Did Jesus Die Spiritually?

Ali emails the following question:

Did Jesus die spiritually and physically when He was on the Cross and went to hell for 3 days and on the 3rd day God rose Jesus up?

Let's take the noncontroversial parts first: Yes, Jesus died physically. Yes, Jesus rose from the dead on the 3rd day.

I'm assuming that Ali is really focusing on the, Did Jesus die spiritually?, and the Did Jesus go to hell?, parts of the question, because these issues have been a source of controversy for Word of Faith ministries like ours. Some people have, I believe unfairly and without any biblical basis, suggested that saying that Jesus died spiritually or that Jesus went to hell is a heresy.

So did Jesus die spiritually?

To start off I should say that I don't really have a dog in this fight. While I do think that the people who teach this are correct, i.e. what they teach is what the Bible teaches and is a position which has been held historically and by some very important christian thinkers, including Luther, Calvin and Spurgeon. Nevertheless, it's not a very big issue to me because I'm not sure what the point is other than to emphasize the tremendous price that Jesus paid for our redemption. I'm not saying there isn't a point just that I don't know what it is.

Anyway.

Did Jesus die spiritually? Well something pretty bad happened to him! Maybe we shouldn't use the phrase "die spiritually" since it doesn't appear in the Bible, but nevertheless something truly horrendous happened to Jesus. Something apparently much worse than his physical death on the cross. Why?

First, he prayed that this cup pass from him, Luke 22:40-45, or as the book of Hebrews puts it:

Hebrews 5:7 “7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;”

Jesus knew he was going to his death. He had told his disciples as much Matt. 26:2. Jesus knew that he was going to rise from the dead after three days Matt. 17:23, John 2:19, Matt 12:40. Jesus knew the the purpose of his dieing was to redeem man, Matt. 20:28. In this context he cries and is afraid and asks that "this cup" pass from him but nevertheless commits himself to the father's will. It seems to me there are only two rational conclusions you can draw from this episode.

1. Jesus was less courageous that others have been in less significant circumstances.
We've all heard stories of men who jumped on grenades to save their friends. In fact here's that kind of story from Iraq. And we've all heard the reports of suicide bombers who purposely kill themselves in hopes of defeating their enemies. Was Jesus not as brave as these men? Shoot, if I knew that my crucifixion would result in the redemption of mankind and that after three days I would rise from the dead I'd say, "Here I am lord. Take me." The apostle Paul goes even one better when he says at Romans 9:3 that he wished he could be accursed, i.e. spiritually dead, if it would result in the salvation of his fellow Jews. No, Jesus the not too brave doesn't sound like Jesus to me.

Or…

2. Something worse than just dieing physically on the cross was happening to Jesus and that is the cup he is asking his father to take away.

Second, Jesus said that God had forsaken him. Matt. 27:46 … My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me?

Third, the Apostle Paul says that Jesus became sin for us.

2 Corinthians 5:21 “21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.”

If Jesus was made sin, isn't that the equivalent of saying he died spiritually? Some people apparently like to argue that the word "sin" here should be "offering for sin."  Well, the original Greek word just means sin, see here, not offering for sin. But, as Joe McIntyre pointed out here, if you're going to translate sin as "offering for sin" then you should at least be consistent and do it both times that sin is used in that scripture, i.e. it would read like this:

2 Corinthians 5:21 “21 For he hath made him to be (an offering for) sin for us, who knew no (offering for) sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.”

Well, for those of us who need language to make sense that doesn't make any. No! Jesus was made sin for us.

Fourth, the Apostle Peter in his speech in chapter 2 of Acts says that Jesus went to hell after he died.

Acts 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

Not to belabor the obvious but, if his soul was not left in hell then it must have been in hell. Some people like to argue that this word "hell" doesn't mean the "damnation" part hell it means the "good" part of hell. If that were so then there would be little significance in Peter quoting this verse. So God didn't leave Jesus soul in the nice part of hell, and your point is what, exactly Peter? But it is true that there are different words translated "hell" in the New Testament so what did the word "hell" Peter used mean? Did it mean the "hell" part of hell or the "nice" part of hell? The word translated "hell" here is "hades." It is the same word used by Luke in his Gospel here:

Luke 10:15 “15 And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell (hades).”

and here:

Luke 12:5 “5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell (hades); yea, I say unto you, Fear him.”

and here:

Luke 16:23 “23 And in hell (hades) he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”

Who wrote the Book of Acts which quotes Peter as using the word "hades?" Luke! The same Luke who wrote the Gospel of Luke. The way Luke uses the word, "Hades," doesn't exactly sound like the luxury resort side of hell to me. In fact, Luke never uses the word, "Hades" to refer to a place other than the hellish, Hades. Isn't it therefore logical to conclude that when Luke uses the word Hades in Acts that he means the hellish part of hell there too.

In sum,

- Jesus was afraid of what was going to happen to him,
- He said God had forsaken him,
- Paul said he became sin for us and
- Peter said his soul was in hell.

Maybe that doesn't mean he died spiritually but it does sound like something a lot worse than a physical death on the cross. What you should take away is the tremendous price that the Father God and Jesus paid to redeem you. It was no small thing. It was something which literally rocked the universe to its very foundations. That is the price they paid for you. What do you think they bought with it?

Ephesians 1:16-20 “16 Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers; 17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,”

Anyway, that's my best shot at it. Look here, and here, and here, and here for more discussion of this issue.

Comments

[John T Kuiper]

Your only problem in trying to make all the pieces of the puzzle fit...is Father into thy hands Do I commend my Spirit...(Whos Hands) not Satans. Luke 16 Rich man and lazarus...and there is a gulf between them that no one may cross over from one side to the other...if Jesus went into Gehenna (The part of Hades set aside for torment and punishment and where Satan will be bound (Revelations.)Now if NO ONE may cross over...why then would God allow his Son Jesus to go into Gehenna...if that where true...Gods word would be a lie...no one may cross over means just that...once in Gehenna no one ever will escape it. Your other problem is to the theif on the cross...today you will be with me in Paradise...not...wait three days and when I get out of Gehenna I'll see you in paradise. Your creating a Jesus that would be in denial of the Trinity. Your problem stems from a lack of understanding of the original Hebrew and Greek. The term Sheol(Hebrew) and the term Hades (Greek) are the same. Every Jew walking in the days of the O.T. to Jesus day knew the term to mean...the place of departed spirits...Jesus said and to those who have done good will be with him and to those who have done evil will be eternally seperated from Him...forever in torment. Now if you but the puzzle together...When a Christian dies...they go immediately to the Father...to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord...Pauls words. So when Jesus died....he went into Hades(Hell) and went into paradise(Thief on the cross by the words of Jesus Himself) and by the words of Jesus about the certain Rich man and Lazarus...and there was a gulf...and no one could cross over. Lk 16. So when Jesus said..it is finished..it was finished...he went into hades and went into the area know as Paradise and preached to the captives(The OT saints...for they had only been washed in lambs and bulls blood upto that point)and released the captives(Many who where seen by the people(Matt 28. Satan is not even in Gehenna yet...it is the place designed by God for him and his imps. Jesus never went into Gehenna but into paradise. Keep reading the Epistles and you will find repeatedly that Paul stating that Jesus took all our sins upon HIS FLESH...a substitute who went in our place. Acts 2 states that neither his flesh..nor his soul did see corruption...now the soul and spirit of a Man are connected at Death....if his soul did not see corruption than neither could His Spirit. His Fleshly body was transfigured before the 4th day...after 3 days a body decomposess rapidly...note Lazarus was risen after 4 days and his body stinketh. Now the Soul and Spirit are alive after Physical death because we KNOW that the Rich Man (Lk16) Recognized Lazarus,Abraham and pain(I am in torment). I fear for your soul sir...heresy is very damnable thing. Please study your Hebrew and Greek and a little common sense and I pray the scriptures will be made alive unto you! The pieces of the puzzle are easy when applying a little reasoning....God did not send his Son into the World to condemn it..but to save it...and God can not Condemn Himself by placing Himself in an Unholy Place reserved for Satan and his angels of light. God cannot lie...nor can he Contradict himself...be very careful...an angel of Light can be very deceptive! Apply just a mustard seed of common sense into what the Jesus Died Spiritually doctrine teaches...be prayerfully discerning and I hope you will see the PURE LIGHT that came into the world and the World comprehended it not because it loved darkness rather than light.

[Greg Marquez]

Just a quick response. John’s comment is very hard to understand but I will try and respond to what I believe are his points.
- Jesus commends his spirit into the father’s hand.
John seems to be assuming that this means that Jesus' spirit went to the father after his death. This would, of course, be inconsistent with what he asserts below about Jesus being in the good compartment of hell. In any event, all Jesus is doing here is entrusting his spirit to the father’s care. The New Living Translation translates this scripture “Father, I entrust my spirit into your hands.” In spanish there is a common expression, “ I commit you to God.” That expression does not mean that the person is expecting you to be carried away to God, or that he's expecting God to take you up to heaven. It only means that he is entrusting God with your care and protection. Jesus is in effect saying, “ Okay, God I’m about to die and I’m trusting in you to take care of me and to keep your promises to me.”

- No one may cross over.
The Bible also says that there is none righteous no not one. Does that mean that Jesus is not righteous? The Bible also says that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Does that mean that Jesus sinned? Obviously, Jesus is an exceptional person. I would argue that Jesus was an exception to "no one may cross over" in the same way that he is an exception to the "none is righteous."

- This day thou shalt be with me in paradise.
The scripture John refers to is, Luke 23:43 "And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." The original manuscripts do not contain punctuation it has been added by the translators. If we move the comma this scripture could also read, “Verily I say unto thee to day, thou shalt be with me in paradise.” In one Jesus is saying you’ll be in paradise with me today, in the other he is just emphasizing the reliability of his statement. Apparently the expression, “I say unto you today” was a common form of speech in Hebrew. Paul uses it in Acts 20:26. Here’s a nice discussion of this point by a Wycliffe Bible translator. http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2002-October/022829.html

[David]

2Co 5:21 -
For he hath made him to be sin for us - Τον μη γνοντα ἁμαρτιαν, ὑπερ ἡμων ἁμαρτιαν εποιησεν· He made him who knew no sin, (who was innocent), a sin-offering for us. The word ἁμαρτια occurs here twice: in the first place it means sin, i.e. transgression and guilt; and of Christ it is said, He knew no sin, i.e. was innocent; for not to know sin is the same as to be conscious of innocence; so, nil conscire sibi, to be conscious of nothing against one’s self, is the same as nulla pallescere culpa, to be unimpeachable.
In the second place, it signifies a sin-offering, or sacrifice for sin, and answers to the חטאה chattaah and חטאת chattath of the Hebrew text; which signifies both sin and sin-offering in a great variety of places in the Pentateuch. The Septuagint translate the Hebrew word by ἁμαρτια in ninety-four places in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, where a sin-offering is meant; and where our version translates the word not sin, but an offering for sin. Had our translators attended to their own method of translating the word in other places where it means the same as here, they would not have given this false view of a passage which has been made the foundation of a most blasphemous doctrine; viz. that our sins were imputed to Christ, and that he was a proper object of the indignation of Divine justice, because he was blackened with imputed sin; and some have proceeded so far in this blasphemous career as to say, that Christ may be considered as the greatest of sinners, because all the sins of mankind, or of the elect, as they say, were imputed to him, and reckoned as his own. One of these writers translates the passage thus: Deus Christum pro maximo peccatore habuit, ut nos essemus maxime justi, God accounted Christ the greatest of sinners, that we might be supremely righteous. Thus they have confounded sin with the punishment due to sin. Christ suffered in our stead; died for us; bore our sins, (the punishment due to them), in his own body upon the tree, for the Lord laid upon him the iniquities of us all; that is, the punishment due to them; explained by making his soul - his life, an offering for sin; and healing us by his stripes.
But that it may be plainly seen that sin-offering, not sin, is the meaning of the word in this verse, I shall set down the places from the Septuagint where the word occurs; and where it answers to the Hebrew words already quoted; and where our translators have rendered correctly what they render here incorrectly. In Exodus, Exo_29:14, Exo_29:36 : Leviticus, Lev_4:3, Lev_4:8, Lev_4:20, Lev_4:21, Lev_4:24, Lev_4:25, Lev_4:29, Lev_4:32-34; Lev_5:6, Lev_5:7, Lev_5:8, Lev_5:9, Lev_5:11, Lev_5:12; Lev_6:17, Lev_6:25, Lev_6:30; Lev_7:7, Lev_7:37; Lev_8:2, Lev_8:14; Lev_9:2, Lev_9:3, Lev_9:7, Lev_9:8, Lev_9:10, Lev_9:15, Lev_9:22; Lev_10:16, Lev_10:17, Lev_10:19; Lev_12:6, Lev_12:8; Lev_14:13, Lev_14:19, Lev_14:22, Lev_14:31; Lev_15:15, Lev_15:30; Lev_16:3, Lev_16:5, Lev_16:6, Lev_16:9, Lev_16:11, Lev_16:15, Lev_16:25, Lev_16:27; Lev_23:19 : Numbers, Num_6:11, Num_6:14, Num_6:16; Num_7:16, Num_7:22, Num_7:28, Num_7:34, Num_7:40, Num_7:46, Num_7:52, Num_7:58, Num_7:70, Num_7:76, Num_7:82, Num_7:87; Num_8:8, Num_8:12; Num_15:24, Num_15:25, Num_15:27; Num_18:9; Num_28:15, Num_28:22; Num_29:5, Num_29:11, Num_29:16, Num_29:22, Num_29:25, Num_29:28, Num_29:31, Num_29:34, Num_29:38.
Besides the above places, it occurs in the same signification, and is properly translated in our version, in the following places: -
2 Chronicles, 2Ch_29:21, 2Ch_29:23, 2Ch_29:24 : Ezra, Ezr_6:17; Ezr_8:35 : Nehemiah, Neh_10:33 : Job, Job_1:5 : Ezekiel, Eze_43:19, Eze_43:22, Eze_43:25; Eze_44:27, Eze_44:29; Eze_45:17, Eze_45:19, Eze_45:22, Eze_45:23, Eze_45:25. In all, one hundred and eight places, which, in the course of my own reading in the Septuagint, I have marked.
That we might be made the righteousness of God in him - The righteousness of God signifies here the salvation of God, as comprehending justification through the blood of Christ, and sanctification through his Spirit or, as the mountains of God, the hail of God, the wind of God, mean exceeding high mountains, extraordinary hail, and most tempestuous wind; so, here, the righteousness of God may mean a thorough righteousness, complete justification, complete sanctification; such as none but God can give, such as the sinful nature and guilty conscience of man require, and such as is worthy of God to impart. And all this righteousness, justification, and holiness, we receive in, by, for, and through Him, as the grand, sacrificial, procuring, and meritorious cause of these, and every other blessing. Some render the passage: We are justified through him; before God; or, We are justified, according to God’s plan of justification, through him.

In many respects, this is a most important and instructive chapter.
1. The terms house, building, tabernacle, and others connected with them, have already been explained from the Jewish writings. But it has been thought by some that the apostle mentions these as readily offering themselves to him from his own avocation, that of a tentmaker; and it is supposed that he borrows these terms from his own trade in order to illustrate his doctrine; This supposition would be natural enough if we had not full evidence that these terms were used in the Jewish theology precisely in the sense in which the apostle uses them here. Therefore, it is more likely that he borrowed them from that theology, than from his own trade.
2. In the terms tabernacle, building of God, etc., he may refer also to the tabernacle in the wilderness, which was a building of God, and a house of God, and as God dwelt in that building, so he will dwell in the souls of those who believe in, love, and obey him. And this will be his transitory temple till mortality is swallowed up of life, and we have a glorified body and soul to be his eternal residence.
3. The doctrines of the resurrection of the same body; the witness of the Spirit; the immateriality of the soul; the fall and miserable condition of all mankind; the death of Jesus, as an atonement for the sins of the whole world; the necessity of obedience to the Divine will, and of the total change of the human heart, are all introduced here: and although only a few words are spoken on each, yet these are so plain and so forcible as to set those important doctrines in the most clear and striking point of view.
4. The chapter concludes with such a view of the mercy and goodness of God in the ministry of reconciliation, as is no where else to be found. He has here set forth the Divine mercy in all its heightenings; and who can take this view of it without having his heart melted down with love and gratitude to God, who has called him to such a state of salvation.
5. It is exceedingly remarkable that, through the whole of this chapter, the apostle speaks of himself in the first person plural; and though he may intend other apostles, and the Christians in general, yet it is very evident that he uses this form when only himself can be meant, as in 2Co_5:12 and 2Co_5:13, as well as in several places of the following chapter. This may be esteemed rather more curious than important.

[David]

2Co 5:21 - For he hath made him to be sin for us,.... Christ was made of a woman, took flesh of a sinful woman; though the flesh he took of her was not sinful, being sanctified by the Spirit of God, the former of Christ's human nature: however, he appeared "in the likeness of sinful flesh"; being attended with infirmities, the effects of sin, though sinless; and he was traduced by men as a sinner, and treated as such. Moreover, he was made a sacrifice for sin, in order to make expiation and atonement for it; so the Hebrew word חטאה signifies both sin and a sin offering; see Psa_40:6 and so αμαρτια, Rom_8:3. But besides all this, he was made sin itself by imputation; the sins of all his people were transferred unto him, laid upon him, and placed to his account; he sustained their persons, and bore their sins; and having them upon him, and being chargeable with, and answerable for them, he was treated by the justice of God as if he had been not only a sinner, but a mass of sin; for to be made sin, is a stronger expression than to be made a sinner: but now that this may appear to be only by imputation, and that none may conclude from hence that he was really and actually a sinner, or in himself so, it is said he was "made sin"; he did not become sin, or a sinner, through any sinful act of his own, but through his Father's act of imputation, to which he agreed; for it was "he" that made him sin: it is not said that men made him sin; not but that they traduced him as a sinner, pretended they knew he was one, and arraigned him at Pilate's bar as such; nor is he said to make himself so, though he readily engaged to be the surety of his people, and voluntarily took upon him their sins, and gave himself an offering for them; but he, his Father, is said to make him sin; it was he that "laid", or "made to meet" on him, the iniquity of us all; it was he that made his soul an offering for sin, and delivered him up into the hands of justice, and to death, and that "for us", in "our" room and stead, to bear the punishment of sin, and make satisfaction and atonement for it; of which he was capable, and for which he was greatly qualified: for he

knew no sin; which cannot be understood or pure absolute ignorance of sin; for this cannot agree with him, neither as God, nor as Mediator; he full well knew the nature of sin, as it is a transgression of God's law; he knows the origin of sin, the corrupt heart of man, and the desperate wickedness of that; he knows the demerit, and the sad consequences of it; he knows, and he takes notice of too, the sins of his own people; and he knows the sins of all wicked men, and will bring them all into judgment, convince of them, and condemn for them: but he knew no sin so as to approve of it, and like it; he hates, abhors, and detests it; he never was conscious of any sin to himself; he never knew anything of this kind by, and in himself; nor did he ever commit any, nor was any ever found in him, by men or devils, though diligently sought for. This is mentioned, partly that we may better understand in what sense he was made sin, or a sinner, which could be only by the imputation of the sins of others, since he had no sin of his own; and partly to show that he was a very fit person to bear and take away the sins of men, to become a sacrifice for them, seeing he was the Lamb of God, without spot and blemish, typified in this, as in other respects, by the sacrifices of the legal dispensation; also to make it appear that he died, and was cut off in a judicial way, not for himself, his own sins, but for the transgressions of his people; and to express the strictness of divine justice in not sparing the Son of God himself, though holy and harmless, when he had the sins of others upon him, and had made himself responsible for them. The end of his being made sin, though he himself had none, was,

that we might be made the righteousness of God in him; not the essential righteousness of God, which can neither be imparted nor imputed; nor any righteousness of God wrought in us; for it is a righteousness "in him", in Christ, and not in ourselves, and therefore must mean the righteousness of Christ; so called, because it is wrought by Christ, who is God over all, the true God, and eternal life; and because it is approved of by God the Father, accepted of by him, for, and on the behalf of his elect, as a justifying one; it is what he bestows on them, and imputes unto them for their justification; it is a righteousness, and it is the only one which justifies in the sight of God. Now to be made the righteousness of God, is to be made righteous in the sight of God, by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. Just as Christ is made sin, or a sinner, by the imputation of the sins of others to him; so they are made righteousness, or righteous persons, through the imputation of his righteousness to them; and in no other way can the one be made sin, or the other righteousness. And this is said to be "in him", in Christ; which shows, that though Christ's righteousness is unto all, and upon all them that believe, it is imputed to them, and put upon them; it is not anything wrought in them; it is not inherent in them. "Surely in the Lord have I righteousness and strength", says the church, Isa_45:24 and also, that the way in which we come by this righteousness is by being in Christ; none have it reckoned to them, but who are in him, we are first "of" God "in" Christ, and then he is made unto us righteousness. Secret being in Christ, or union to him from everlasting, is the ground and foundation of our justification, by his righteousness, as open being in Christ at conversion is the evidence of it.

[David]

2Co 5:21 - For--omitted in the oldest manuscripts. The grand reason why they should be reconciled to God, namely, the great atonement in Christ provided by God, is stated without the "for" as being part of the message of reconciliation (2Co_5:19).

he--God.

sin--not a sin offering, which would destroy the antithesis to "righteousness," and would make "sin" be used in different senses in the same sentence: not a sinful person, which would be untrue, and would require in the antithesis "righteous men," not "righteousness"; but "sin," that is, the representative Sin-bearer (vicariously) of the aggregate sin of all men past, present, and future. The sin of the world is one, therefore the singular, not the plural, is used; though its manifestations are manifold (Joh_1:29). "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the SIN of the world." Compare "made a curse for us," Gal_3:13.

for us--Greek, "in our behalf." Compare Joh_3:14, Christ being represented by the brazen serpent, the form, but not the substance, of the old serpent. At His death on the cross the sin-bearing for us was consummated.

knew no sin--by personal experience (Joh_8:46) [ALFORD]. Heb_7:26; 1Pe_2:22; 1Jo_3:5.

might be made--not the same Greek as the previous "made." Rather, "might become."

the righteousness of God--Not merely righteous, but righteousness itself; not merely righteousness, but the righteousness of God, because Christ is God, and what He is we are (1Jo_4:17), and He is "made of God unto us righteousness." As our sin is made over to Him, so His righteousness to us (in His having fulfilled all the righteousness of the law for us all, as our representative, Jer_23:6; 1Co_1:30). The innocent was punished voluntarily as if guilty, that the guilty might be gratuitously rewarded as if innocent (1Pe_2:24). "Such are we in the sight of God the Father, as is the very Son of God himself" [HOOKER].

in him--by virtue of our standing in Him, and in union with Him [ALFORD].

[David]

(2Co_5:21), namely, (1.) The purity of the Mediator: He knew no sin. (2.) The sacrifice he offered: He was made sin; not a sinner, but sin, that is, a sin-offering, a sacrifice for sin. (3.) The end and design of all this: that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, might be justified freely by the grace of God through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. Note, [1.] As Christ, who knew no sin of his own, was made sin for us, so we, who have no righteousness of our own, are made the righteousness of God in him. [2.] Our reconciliation to God is only through Jesus Christ, and for the sake of his merit: on him therefore we must rely, and make mention of his righteousness and his only.

[David]

2Co 5:21 -
For he hath made him to be sin for us - The Greek here is, ‘for him who knew no sin, he hath made sin, or a sin-offering for us.’ The design of this very important verse is, to urge the strongest possible reason for being reconciled to God. This is implied in the word (γὰρ gar) “for.” Paul might have urged other arguments, and presented other strong considerations. But he chooses to present this fact, that Christ has been made sin for us, as embodying and concentrating all. It is the most affecting of all arguments; it is the one that is likely to prove most effectual. It is not indeed improper to urge on people every other consideration to induce them to be reconciled to God. It is not improper to appeal to them by the conviction of duty; to appeal to their reason and conscience; to remind them of the claims, the power, the goodness, and the fear of the Creator; to remind them of the awful consequences of a continued hostility to God; to persuade them by the hope of heaven, and by the fear of hell 2Co_5:1 l to become his friends: but, after all, the strongest argument, and that which is most adapted to melt the soul, is the fact that the Son of God has become incarnate for our sins, and has suffered and died in our stead. When all other appeals fail this is effectual; and this is in fact the strong argument by which the mass of those who become Christians are induced to abandon their opposition and to become reconciled to God.
To be sin - The words ‘to be’ are not in the original. Literally, it is, ‘he has made him sin, or a sin-offering’ ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν hamartian epoiēsen . But what is meant by this? What is the exact idea which the apostle intended to convey? I answer, it cannot be:
(1) That he was literally sin in the abstract, or sin as such. No one can pretend this. The expression must be, therefore, in some sense, figurative. Nor,
(2) Can it mean that he was a sinner, for it is said in immediate connection that he “knew no sin,” and it is everywhere said that he was holy, harmless, undefiled. Nor,
(3) Can it mean that he was, in any proper sense of the word, guilty, for no one is truly guilty who is not personally a transgressor of the Law; and if he was, in any proper sense, guilty, then he deserved to die, and his death could have no more merit than that of any other guilty being; and if he was properly guilty it would make no difference in this respect whether it was by his own fault or by imputation: a guilty being deserves to be punished; and where there is desert of punishment there can be no merit in sufferings.
But all such views as go to make the Holy Redeemer a sinner, or guilty, or deserving of the sufferings which he endured, border on blasphemy, and are abhorrent to the whole strain of the Scriptures. In no form, in no sense possible, is it to be maintained that the Lord Jesus was sinful or guilty. It is a corner stone of the whole system of religion, that in all conceivable senses of the expression he was holy, and pure, and the object of the divine approbation. And every view which fairly leads to the statement that he was in any sense guilty, or which implies that he deserved to die, is “prima facie” a false view, and should be at once abandoned. But,
(4) If the declaration that he was made “sin” (ἁμαρτίαν hamartian) does not mean that he was sin itself, or a sinner, or guilty, then it must mean that he was a sin-offering - an offering or a sacrifice for sin; and this is the interpretation which is now generally adopted by expositors; or it must be taken as an abstract for the concrete, and mean that God treated him as if he were a sinner. The former interpretation, that it means that God made him a sin-offering, is adopted by Whitby, Doddridge, Macknight, Rosenmuller, and others; the latter, that it means that God treated him as a sinner, is adopted by Vorstius, Schoettgen, Robinson (Lexicon), Dr. Bull, and others. There are many passages in the Old Testament where the word “sin” (ἁμαρτία hamartia) is used in the sense of sin-offering, or a sacrifice for sin. Thus, Hos_4:8, “They eat up the sin of my people;” that is, the sin-offerings; see Eze_43:22, Eze_43:25; Eze_44:29; Eze_45:22-23, Eze_45:25.
See Whitby’s note on this verse. But whichever meaning is adopted, whether it means that he was a sacrifice for sin, or that God treated him as if he were a sinner, that is, subjected him to sufferings which, if he had been personally a sinner, would have been a proper expression of his hatred of transgression, ands proper punishment for sin, in either case it means that he made an atonement; that he died for sin; that his death was not merely that of a martyr; but that it was designed by substituted sufferings to make reconciliation between man and God. Locke renders this: probably expressing the true sense, “For God hath made him subject to suffering and death, the punishment and consequence of sin, as if he had been a sinner, though he were guilty of no sin.” To me, it seems probable that the sense is, that God treated him as if he had been a sinner; that he subjected him to such pains and woes as would have been a proper punishment if he had been guilty; that while he was, in fact, in all senses perfectly innocent, and while God knew this, yet that in consequence of the voluntary assumption of the place of man which the Lord Jesus took, it pleased the Father to lay on him the deep sorrows which would be the proper expression of his sense of the evil of sin; that he endured so much suffering, as would answer the same great ends in maintaining the truth, and honor, and justice of God, as if the guilty had themselves endured the penalty of the Law. This, I suppose, is what is usually meant when it is said “our sins were imputed to him;” and though this language is not used in the Bible, and though it is liable to great misapprehension and perversion, yet if this is its meaning, there can be no objection to it.
(Certainly Christ’s being made sin, is not to be explained of his being made sin in the abstract, nor of his having actually become a sinner; yet it does imply, that sin was charged on Christ, or that it was imputed to him, and that he became answerable for it. Nor can this idea be excluded, even if we admit that “sin-offering” is the proper rendering of ἁμαρτία hamartia in the passage. “That Christ,” says an old divine commenting on this place, “was made sin for us, because he was a sacrifice for sin, we confess; but therefore was he a sacrifice for sin because our sins were imputed to him, and punished in him.” The doctrine of imputation of sin to Christ is here, by plain enough inference at least. The rendering in our Bibles, however, asserts it in a more direct form. Nor, after all the criticism that has been expended on the text, does there seem any necessity for the abandonment of that rendering, on the part of the advocate of imputation. For first ἁμαρτία hamartia in the Septuagint, and the corresponding אשׁם 'aashaam in the Hebrew, denote both the sin and the sin-offering, the peculiar sacrifice and the crime itself. Second, the antithesis in the passage, so obvious and beautiful, is destroyed by the adoption of “sin-offering.” Christ was made sin, we righteousness.
There seems in our author’s comment on this place, and also at Rom. 5, an attempt to revive the oft-refuted objection against imputation, namely, that it involves something like a transference of moral character, an infusion, rather than an imputation of sin or righteousness. Nothing of this kind is at all implied in the doctrine. Its advocates with one voice disclaim it; and the reader will see the objection answered at length in the supplementary notes at Rom. 4 and Rom. 5. What then is the value of such arguments or insinuations as these: “All such views as go to make the Holy Redeemer a sinner, or guilty, or deserving of the sufferings he endured, border on blasphemy,” etc. Nor is it wiser to affirm that “if Christ was properly guilty, it would make no difference in this respect, whether it was by his own fault or by imputation.” What may be meant in this connection by “properly guilty,” we know not. But this is certain, that there is an immense difference between Christ’s having the guilt of our iniquities charged on him, and having the guilt of his own so charged.
It is admitted in the commentary, that God “treated Christ as if he had been a sinner,” and this is alleged as the probable sense of the passage. But this treatment of Christ on the part of God, must have some ground, and where shall we find it, unless in the imputation of sin to him? If the guilt of our iniquities, or which is the same thing, the Law obligation to punishment, be not charged on Christ, how in justice can he be subjected to the punishment? If he had not voluntarily come under such obligation, what claim did law have on him? That the very words “sin imputed to Christ” are not found in scripture, is not a very formidable objection. The words in this text are stronger and better “He was made sin,” and says Isaiah, according to the rendering of Dr. Lowth, “The Lord made to meet upon him the iniquities of us all. It was required of him, and he was made answerable.” Isa, Isa_53:6.)
Who knew no sin - He was not guilty. He was perfectly holy and pure. This idea is thus expressed by Peter 1Pe_2:22; “who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth;” and in Heb_7:26, it is said he was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.” In all respects, and in all conceivable senses, the Lord Jesus was pure and holy. If he had not been, he would not have been qualified to make an atonement. Hence, the sacred writers are everywhere at great pains to keep this idea prominent, for on this depends the whole superstructure of the plan of salvation. The phrase “knew no sin,” is an expression of great beauty and dignity. It indicates his entire and perfect purity. He was altogether unacquainted with sin; he was a stranger to transgression; he was conscious of no sin; he committed none. He had a mind and heart perfectly free from pollution, and his whole life was perfectly pure and holy in the sight of God.
That we might be made the righteousness of God - This is a Hebraism, meaning the same as divinely righteous. It means that we are made righteous in the sight of God; that is, that we are accepted as righteous, and treated as righteous by God on account of what the Lord Jesus has done. There is here an evident and beautiful contrast between what is said of Christ, and what is said of us. He was made sin; we are made righteousness; that is, he was treated as if he were a sinner, though he was perfectly holy and pure; we are treated as if we were righteous, though we are defiled and depraved. The idea is, that on account of what the Lord Jesus has endured in our behalf we are treated as if we had ourselves entirely fulfilled the Law of God, and bad never become exposed to its penalty. In the phrase “righteousness of God,” there is a reference to the fact that this is his plan of making people righteous, or of justifying them.
They who thus become righteous, or are justified, are justified on his plan, and by a scheme which he has devised. Locke renders this: “that we, in and by him, might be made righteous, by a righteousness imputed to us by God.” The idea is, that all our righteousness in the sight of God we receive in and through a Redeemer. All is to be traced to him. This verse contains a beautiful epitome of the whole plan of salvation, and the uniqueness of the Christian scheme. On the one hand, one who was perfectly innocent, by a voluntary substitution, is treated As if he were guilty; that is, is subjected to pains and sorrows which if he were guilty would be a proper punishment for sin: and on the other, they who are guilty and who deserve to be punished, are treated, through his vicarious sufferings, as if they were perfectly innocent; that is, in a manner which would be a proper expression of God’s approbation if he had not sinned. The whole plan, therefore, is one of substitution; and without substitution, there can be no salvation. Innocence voluntarily suffers for guilt, and the guilty are thus made pure and holy, and are saved. The greatness of the divine compassion and love is thus shown for the guilty; and on the ground of this it is right and proper for God to call on people to be reconciled to him. It is the strongest argument that can be used. When God has given his only Son to the bitter suffering of death on the cross in order that we may be reconciled, it is the highest possible argument which can be used why we should cease our opposition to him, and become his friends.
(See the supplementary notes on Rom_1:17; note at Rom_3:21. See also the additional note above on the first clause of the verse. The “righteousness of God,” is doubtless that righteousness which the divine Saviour worked out, in his active and passive obedience, and if ever any of the guilty race of Adam are “treated as righteous” by God, it must be solely on the ground of its imputation.)
Remarks
1. It is possible for Christians to have the assurance that they shall enter into heaven, 2Co_5:1. Paul said that he knew this; John knew this (see the note on 2Co_5:1), and there is no reason why others should not know it. If a man hates sin he may know that as well as anything else; if he loves God, why should he not know that as well as to know that he loves an earthly friend? If he desires to be holy, to enter heaven, to be eternally pure, why should we have any doubt about that? If he loves to pray, to read the Bible, to converse of heaven - if his heart is truly in these things, he may know it, as well as know anything else about his own character of feelings.
2. If a Christian may know it, he should know it. No other knowledge is so desirable as this. Nothing will produce so much comfort as this. Nothing will contribute so much to make him firm, decided, and consistent in his Christian walk as this. No other knowledge will give him so much support in temptation; so much comfort in trial; so much peace in death. And if a man is a Christian, he should give himself no rest until he obtains assurance on this subject; if he is not a Christian be cannot know that too soon, or take too early measures to flee from the wrath to come.
3. The body will soon be dissolved in death, 2Co_5:1. It is a frail crumbling, decaying dwelling, that must soon be taken down. It has none of the properties of a permanent abode. it can be held together but a little time. It is like a hut or cottage, that is shaken by every gust of wind: like a tent when the pins are loose, and the cords unstranded, or rotten, and when the wind will soon sweep it away. And since this is the fact, we may as well know it, and not attempt to conceal it from the mind. All truth may be looked at calmly, and should be, and a man who is residing in a frail and shattered dwelling, should be looking out for one that is more permanent and substantial. Death should be looked at. The fact that this tabernacle shall be taken down should be looked at; and every man should be asking with deep interest the question whether there is not a more permanent dwelling for him in a better world.
4. This life is burdened, and is full of cares, 2Co_5:2, 2Co_5:4. It is such as is suited to make us desire a better state. We groan here under sin, amidst temptation, encompassed by the cares and toils of life. We are burdened with duties, and we are oppressed by trials; and under all we are sinking to the grave. Soon, under the accumulated burdens, the body will be crushed, and sink back to the dust. Man cannot endure the burden long, and he must soon die. These accumulated trials and cares are such as are adapted to make him desire a better inheritance, and to look forward to a better world. God designs that this shall be a world of care and anxiety, in order that we may be led to seek a better portion beyond the grave.
5. The Christian has a permanent home in heaven, 2Co_5:1-2, 2Co_5:4. There is a house not made with hands; an eternal home; a world where mortality is unknown. There is his home; that is his eternal dwelling. Here he is a stranger, among strangers, in a strange world. In heaven is his home. The body here may be sick, feeble, dying; there it shall be vigorous, strong, immortal. He may have no comfortable dwelling here; he may be poor, and afflicted; there he shall have an undecaying dwelling, an unchanging home. Who in a world like this should not desire to be a Christian? What other condition of life is so desirable as that of the man who is sure that after a few more days he shall be admitted to an eternal home in heaven, where the body never dies, and where sin and sorrow are known no more?
6. The Christian should be willing to bear all the pain and sorrow which God shall appoint, 2Co_5:1-4. Why should he not? He knows not only that God is good in all this; but he knows that it is but for a moment; that he is advancing toward heaven, and that he will soon be at home. Compared with that eternal rest what trifles are all the sufferings of this mortal life!
7. We should not desire to die merely to get rid of pain, or to be absent from the body, 2Co_5:4. It is not merely in order that we may be “unclothed,” or that we may get away from a suffering body, that we should be willing to die. Many a sinner suffers so much here that he is willing to plunge into an awful eternity, as he supposes, to get rid of pain, when, alas, he plunges only into deeper and eternal woe. We should be willing to bear as much pain, and to bear it as long as God shall be pleased to appoint. We should submit to all without a complaint. We should be anxious to be relieved only when God shall judge it best for us to be away from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
8. In a mere readiness to die there is no evidence that we are prepared for heaven; compare 2Co_5:4. Many a man supposes that because he is ready to die, that, therefore, he is prepared. Many a one takes comfort because a dying friend was ready and willing to die. But in a mere willingness to die there is no evidence of a preparation for death, because 100 causes may conspire to produce this besides piety. And let us not be deceived by supposing that because we have no alarm about death, and are willing to go to another world, that therefore we are prepared. It may be either stupidity, or insensibility; it may be a mere desire to get rid of suffering; it may be because we are cherishing a hope of heaven which is altogether vain and illusive.
9. The Christian should, and may desire to depart and to be in heaven, 2Co_5:2. Heaven is his home; and it is his privilege to desire to be there. Here he is in a world of trial and of sin. There he shall be in a world of joy and of holiness. Here he dwells in a frail, suffering, decaying body. There he shall be clothed with immortality. It is his privilege, therefore, to desire, as soon as it shall be the will of God, to depart, and to enter on his eternal inheritance in heaven. He should have a strong, fixed, firm desire for that world; and should be ready at the shortest notice to go and to be forever with the Lord.
10. The hopes and joys of Christians, and all their peace and calmness in the prospect of death, are to be traced to God, 2Co_5:5. It is not that they are not naturally as timid and fearful of dying as others; it is not that they have any native courage or strength, but it is to be traced entirely to the mercy of God, and the influence of his Spirit, that they are enabled to look calmly at death, at the grave, at eternity. With the assured prospect of heaven, they have nothing to fear in dying; and if we have the “earnest of the Spirit” - the pledge that heaven is ours - we have nothing to fear in the departure from this world.
11. The Christian should be, and may be, always cheerful, 2Co_5:6. Paul said that he was always confident, or cheerful. Afflictions did not depress him; trials did not cast him down. He was not disheartened by opposition; he did not lose his courage by being reviled and persecuted. In all this he was cheerful and bold. There is nothing in religion to make us melancholy and sad. The assurance of the favor of God, and the hope of heaven, should have, and will have, just the opposite effect. A sense of the presence of God, a conviction that we are sinners, a deep impression of the truth that we are to die, and of the infinite interest of the soul at stake, will indeed make us serious and solemn, and should do so. But this is not inconsistent with cheerfulness, but is rather suited to produce it. It is favorable to a state of mind where all irritability is suppressed, and where the mind is made calm and settled; and this is favorable to cheerfulness. Besides, there is much, very much in religion to prevent sadness, and to remove gloom from the soul. The hope of heaven, and the prospect of dwelling with God and with holy beings forever, is the best means of expelling the gloom which is caused by the disappointments and cares of the world. And much as many persons suppose that religion creates gloom, it is certain that nothing in this world has done so much to lighten care, to break the force of misfortune and disappointment, to support in times of trial, and to save from despair, as the religion of the Redeemer. And it is moreover certain that there are no persons so habitually calm in their feelings, and cheerful in their tempers, as consistent and devout Christians. If there are some Christians, like David Brainerd, who are melancholy and sad, as there are undoubtedly, it should be said:
(1) That they are few in number;
(2) That their gloom is to be traced to constitutional propensity, and not to religion;
(3) That they have, even with all their gloom, joys which the world never experiences, and which can never be found in sin; and,
(4) That their gloom is not produced by religion, but by the lack of more of it.
12. It is noble to act with reference to things unseen and eternal, 2Co_5:7. It elevates the soul; lifts it above the earth; purifies the heart; and gives to man a new dignity. It prevents all the grovelling effect of acting from a view of present objects, and with reference to the things which are just around us. “Whatever withdraws us,” says Dr. Johnson, “from the power of our senses; whatever makes the past, the distant, or the future, predominate over the present, advances us in the dignity of thinking beings” - Tour to the Hebrides, p. 322, ed. Phil. 1810. Whatever directs the eye and the heart to heaven; whatever may make man feel and believe that there is a God, a Saviour, a heaven, a world of glory, elevates him with the consciousness of his immortality, and raises him above the groveling objects that wither and debase the soul. Man should act with reference to eternity. He should be conscious of immortality. He should be deeply impressed with that high honor that awaits him of standing before God. He should feel that he may partake in the glories of the resurrection; that he may inherit an eternal heaven. Feeling thus, what trifles are the things of the earth! How little should he be moved by its trials! How little should he be influenced by its wealth, its pleasures, and its honors!
13. The Christian, when he leaves the body, is at once with the Lord Jesus, 2Co_5:8. He rushes, as it were instinctively, to his presence, and casts himself at his feet. He has no other home than where the Saviour is; he thinks of no future joy or glory but that which is to be enjoyed with him. Why then should we fear death? Lay out of view, as we may, the momentary pang, the chilliness, and the darkness of the grave, and think of that which will be the moment after death - the view of the Redeemer, the sight of the splendors of the heavenly world, the angels, the spirits of the just made perfect, the river of the paradise of God, and the harps of praise, and what has man to fear in the prospect of dying?
Why should I shrink at pain or woe,
Or feel at death dismay?
I’ve Canaan’s goodly land in view,
And realms of endless day.
Apostles, martyrs, prophets there,
Around my Saviour stand;
And soon my friends in Christ below.
Will join the glorious band,
Jerusalem! my happy home!
My soul still pants for thee;
When shall my labors have an end.
In joy, and peace, and thee!
- Charles Wesley.
14. We should act feeling that we are in the immediate presence of God and so as to meet his acceptance and approbation, whether we remain on earth, or whether we are removed to eternity, 2Co_5:9. The prospect of being with him, and the consciousness that his eye is fixed upon us, should make us diligent, humble, and laborious. It should be the great purpose of our lives to secure his favor, and meet with his acceptance; and it should make no difference with us in this respect, where we are - whether on earth or in heaven; with the prospect of long life, or of an early death; in society or in solitude; at home or abroad; on the land or on the deep; in sickness or in health; in prosperity or in adversity, it should be our great aim so to live as to be “accepted of him.” And the Christian will so act. To act in this manner is the very nature of true piety; and where this desire does not exist, there can be no true religion.
15. We must appear before the judgment-seat, 2Co_5:10. We must all appear there. This is inevitable. There is not one of the human family that can escape. Old and young; rich and poor; bond and free; all classes, all conditions, all nations must stand there, and give an account for all the deeds done in the body, and receive their eternal doom. How solemn is the thought of being arraigned! How deeply affecting the idea that on the issue of that one trial will depend our eternal weal or woe! How overwhelming the reflection that from that sentence there can be no appeal; no power of reversing, it; no possibility of afterward changing our destiny!
16. We shall soon be there, 2Co_5:10. No one knows when he is to die; and death when it comes will remove us at once to the judgment-seat. A disease that may carry us off in a few hours may take us there; or death that may come in an instant shall bear us to that awful bar. How many are stricken down in a moment; how many are hurried without any warning to the solemnities of the eternal world! So we may die. No one can insure our lives; no one can guard us from the approach of the invisible king of terrors.
17. We should be ready to depart If we must stand at the awful bar; and if we may be summoned there any moment, assuredly we should lose no time in being ready to go. It is our great business in life; and it should claim our first attention, and all other things should be postponed that we may be ready to die. It should be the first inquiry every morning, and the last subject of thought every evening - for who knows when he rises in the morning but that before night he may stand at the judgment-seat! Who, when he lies down on his bed at night, knows but that in the silence of the night-watches he may be summoned to go alone - to leave his family and friends, his home and his bed, to answer for all the deeds done in the body?
18. We should endeavor to save others from eternal death, 2Co_5:11. If we have ourselves any just views of the awful terrors of the day of judgment, and if we have any just views of the wrath of God, we should endeavor “to persuade” others to flee from the wrath to come. We should plead with them; we should entreat them; we should weep over them; we should pray for them, that they may be saved from going up to meet the awful wrath of God. If our friends are unprepared to meet God; if they are living in impenitence and sin, and if we have any influence over others in any way, we should exert it all to induce them to come to Christ, and to save themselves from the awful terrors of that day. Paul deemed no self-denial and no sacrifice too great, if he might persuade them to come to God, and to save their souls. And who that has any just views of the awful terrors of the day of judgment; of the woes of an eternal hell, and of the glories of an eternal heaven; can deem that labor too great which shall be the means of saving immortal souls? Not to frighten them should we labor, not to alarm them merely should we plead with them, but we should endeavor by all means to persuade them to come to the Redeemer. We should not use tones of harshness and denunciation; we should not speak of hell as if we would rejoice to execute the sentence, but we should speak with tenderness, earnestness, and with tears (compare Act_20:31), that we may induce our friends and fellow-sinners to be reconciled to God.
19. We should not deem it strange or remarkable if we are charged with being deranged for being active and zealous in the subject of religion, 2Co_5:13. There will always be enough, both in the church and out of it, to charge us with over-heated zeal; with lack of prudence; or with decided mental alienation. But we are not to forget that Paul was accused of being “mad;” and even the Redeemer was thought to be “beside himself.” “It is sufficient for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his Lord;” and if the Redeemer was charged with derangement on account of his special views and his zeal, we should not suppose that any strange thing had happened to us if we are accused in like manner.
20. The gospel should be offered to all people, 2Co_5:14. If Christ died for all, then salvation is provided for all; and then it should be offered to all freely and fully. It should be done without any mental reservation, for God has no such mental reservation; without any hesitation or misgiving; without any statements that would break the force, or weaken the power of such an offer on the consciences of people. If they reject it, they should be left to see that they reject that which is in good faith offered to them, and that for this they must give an account to God. Every man who preaches the gospel should feel that he is not only permitted but required to preach the gospel “to every creature;” nor should he embrace any opinion whatever which will in form or in fact cramp him or restrain him in thus offering salvation to all mankind. The fact that Christ died for all, and that all may be saved, should be a fixed and standing point in all systems of theology, and should be allowed to shape every other opinion, and to shed its influence over every other view of truth.
21. All people by nature are dead in sins, 2Co_5:14. They are insensible to their own good; to the appeals of God; to the glories of heaven, and to the terrors of hell. They do not act for eternity; they are without concern in regard to their everlasting destiny. They are as insensible to all these things, until aroused by the Spirit of God, as a dead man in his grave is to surrounding objects. And there is nothing that ever did arouse such a man, or ever could, but the same power that made the world, and the same voice that raised Lazarus from his grave. This melancholy fact strikes us everywhere; and we should be deeply humbled that it is our condition by nature, and should mourn that it is the condition of our fellowmen everywhere.
22. We should form our estimate of objects and of their respective value and importance by other considerations than those which are derived from their temporal nature, 2Co_5:16. It should not be simply according to the flesh. It should not be as they estimate them who are living for this world. It should not be by their rank, their splendor, or their fashion. It should be by their reference to eternity, and their bearing on the state of things there.
23. It should be with us a very serious inquiry whether our views of Christ are such as they have who are living after the flesh, or such only as the unrenewed mind takes, 2Co_5:16. The carnal mind has no just views of the Redeemer. To every impenitent sinner he is “a root out of a day ground.” There is no beauty in him. And to every hypocrite, and every deceived professor of religion, there is really no beauty seen in him. There is no spontaneous, elevated, glowing attachment to him. It is all forced and unnatural. But to the true Christian there is a beauty seen in his character that is not seen in any other; and the whole soul loves him, and embraces him. His character is seen to be most pure and lovely; his benevolence boundless; his ability and willingness to save, infinite. The renewed soul desires no other Saviour; and rejoices that he is just what he is - rejoices in his humiliation as well as his exaltation; in his poverty as well as his glory; rejoices in the privilege of being saved by him who was spit upon, and mocked, and crucified, as well as by him who is at the right hand of God. One thing is certain, unless we have just views of Christ we can never be saved.
24. The new birth is a great and most important change, 2Co_5:17. It is not in name or in profession merely, but it is a deep and radical change of the heart. It is so great that it may be said of each one that he is a new creation of God; and in relation to each one, that old things are passed away, and all things are become new. How important it is that we examine our hearts and see whether this change has taken place, or whether we are still living without God and without hope. It is indispensable that we be born again; John 3. If we are not born again, and if we are not new creatures in Christ, we must perish for ever. No matter what our wealth talent, learning, accomplishment, reputation, or morality; unless we have been so changed that it may be said, and that we can say, “old things are passed away, and all things are become new,” we must perish forever. There is no power in the universe that can save a man who is not born again.
25. The gospel ministry is a most responsible and important work, 2Co_5:18-19. There is no other office of the same importance; there is no situation in which man can be placed more solemn than that of making known the terms on which God is willing to bestow favor on apostate man.
26. How amazing is the divine condescension, that God should have ever proposed such a plan of reconciliation, 2Co_5:20-21. That he should not only have been willing to be reconciled, but that he should have sought, and have been so anxious for it as to be willing to send his own Son to die to secure it! It was pure, rich, infinite benevolence. God was not to be benefitted by it. He was infinitely blessed and happy even though man should have been lost. He was pure, and just, and holy, and it was not necessary to resort to this in order to vindicate his own character. He had done man no wrong: and if man had perished in his sins, the throne of God would have been pure and spotless. It was love; mere love. It was pure, holy, disinterested, infinite benevolence. It was worthy of a God; and it has a claim to the deepest gratitude of man.
Let us then, in view of this whole chapter, seek to be reconciled to God. Let us lay aside all our opposition to him. Let us embrace his plans. Let us be willing to submit to him, and to become his eternal friends. Let us seek to heaven to which he would raise us; and though our earthly house of this tabernacle must be dissolved, let us be prepared, as we may be, for that eternal habitation which he has prepared for all who love him in the heavens.

[David]

After all of this I have posted, if you still believe in that Jesus Christ the Son of God, that He died spiritually; False doctrine, that borders on rank blasphemy. You are close to becoming a religeous person that has been turned over to a reprobate mind.
David a soldier of the cross!

[albert]

I agree that Jesus as a man died physically, but if he died spiritually, will that not contradict his nature as God? We know that Jesus is God from John 1 and as God he is eternal and being eternal means that he has no end or death.

[Greg Marquez]

David:
I think that yours is the proper way to approach this question.

Here's the way I understand the issue.

There is a conflict between what the Bible says and what our theology says about the matter. The Bible apparently says that Jesus became sin for us, that he went to hell for us, and this is what people call dieing spiritually. Our theology says that God cannot die and therefore to state that Jesus died spiritually is to deny that he is God.

I think the proper theological response is to say that to deny that Jesus could die spiritually is to deny his humanity, but I don't want to approach the issue that way.

Here's how I think about it: Maybe the nature of spiritual things is not limited by our reason. Maybe spiritual things operate differently than our reason leads us to imagine they do. So that Jesus could die spiritually and still be God in much the same way that Jesus could be a true man and still be God, Or in much the same way that the father, the son , and the Holy spirit are three and yet one.

Put another way I give more authority to what God has revealed in His Word than I do to what my reason says about the nature of God. Most Christians don't realize that a lot of what the church has historically taught about the nature of God has its basis in philosophical reasoning and not in the text of the Bible. And some Christians, the current Pope for example think this is a good thing. See Pope Benedict's speech here:

My point in referencing the Pope is only to say that a lot of Christian theology is based on Greek Philosophy and not on the Bible, and there are many Christians who think that is a right and proper thing. But what we end up having is theologians trying to twist scriptures to conform to what their Greek philosophical reasoning, says about the nature of God.

That's my best shot at it.

Greg