Behind this salvific outcome is God's action, now
in the past, that Paul describes in 25a: "whom God put forward as a
ιλαστηριον by his blood, effective through faith." The Latin rendering of
ιλαστηριον as propitiatio has undoubtedly contributed significantly to
the understanding of Christ's death in Christian soteriology as making
"satisfaction" to God, offended by human sin. The Greek term itself,
along with cognates such as the verb ιλασκομαι and the noun ιλασμος, in wider
usage outside the Bible has the sense of "make gracious,' usually with
respect to placating an angry god or offended human being. It is regularly used
in connection with sacrifices of various kinds designed to assuage the anger of
a god that a suppliant believes lies behind illness or misfortune. To the ears
of the Greek-speaking members of the churches in Rome to whom Paul's letter was
read, the reference to Christ's death as a ιλαστηριον would most likely have
this propitiatory sense. . . . Until recently, especially on the grounds of an
allusion to the Day of Atonement ritual, I have argued for the interpretation
of ιλαστηριον in Romans 3:25 in an expiatory sense. I now find that position harder
to maintain in the face, first of all, of the dominant propitiatory sense in
secular age. How could Paul be confident that the community in Rome, one that he
himself had not founded or instructed, would hear a reference to the Day of
Atonement ritual without requiring explanation to that effect? We must reckon
with the possibility that the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew with ιλαστηριον
could well have introduced a more propitiatory nuance not present in the Hebrew
original. It is Greek that Paul wrote and his audience heard. It is unsafe then
to allow the background expressed in Hebrew to determine the meaning across the
translation. In other words, allusion to the Day of Atonement—and the
implication that God in Christ was performing the culminating Day of Atonement,
not simply for Israel but for the entire world—may not of itself be sufficient
to make a purely expiatory understanding of Paul’s formulation in Romans 3:25 convincing.
Second, the interpretation of ιλαστηριον in 3:25
cannot ignore the overarching threat of divine wrath that begins with the
assertion of the revelation of God’s wrath (οργη) in 1:18, continues in the prospect of judgment looming throughout
1:19-3:20, and surfaces repeatedly throughout the remainder of the letter
(4:15; 5:9; 9:22; 12:19; 13:4; see also 1 Thess. 1:10; 2:16; 5:9). The implied
causal connection (see γαρ)
between the revelation of God’s righteousness and the revelation of God’s wrath
across Romans 1:17-18 implies in turn that the revelation of God’s
righteousness is necessitated by the revelation of God’s wrath, the threat
overhanging the entire human race because of the universal lack of
righteousness. Thus the renewed proclamation of the revelation of God’s righteousness
in 3:21-26 seems to be a very intentional response on Paul’s part to the threat
of the wrath that continues to hang over all. This strongly reinforces the
appropriateness of reading ιλαστηριον in a propitiatory sense at this point. (Brendan
Byrne, Paul and the Economy of Salvation: Reading from the Perspective of
the Last Judgment [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2021], 97, 98-99)
It is hard to eliminate all nuance of propitiation
from the function of Christ’s death in this passage. God does not simply
forgive human sin. In the person of the Son, God deals with human sin in a way
that displays the evil and offense of sin, while at the same time creating for
human beings the possibility of being found righteous at the judgment and so
escaping the wrath. God’s justification of the believer thus represents a
unified exercise of divine righteousness in both a judicial and salvific sense
(Rom. 3:25b-26). Paul describes the same divine action in Romans 8:3, where,
through the sending of the Son in the likeness of sinflu flesh, God deals with
sin by “condemning” (κατεκρινεν) its manifestation “in the flesh.” The soteriological
passage in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21 features the motif of “reconciliation”—a one-sided
reconciliation where, in the person of the Son (Christ)”, who is “made sin” (v.
21b), God reaches out to the alienated human world, “not counting their trespasses
against them” (v. 19b). Here perhaps the language of “expiation” could be
appropriate. But, as in Romans 5:6, 8, and especially 8:32, there remains the implication
that the “not counting” of the trespasses is not without cost. . . . By dying
with him in baptism (see Rom. 6:3-4a, 5a, 6; 2 Cor. 5:14; Gal. 2:19) believers
enter into the ιλαστηριον of his death and so into divine “condemnation” (Rom.
8:3; see 4:25a) of sin. By entering into his obedience (Rom. 5:19; Phil. 2:8)
they also enter into the justification displayed in his resurrection (Rom. 4:25b).
Thus the justification of believers is not a series of (innumerable) fresh
divine acts in regard to individuals. Believers participate in God’s
justification to the obedient Christ. (Ibid., 231-32, 233)
Justification of the Ungodly
In what sense, then is this “the justification of the
ungodly” (Rom. 4:5)? It is the justification of those who have been “ungodly”
(sinners) and who in themselves have no grounds for justification. They are
justified solely on the basis of the righteousness of God embodied in the
obedient Christ, into whose total career (obedient death, burial, and
resurrection) they have entered through faith and baptism. They do not as yet
share his risen life in a bodily sense; that must await his final defeat of
death (1 Cor. 15:22-28). But they already share in the justification bodily
displayed in his resurrection (Rom. 4:25b). (Ibid., 233)
Further Reading