JUSTIFICATION AS DECLARED BY PAUL. 347
the same way and manner; and therefore doth he not assign any- special way whereby he is so made them all, but clouds it in an am- biguous expression, that he becomes all these things unto us in the providence of God. But ask him in particular, how Christ is made sanctification unto us, and he will tell you that it was by his doctrine and example alone, with some such general assistance of the Spirit of God as he will allow. But now, this is no way at all whereby Christ was made redemption unto us; which being a thing external, and not wrought in us, Christ can be no otherwise made redemption unto us than by the imputation unto us of what he did that we might be redeemed, or reckoning it on our account; — not that he was redeemed for us, as he childishly cavils, but that he did that whereby we are redeemed. Wherefore, Christ is made of God right- eousness unto us in such a way and manner as the nature of the thing doth require. Say some, "It is because by him we are justified." Howbeit the text says not that hj him Ave are justified, but that he is of God made righteousness unto us; which is not our justification, but the ground, cause, and reason whereon we are justified. Righteous- ness is one thing, and justification is another. Wherefore we must inquire how we come to have that righteousness whereby we are justified; and this the same apostle tells us plainly is by imputation: " Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth righteousness," Rom. iv. 6. It follows, then, that Christ being made unto us of God righteousness, can have no other sense but that his righteousness is imputed unto us, which is what this text doth undeniably confirm.
2 Cor. V. 21. The truth pleaded for is yet more emphatically ex- pressed: " 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." The paraphrase of Austin on these words gives the sense of them : '■' Ipse peccatum ut nos justitia, non nostra sed Dei, non in nobis sed in ipso; sicut ipse peccatum non suum sed nostrum, non in se, sed in nobis constitutum," Enchirid. ad Laurent., cap. iv. And the words of Chrysostom upon this place, unto the same purpose, have been cited before at large.
To set out the greatness of the grace of God in our reconciliation l)y Christ, he describes him by that paraphrasis, rov i^ri yvovra aij^apTiav^ — " who knew no sin," or " who knew not sin." He knew sin in the notion or understanding of its nature, and he knew it experiment- ally in the effects which he undenvent and suffered ; but he knew it not, — that is, was most remote from it, — as to its commission or guilt. So that " he knew no sin," is absolutely no more but " he did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth," as it is expressed, 1 Pet. ii. 22; or that he was "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate
848 ON JUSTIFICATION.
from sinners/' Heb. vii. 26. Howbeit, tbere is an emphasis in the expression, which is not to be neglected : for as it is observed by Chrysostom, as containing an anxesis (ov'^i rhv /j^rt u/Maprdvovra /xovov X'ijii aXka rov /x^Ss yvovra afMupriav), and by sundry learned persons after hira ; so those who desire to learn the excellency of the grace of God herein, will have an impression of a sense of it on their minds from this emphatical expression, which the Holy Ghost chose to make use of unto that end ; and the observation of it is not to be despised.
" He hath made him to be sin;" "That is," say many expositors, " a sacrifice for sin." " Quemadmodum oblatus est pro peccatis, nou immerito peccatum factus dicitur, quia et bestia in lege quae pro pec- catis offerebatur, peccatum nuncupatur," Ambros. in locum. So the sin and trespass-offering are often expressed by nxtsn and ^^'^, — " the sin " and " trespass," or " guilt." And I shall not contend about this exposition, because that signified in it is according unto the truth. But there is another more proper signification of the word: aiMapria being put for a[iaprcnX6i, — "sin," for a "sinner," (that is, passively, not actively ; not by inhesion, but imputation) ; for this the phrase of speech and force of the antithesis seem to require. Speaking of another sense, Estius^ himself on the place adds, as that which he approves : " Hie intellectus explicandus est per commentarium Grsecorum Chrysostomi et ceeterorum; quia pec- catum emphaticwj interpretantur magnum peccatorem ; ac si dicat apostolus, nostri causa tractavit eum tanquam ipsum peccatum, ipsum scelus, id est, tanquam hominem insigniter sceleratum, ut in quo posuerit iniquitates omnium nostrum." And if this be the interpre- tation of the Greek scholiasts, as indeed it is, Luther was not the first who affirmed that Christ was made the greatest sinner, — namely, by imputation. But we shall allow the former exposition, provided that the true notion of a sin-offering, or expiatory sacrifice, be ad- mitted : for although this neither was nor could consist in the trans- fusion of the inherent sin of the person into the sacrifice, yet did it so in the translation of the guilt of the sinner unto it; as is fully declared. Lev. xvi. 20, 2L Only I must sa}^, that I grant this signi- fication of the word to avoid contention ; for whereas some say that aijjapria signifies sin, and a sacrifice for sin, it cannot be allowed. ^^PC in Kal, signifies " to err, to sin, to transgress the law of God." In Piel it hath a contrary signification, — namely, " to cleanse from sin," or " to make expiation of sin." Hence ^it^^n ig most frequently used with respect unto its derivation from the first conjugation, and signifies "sin," "transgression," and "guilt;" but sometimes with respect unto the second, and then it signifies " a sacrifice for sin, to