This suffering in and with the sins of men, which Dr. Bushnell emphasized so strongly, though it is not, as he thought, the principal element, is notwithstanding an indispensable element in the atonement of Christ. Suffering in and with the sinner is one way, though not the only way, in which Christ is enabled to bear the wrath of God which constitutes the real penalty of sin.
Exposition of 2 Cor. 5:21.—It remains for us to adduce the Scriptural proof of this natural assumption of human guilt by Christ. We find it in 2 Cor. 5:21—“Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in him.” “Righteousness” here cannot mean subjective purity, for then “made to be sin” would mean that God made Christ to be subjectively depraved. As Christ was not made unholy, the meaning cannot be that we are made holy persons in him. Meyer calls attention to this parallel between “righteousness” and “sin”:—“That we might become the righteousness of God in him” = that we might become justified persons. Correspondingly, “made to be sin on our behalf” must = made to be a condemned person. “Him who knew no sin” = Christ had no experience of sin—this was the necessary postulate of his work of atonement. “Made sin for us,” therefore, is the abstract for the concrete, and = made a sinner, in the sense that the penalty of sin fell upon him. So Meyer, for substance.
We must, however, regard this interpretation of Meyer's as coming short of the full meaning of the apostle. As justification is not simply remission of actual punishment, but is also deliverance from the obligation to suffer punishment,—in other words, as “righteousness” in the text = persons delivered from the guilt as well as from the penalty [pg 761]of sin,—so the contrasted term “sin,” in the text,—a person not only actually punished, but also under obligation to suffer punishment;—in other words, Christ is “made sin,” not only in the sense of being put under penalty, but also in the sense of being put under guilt. (Cf. Symington, Atonement, 17.)
In a note to the last edition of Meyer, this is substantially granted. “It is to be noted,” he says, “that ἁμαρτίαν, like κατάρα in Gal. 3:13, necessarily includes in itself the notion of guilt.” Meyer adds, however: “The guilt of which Christ appears as bearer was not his own (μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν); hence the guilt of men was transferred to him; consequently the justification of men is imputative.” Here the implication that the guilt which Christ bears is his simply by imputation seems to us contrary to the analogy of faith. As Adam's sin is ours only because we are actually one with Adam, and as Christ's righteousness is imputed to us only as we are actually united to Christ, so our sins are imputed to Christ only as Christ is actually one with the race. He was “made sin”by being made one with the sinners; he took our guilt by taking our nature. He who “knew no sin” came to be “sin for us” by being born of a sinful stock; by inheritance the common guilt of the race became his. Guilt was not simply imputed to Christ; it was imparted also.
This exposition may be made more clear by putting the two contrasted thoughts in parallel columns, as follows:
| Made righteousness in him = | Made sin for us = |
| righteous persons; | a sinful person; |
| justified persons; | a condemned person; |
| freed from guilt, or obligation to suffer; | put under guilt, or obligation to suffer; |
| by spiritual union with Christ. | by natural union with the race. |
For a good exposition of 2 Cor. 5:21, Gal. 3:13, and Rom. 3:25, 26, see Denney, Studies in Theology, 109-124.
The Atonement, then, on the part of God, has its ground (1) in the holiness of God, which must visit sin with condemnation, even though this condemnation brings death to his Son; and (2) in the love of God, which itself provides the sacrifice, by suffering in and with his Son for the sins of men, but through that suffering opening a way and means of salvation.
The Atonement, on the part of man, is accomplished through (1) the solidarity of the race; of which (2) Christ is the life, and so its representative and surety; (3) justly yet voluntarily bearing its guilt and shame and condemnation as his own.
Melanchthon: “Christ was made sin for us, not only in respect to punishment, but primarily by being chargeable with guilt also (culpæ et reatus)”—quoted by Thomasius, Christi Person und Werk, 3:95, 102, 103, 107; also 1:307, 314 sq. Thomasius says that “Christ bore the guilt of the race by imputation; but as in the case of the imputation of Adam's sin to us, imputation of our sins to Christ presupposes a real relationship. Christ appropriated our sin. He sank himself into our guilt.” Dorner, Glaubenslehre, 2:442 (Syst. Doct., 3:350, 351), agrees with Thomasius, that “Christ entered into our natural mortality, which for us is a penal condition, and into the state of collective guilt, so far as it is an evil, a burden to be borne; not that he had personal guilt, but rather that he entered into our guilt-laden common life, not as a stranger, but as one actually belonging to it—put under its law, according to the will of the Father and of his own love.”