The Dilemma of the "In Christ" Motif

For many Evangelicals the "in Christ" motif is the central theme of the apostle Paul’s theology. It is true on a significant number of occasions Paul uses the term "in Christ."

The issue of the "in Christ" motif revolves around the belief that Adam was responsible for the guilt of all men and Jesus is responsible for the salvation of all men, and that human consent plays no part in either.

It is frequently argued that the whole human race was in Adam when he sinned because each one of us is a genetic descendant of Adam. It is further argued that in a mysterious way, when Jesus died on the cross we were all in Christ so that "in Christ" we paid the penalty for our sins. This concept is blasphemy. The Scripture does not confirm it nor imply it. When we look at the fifth chapter of Romans which is used as a basis for this theology we read,

Each passage clearly states that Christ died that we might be reconciled to God so that the love of God might be understood by each one of us and that Jesus might be our sin bearer. In no more beautiful way is this truth expressed than in the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah.

In no way, actually, genetically, or mystically, did we have anything to do with the price paid for our redemption. To imply that we were in Christ mystically when He died so that in that sense we paid the penalty for our own sins is surely an abomination and blasphemy. Inevitably the "in Christ" concept is seen by many Evangelicals as outside the saving grace of Jesus. Let us look more closely at this whole situation. What was Paul talking about when he talked about "in Christ"?

The dilemma of Evangelicals who emphasize the "in Christ" motif, is that Paul does not talk about the objective gospel that they also espouse, but rather he explains that if we are in Christ we are new creatures, the old habits are passed away, and we are now in newness of life. There must be an entire transformation of character, a total subjective change of heart. This fact surely demonstrates the completeness of the new-birth experience. Paul also identifies the "Christ in" concept as central to salvation.

It will be seen that Paul, in this reference, uses both Christ in and in Christ as essential and complementary aspects of salvation. One cannot be "in Christ" if Christ is not in him. Similarly the reverse is equally true.

There is no appropriate way in which the concepts of in Christ and Christ in can be separated one from another, any more than justification and sanctification can be separated. Thus Christ in His discourses frequently placed the two concepts together.

Not only does John record these significant statements of Jesus, but he himself emphasized them in his first epistle.

This same beautiful message is seen when Paul speaks concerning "Christ in" us.

Frequently the argument of Paul in the book of Hebrews is used. Paul states that Levi, yet unborn, was in the loins of Abraham when Abraham returned tithe to Melchisedec. Paul uses this fact as a basis for demonstrating that the High-priestly ministry of Melchisedec was a higher ministry than the Levitical priesthood. It is an interesting argument, and it does reflect upon the thinking of the Israelites in their relationship of forebear to descendant. But it is a text which cannot be used to claim that all humanity was in Christ when He died. Nor is it possible to use this text to teach the error that each one bore the penalty for his or her sins in Christ on Calvary. Every evidence of the Scripture declares that Christ was alone when He bore that penalty. No one else shared the unimaginable anguish of that moment.

If we were to say that we were all "in Christ" and we paid the penalty, then Jesus did not pay the penalty alone. It took the perfect Son of God to die for each one of us—the Righteous for the unrighteous, the Guiltless for the guilty, the Sinless for the sinner, the Just for the unjust, the Holy for the unholy.

Tragically the belief that we were "in Christ" when He died leads to the concept that every human being was justified and saved on Calvary. While there are those who claim that we can lose that salvation by rejecting it, there is no evidence in such a gospel that we have to actively accept the salvation that God has offered to us. Yet the words of Scripture are clear that we need not reject the salvation to lose it, we need only to neglect it.

In the illustration of the vine and the branch of John 15, we have a special picture of the situation. Those who are in a saving relationship with Jesus are both in Christ as well as possessing Christ in them, through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The vine and branch are both in each other, and when they are separated the branch is destined to die. And so it is with salvation. An undue emphasis on the in Christ motif, dissociating this concept from "Christ in" us, is an imbalance and a denial of the fulness of the role of Christ in the plan of salvation. Such a limitation of the provisions of Christ’s sacrifice can lead only to many souls being lost from the kingdom of heaven. Eternity is at stake. This is not a trivial matter nor a nicety of theological debate, it is a matter of eternal life and eternal damnation.