Sacrifice of Christ – Next Step Bible Study (2025)

Romans 5:10 (continued); 8:3

An exegesis (and theological exposition) of the context/setting of Romans 5:10 was presented in the previous article; we examined the immediate context of 5:1-11, as well as the broader setting of 3:21-5:21. This will enable us, in the current article, to focus on the Christology of verse 10 in more detail. There are three components to the verse: (i) an initial phrase that ‘sets the scene’, and (ii-iii) a pair of sequential clauses that summarize the mediatoral work of God’s Son (Jesus) in relation to humankind (believers):

• • “For, if (while) being (one)s hostile (to God),
    • we were made different [kathllaghmen] (in relation) to God
      through [dia/] the death of His Son,
      • how much more, having been made different, will we be saved
        in [e)n] the life of him?”

Note the difference in tense between the verb katalla/ssw (past/aorist) and sw/zw (future): as believers, we have already been made different, but our salvation will only be fully realized in the future—i.e., an eschatological reference to the coming Judgment and the end-time Resurrection. The present aspect of our salvation (i.e., having been made different) was effected through the death of Christ, while the future aspect (final salvation and glory) is enabled by his life (i.e., resurrection). This is an important principle in Paul’s theology—namely, the participation of believers in the death and resurrection of Jesus. It is expounded and developed in chapters 6-8, and particularly in chap. 8 (cf. below, and in the next article), where both present and future aspects of the believer’s experience are held in balance.

What of the central Son-phrase in verse 10 (“through the death of His Son”)? How much can we infer, from this phrase, regarding Paul’s understanding of the Sonship of Jesus? At the very least, it would seem to imply that Jesus was God’s Son prior to his death, but his Sonship, in this regard, could still be understood entirely in a Messianic sense—as we see in Rom 1:3, and throughout the Gospel Tradition (Mk 1:11 par, etc). It is only when the reference here (and in 1:3-4) is read in light of the statements in 8:3 and (earlier) in Gal 4:4 (cf. the recent article), that we are able to infer an incarnational perspective.

Let us consider Rom 8:3 (along with v. 4):

“For, (due) to the law’s being without power, in that it was without strength through the flesh, God, (hav)ing sent His own Son in (the) likeness of flesh of sin, and about sin (itself), He brought down judgment (on) sin in the flesh, (so) that the right (thing) of the law might be fulfilled in us…”

Paul’s thought (and syntax) in these two verses is particularly dense and complex. It may help to outline vv. 3-4 in terms of its thematic structure, which is chiastic in nature:

• • The Law is without power [and thus fulfilling it cannot bring about rightness for human beings before God]
    • God sent His Son in the likeness of flesh of sin
      • and thus concerning sin
    • He brought down judgment on sin in the flesh
  • Human beings (Believers) are now able to fulfill the “right (thing)” described and intended by the Law

The motif of “flesh” (sa/rc, a familiar Pauline keyword) informs the entire statement. The Law was made powerless (“without power”, “without strength”) because of the flesh (“through the flesh”, dia\ th=$ sarko/$), which itself had been corrupted (and enslaved) by sin (cf. Paul’s extended discussion in chaps. 5-7). Human beings were thus in bondage to sin (“in the flesh”), their human nature having become a “flesh of sin” (i.e., sinful flesh). It was necessary for God Himself to free humankind from this bondage (see v. 2), which He did through the incarnation of the Son.

This extensive use of the term sa/rc (“flesh”) throughout vv. 3-4 strongly argues in favor of an incarnational Christology—viz., a belief that the Son of God took on human form (“flesh”) in the person of Jesus. That this took place through a human birth is confirmed by the parallel between v. 3 and Gal 4:4 (cf. the recent article). Both references contain the idea (and motif) of God sending His Son (presumably, from heaven to earth); here it is the general verb pe/mpw (“send”), while in Gal 4:4 (cf. also v. 6) the compound e)caposte/llw (“send out from”) was used.

Even more clearly than in Gal 4:4ff, Paul indicates in Rom 8:3-4 (in context of v. 2) the purpose of the incarnation. It is summarized by the phrase at the center of vv. 3-4: peri\ a(marti/a$ (“about sin”)—that is, because of the sin that holds humankind in bondage. Verse 2 states the matter more fully: “the law of the Spirit of life in (the) Anointed Yeshua (has) set you free from the law of sin and death”. Humankind (believers) have been set free from bondage to the power of sin (and death). Paul explains, if somewhat enigmatically (and provocatively), how this was accomplished, by the inner clauses of vv. 3-4 (cf. the outline above):

• • “(hav)ing sent His own Son in (the) likeness of flesh of sin…
    
  • He brought down judgment (on) sin in the flesh”

What Paul does not make immediately clear, at this point in the passage, is that the judgment made against sin (“in the flesh”) was done through the death of Jesus. In this regard, the earlier statement in 5:10 supplements the message. Indeed, v. 10 comes at the close of a section (vv. 6-10) that very much emphasizes the death of Jesus—an emphasis that continues (implicitly) throughout vv. 12-21, and into chapter 6. The main statement in v. 10 is conceptually parallel with that in v. 9:

• • “(hav)ing been made right [vb dikaio/w] in his blood” (v. 9)
  • “we were made different [vb katalla/ssw] (in relation) to God through the death of His Son” (v. 10)

The verbs dikaio/w (“make right”) and katalla/ssw (“make different”) are certainly parallel, with both being instances of the ‘Divine passive’ (divinum passivum) in which God is the implied actor; moreover mention of the “blood” of Jesus is another way of referring to his death, while also emphasizing the sacrificial nature and character of the death.

In 2 Corinthians 5:21, Paul seems to anticipate (and blend together) the wording of Rom 5:10 and 8:3. He utilizes the same verb (katalla/ssw) from Rom 5:10, and there is also present a Christological statement that resembles Rom 8:3. Picking up at the end of v. 20, we read:

“…(may you) be made different [katalla/ghte] (in relation) to God. The (one) not (hav)ing known sin He made (to be) sin, over us, (so) that we might come to be the right(eous)ness [dikaiosu/nh] of God in him.”

In some ways, the declaration that God made His Son to be sin is even more striking that the statement in Rom 8:3, that God sent His Son “in the likeness of flesh of sin”. The use of the noun o(moi/wma (“likeness”) could be taken to mean that the Son’s incarnate human nature only resembled the condition of all other human beings. However, elsewhere in Romans (5:14; 6:5; cf. also Phil 2:7), the noun o(moi/wma is clearly being used as a way of relating Christ to humankind, entailing a sense of real (and full) participation. The incarnate Son shared fully in the human nature that is in bondage to sin; Paul indicated much the same already in Gal 4:4 with the idea that God’s Son, in his birth as a human being, came to be “under the law” (and under the curse of the law, cf. 3:13).

And yet, the qualifying phrase in 2 Cor 5:21, identifying Christ as “not (hav)ing known sin”, would indicate that Paul also held a relatively firm (if rudimentary) belief in the sinlessness of Jesus (viz., as a human being). Jesus Christ, along with all other human beings, was in bondage to the power of sin, but without succumbing to the wicked influence of that power. Quite the opposite! Through the participation of His Son in the human condition, God took the opportunity to destroy the enslaving power which sin possessed, freeing humankind from its grip. Now human beings (believers) are able, like the incarnate Son himself, to live free from sin. Though an impulse toward sin, with which one must continually grapple, may remain in the “flesh” of the believer, it is no longer an irresistible and enslaving power.

It is fascinating to consider the way Paul makes use of these powerful soteriological statements and concepts (in vv. 11-19 and 20-21ff) for the immediate rhetorical (and pastoral) purpose of exhorting the Corinthians to be reconciled and at peace with one another (as believers). Because believers have been freed from bondage to sin, and have been transformed into a “new creation” (v. 17)—that is, an entirely different kind of humanity—they/we should be living in peace and unity with one another (i.e., living according to the Spirit, rather than merely according to the “flesh”). This applies to the relationship between the congregation and its ministers (such as Paul), but even more fundamentally to the common bond that unites all believers.

Paul never presents an entirely clear or comprehensive theological exposition of exactly how humankind was freed from the power of sin, and “made different/right” with God, through the death of Christ. The most extensive discussion is found in chapters 5-8 in Romans, which offers a fuller exposition of many of the points mentioned in 1-2 Corinthians (and also Galatians). We will examine the culmination of the Romans arguments (in chap. 8) in the next article. I would isolate at least three distinct theological tenets, held by Paul, which inform the lines of argument:

• • The manifest presence of God in the person of Jesus Christ (His Son)—that is, God was present, working in Christ (and through him) to effect the transformative salvation of humankind.
  • The Adam-Christ typology—by which both Adam (the first man of the old human condition) and Christ (the first of the new) represent all of humankind, generally and collectively.
  • Sacrificially imagery, regarding the sacrifice/offering for sin—the death of Christ fulfills the paradigms of the ancient sacrificial offerings, intended to deal with sin and impurity, etc, so as to achieve/maintain holiness before God.

There are important incarnational aspects to all three of these theological (and Christological) tenets. One can see the strands present in all of the passages we have been considering—Rom 5:1-11ff, 8:2-4ff, and 2 Cor 5:11-19ff. With regard to the latter (2 Cor 5:11-19ff), we may juxtapose several of the theological statements that run through the passage:

• • “…God, the (One hav)ing made us different (in relation) to Himself through the Anointed (One)” (v. 18)
    “God was, in (the) Anointed (One), making us different (in relation) to Himself” (v. 19)
  • “one [i.e. Christ] died away over all, (so) then the(y) all (have) died” (v. 14)
    “…if any(one is) in (the) Anointed, he (is) a new formation [i.e., creation]; the old (thing)s (have) gone along, (and) see—they have become new!” (v. 17)
  • “The (one) not (hav)ing known sin He made (to be) sin, over us..” (v. 21)

On the last point, the sacrificial aspect is not particularly emphasized by Paul in this passage. The language in Rom 8:3 is more suggestive, especially with regard to the phrase “about/concerning sin” (peri\ a(marti/a$), which regularly occurs in the LXX in relation to the sin offering (Lev 5:6-7ff; 16:3ff; Num 6:16; 7:16, etc; cf. also Isa 53:10). Even stronger is the statement in Rom 3:25, with its use of the noun i(lasth/rion in connection with the blood of Jesus. The verb katalla/ssw, used in Rom 5:10 and 2 Cor 5:18-20, does not normally occur in a ritual or sacrificial context (it is completely absent from all relevant references in the LXX); however, there are strong propitiatory implications when used in a religious setting (as here, cf. 2 Macc 1:5; 7:33; 8:28), entailing the idea of appeasing God (through prayer and repentance, etc) and thus being treated favorably by Him. Finally, the prepositional expression u(pe\r h(mw=n (“over us”) in 2 Cor 5:21 does suggest the sacrificial aspect of Jesus’ death on behalf of human beings (cf. Mark 14:24 par [esp. Lk 22:19-20]; Jn 6:51 [cf. also the use of u(pe/r in 10:11, 15; 11:50-52, etc]).

In the next article, we will examine the context of Romans 8:3 (chap. 8) in more detail, considering the incarnational aspects of the reference in connection with both the death and resurrection of Jesus. Our discussion of Paul’s incarnational theology in Romans (and esp. chapter 8) will conclude with a particular study of the Sonship theme as it reaches its climax in vv. 29-30.