know that faith without understanding is precious when we first began our Christian life, but in the long run it is not effective, for only he who gains understanding can mature and do the necessary works of faith without stumbling.
I believe that Jesus became flesh and consequently He was made sin, because the flesh and sin are one and the same.
So, Adam and Eve before the fall, walking around in the garden, haven’t sinned yet so there is no “original sin” but I’m pretty sure they have flesh blood bone nails teeth eyes and so on.
Are they sin?

“So Adam and Eve before the fall, walking around in the garden, haven’t sinned yet so there is no “original sin” but I’m pretty sure they have flesh blood bone nails teeth eyes and son on”
“Are they sin”
No, I seem to remember from my theology degree that Paul uses the term “sarx” in a range of different contexts to mean different things. He often uses it to mean human frailty and effort unaided by God resulting in sin. This carries connotations of selfishness and sinful self reliance rather than dependence on Gods help. This is best not confused with the idea that our literal flesh is inherently evil or necessarily linked with sexual acts which would be judged sinful, and I think it’s in this sense that he is referring to Adam and Eve.

“τὸν μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς γενώμεθα δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Almost all translations I’ve seen translate ‘ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν’ as ‘he made him to be sin’, or words to that effect, which I find strange. It literally means ‘(he) made/ did sin’. There is no ‘to be’ or ‘him’ in the Greek, so is it necessary to add these words in English translation? ‘ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν’ can be rendered ‘for us’, ‘on behalf of us’ or ‘for our sakes’. So I’m thinking you could translate the verse: “The one not knowing sin made sin for our sakes, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” However, I haven’t seen a single translation that provides this very different interpretation. Hence I’m wondering whether there’s a subtlety in the Greek I don’t understand.
I still think the way I’ve translated it chimes better with Paul’s theology, in that the emergence of sin was necessary for the greater potency of grace to take effect, not that it was necessary to make Christ, in some curious way, become sin for us, that we may also, curiously, become righteousness in him:
“The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 5: 20-21).

Hi Robert, nice to meet you.
Looking at it again, I notice τὸν is accusative, whereas I initially translated it as nominative. So now I’d make it: “He made the one not knowing sin a sin on our behalf, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” This now suggests to me the idea of vicarious sacrifice, or a sacrificial lamb.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)

