I returned from my last course at CTS this last Thursday late at night, just a couple of days before these terrible attacks. This time, the course was focused on New Testament exegetical methods. The professor has presented some enjoyable material. Was only my Greek a little bit better, I would enjoy the course even more. But it wasn't. And as I was exposed to delicacies of diagrammatical analysis, I found my preparedness wanting, as also all of my classmates did. I hope I'm ever gonna catch up on killer Greek like this! (But Hebrew is first. So one step at a time.)

One particular homework that we were assigned to do was to prepare an exegetical sermon. I picked up Romans 3:21–26 for my homework, which is probably one of the hardest passages for exegesis ever. I won't share the whole sermon, just the most salient points with particular reference to the word hilastērion in Romans 3:25.

Chiastic Structure

Romans 3:21–26 has a chiastic structure, which means that first corresponds to last, second to next-to-last etc. It also has a dialogical progress. I can easily insert questions in between of sections of this argument, so that it looks like an interview with… let's say Luke.

• (21) “But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets,” Well, ok, but what kind of righteousness? Isn't righteousness bound to covenantal relationship and obedience?
  • (22a) Actually, yes, my friend. But maybe not in the way you would have it. What I'm talking about is “the righteousness of God through [the faithfulness of] Jesus Christ for all who believe.” I'm talking about God's righteou­sness, not your's!
    • (22b-23) My most important point is that “there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”! Ugh! Isn't this too strong? Are you saying that the fact of everyone's personal sin nullifies distinctions between old covenant people and the gentiles?
  • (24–25a) Exactly! But those who believe, even though they fall short on every page, “are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith.” Aha! You mean that Jesus' death is somehow vindicating God's righteou­sness?
• (25b-26) Yes! “[God] did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.” Well, I understand the vindication stuff. But how is simple faith in Jesus connecting me to it?

Translating Hilastērion

To answer Luke's uncerta­inties, an excursus into levitical terminology is needed. The answer lies in Paul's allusion to “a sacrifice of atonement.” This phrase was translated from the Greek word ἱλαστήριον (hilastērion), which is hapax legomenon (a very rare word) with an uncertain translation.

In the Septuagint, ἱλαστήριον is used to translate כַּפֹּרֶת (kapporęţ), which was “the mercy seat” covering the ark of the covenant. On the Day of Atonement (Yom Kipppur), High Priest would come into the Holy of Holies and sprinkle the mercy seat with blood of a bull and a goat, which was supposed to effectuate sanctification of the sanctuary (Lv 16,14–16). In order to perform the Day of Atonement ritual, exactly three members were required. (1) The High Priest as someone who supplies, (2) the sacrifice as something that's being supplied and (3) the mercy seat as the place of demand. Understanding hilastērion as kapporęţ, the mercy seat, is quite obvious also in Hebrews 9:5, which happens to be the only other New Testament instance of this difficult word.

Nonetheless, this plain meaning of hilastērion gets a little bit muddy as far as Romans 3:25 is concerned. God had “put Jesus forward as hilastērion by his blood, effective through faith.” In the Old Testament imagery, this would imply that Jesus is either the sacrifice, or the “thing” mercy seat. Various translations follow their instincts while translating hilastērion as “a sacrifice of atonement” (NRSV, NIV). This is obviously quite faithful to the context. As someone offering His blood, Christ could take place of a sacrificed animal. Other translations use the term “propitiation” (ESV, HCSB, KJV), which attempts to explain the complex reality with a theological terminus-technicus.

A stubborn translator could, however, insist on the most faithful translation. In such a case, verses 24 and 25 would read as follows.

24 They are being justified as a gift from Him by the grace of the redemption that is in Christ Jesus
25 whom God put forward as the mercy seat through faith in His blood in order to demonstrate His righteousness, because of overlooking the sins that occurred beforehand …

Hilastērion and Faith

Let us now ponder some larger biblical-theological ramifications. Hebrews 9 tells us that Jesus entered the Holy of Holies in heaven as a High Priest and supplied his own blood at the place of demand occupied by God (Heb 9:25f). Romans 3, however, shift roles within this triangle by putting Jesus at the place of demand, i.e. the mercy seat, where the Lord “appear[ed] in the cloud” (Lv 16:2). Hence in Romans 3:25, Jesus is described neither as the High Priest, nor as the atoning sacrifice, but as the most holy presence of God which demanded it.

So according to Romans 3:25, in Jesus, God became a supplier of His own righteous demand. But not only in the way that He appointed Jesus to be the ultimate sacrifice, but that He made Jesus to handle this righteous demand for Himself. He had made Jesus both the atoning sacrifice and the place of demand. God put Jesus forward to take His own position, which in the Old Testament was known as the mercy seat. At this very place, Jesus sprinkled Himself with His own blood. This is why Jesus' sacrifice has an eternal effect, because both the place of demand and the supply have imploded in the crucified Christ. To put it very simply, God vindicates His righteousness by dying on the cross and thus silencing his righteous demand once for all.

The remaining question is, “how does simple faith connect us to Jesus?” Answer on this question would be obvious to the 1st century Jew. The fact that Jesus is in control of the mercy seat means that He is now the one to obey. Our covenant with God is only effectuated through our obedience of Jesus. For Paul, to be “set free from sin” means nothing else than to “become slaves of righteousness” (Ro 6:18). For Bonhoeffer, “only the believer obeys and only the obedient believe”. Whoever disobeys Christ lacks the saving faith. Whoever believes is saved through his obedience by faith, not by his works.

I hope that it's obvious by now that none of this would be possible if Jesus wasn't put forward to the most holy place at the mercy seat. If He wasn't the one who places the demand and supplies for it accordingly, if He was, let't say, only the High Priest offering His own blood, how exactly would our obedient faith in Jesus effectuate our new covenantal relationship with God? If this “implosion” of all three members of the Old Testament imagery didn't happen, how would simple faith in Jesus cause one to be part of the new covenantal people? No way! On the contrary, Jesus is the eternal embodiment of the Day of Atonement, where God's righteousness is manifested by self-denying, self-sacrificing love for all people. Our obedient faith then becomes something like an agreement with, appropriation of and leaning to this eternal Day. This leaning answers the problem of us “falling short of the glory of God.”

Does it make sense to you? What do you think?