which he was made sm, is that he was regarded and treated as a sinner. His being made sin is consistent with his being in himself free from sin ; and our being made righteous is con- sistent with our being in ourselves ungodly. In other words, our sins were imputed to Christ, and his righteousness is im- puted to us. Justitia hie non pro qualitate aut habitu, says Calvin, sed pro imputatione accipitur, eo quod accepta nobis fertur Christi justitia. Quod e converso peccatum? reatus
quo in Dei judicio obstringimur Personam enim nos-
tram quodammodo suscepit, ut reus nostro nomine fieret, et tanquam peccator judicaretur, non propriis, sed aUenis deHctis, quum purus foret ipse et immunis ab omni culpa, poenamque subiret nobis, non sibi debitam. Ita scilicit nunc justi sumus in ipso : non quia operibus propriis satisfacianius judicio Dei, sed quoniam censimur Christi justitia, quam tide induimus, ut nostra fiat. In Gal. 3, 13, the apostle says that "Christ was made a curse for us," which is equivalent to saying that he was made sin for us. In both cases the idea is that he bore the punishment of our sins. God laid on him the iniquities of us all. His sufferings and death were penal, because inflict- ed and endured in satisfaction of justice. And in virtue of the infinite dignity of his person they were a perfect satisfac- tion ; that is, a full equivalent for all the law's demands. In Rom. 8, 3, it is said, " What the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." Here again we have precisely the same doctrine. What in one passage is expressed by saying that Christ was made sin, in the other is expressed by saying, he was sent " for sin," i. e. as a sin-offering (Trcpt afxapTLaq).
The apostle says Christ was made sin for us^ vrrlp rj/jiiov^ i. e. in our stead, because the idea of substitution is involved in the very nature of the transaction. The victim was the substitute for the offender. It was put in his place. So Christ was our substitute, or, was put in our place. This is the more apparent from the following clause, which teaches the design of this substitution. He w^as made sin, that we might be made righteous. He was condemned, that we might be justified. The very idea of substitution is that Avhat is done by one in the j^hice of another, avails as though that other had done it himself. The victim was the substitute of the offerer, because its death took the place of his death. K both died there was no substitution. So if Christ's being