Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5

The locus classicus of the New Testament doctrine of reconciliation is found in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. In this passage, apostle Paul presents the work of Christ, and the work of his followers as the work of reconciliation. There are two different reconciliations in this section; the first is a historical and finished reconciliation, while the second is a present and ongoing reconciliation. The work of God in Christ is described as “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them”, and our work is called “the word of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:19) .
Both reconciliations are completely centered in the cross event, and both reconciliations are in full harmony with the biblical aspects of the moral influence and the penal substitution analogies of the atonement. It is beyond the scope of this article to analyze the various models of atonement that have been discussed for centuries. It will suffice here only to delineate our usage of the main idea underlining the moral influence and penal substitution analogies, as presented exclusively in the biblical text. This article defines the message of the minister as that of reconciliation, explaining what happened at the cross, and inviting the listeners to accept the historical and finished reconciliation.
Moral influence
When we talk about the moral influence of the cross here, we mean the love of God manifested in the cross, and the power of that love to change and redirect our lives. We do not, however, imply here the full-fledged moral influence theory, first attributed to Peter Abelard (1079-1142).
As per the Biblical author, love has a transforming moral influence when believers meditate on substitution. Te love of God becomes a controlling force, and the believer lives for the glory of God. Paul discloses the deep motivation that controls his message, his ministry, and his entire life, writing in the first person: “For the love of Christ controls us” (2 Cor. 5:14).The love of Christ is a powerful influence that affects and “controls” the lives of believers, just as a person is controlled by a great fever, or a great fear. What is the purpose of the controlling power of love? The context answers: “so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf” (2 Cor. 5:15).
Penal substitution
With regards of the penal substitution model of atonement, attributed to Anselm (1033-1109), we also focus exclusively on the biblical bases of the theory as presented in this chapter. As per the Biblical author, “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them…” and “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:19, 21). These verses give us the idea of the substitution. Our sins were not counted against us, but against Christ, so that God’s righteousness may be counted in our behalf
Paul maintains that love becomes a controlling force when we focus our attention to the substitutionary meaning of the cross: “having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died” (2 Cor. 5:14). The moral influence of the cross occurs when the believer meditates on the meaning of the phrase, “one died for all, therefore all died”, which means to meditate on the substitutionary death of Christ.
Many theologians have attempted to remove the propitiatory aspect of Jesus’ sacrifice. In their effort to show that God is love to the point of dying for us, they deny the idea of condemnation involved in the sacrifice of Christ. an eminent representative of the concept of penal substitution was Emil Brunner, who wrote, “It is only at the Cross that we see clearly both the ‘offense’ and the ‘folly’ of the Christian revelation. Here alone, at least, the intellectual and moral pride of reason is finally broken” and “The rejection of the doctrine of the wrath of God—as ‘antropopathic’—is the beginning of the Pantheistic disintegration of the Christian idea of God.” Brunner also explains that forgiveness expresses “the reality of guilt, the reality of the divine wrath, and yet, at the same time the overwhelming reality of forgiving love”
Past reconciliation
“Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them…” (2 Cor. 5:18, 19). This is a historical, a unique, and a finished reconciliation, consummated at the cross of Christ.
It is crucial, for the minister of reconciliation, to preach an objective or historic reconciliation. If the minister invites the audience to be reconciled with God without declaring that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Him, the minister is depriving the audience from the only source of power, the immeasurable and incomprehensible love of God. Other theologian, James Denney, commenting 2 Corinthians 5:19-21, wrote: “Unless we can preach a finished work of Christ in relation to sin, a katallage or reconciliation or peace which has been achieved independently of us, at an infinite cost, and to which we are called in a word or ministry of reconciliation, we have no real gospel for sinful men at all”
The “ambassadors” of reconciliation do not confuse the gospel with the blessings that proceed from the gospel. For example, they cannot preach about forgiveness without talking about the cost of forgiveness (see Rom. 3:25, 26). P. T. Forsyth, a classic representative of penal substitution, wrote, “An enlightened Judaism can preach a gospel of forgiveness, but our Christian religion has primarily to do with the terms of forgiveness; not with God’s readiness to forgive, but with His way of redemption; not with His willingness, but with His will; and with His will not merely as His aim, but as His deed; not as intended, but as achieved. The feeble gospel preaches ‘God is ready to forgive’; the mighty gospel preaches ‘God has redeemed.’”
“God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.” This reconciliation does not depend on our response, and it was done without our participation. This reconciliation was possible because God was “not counting men’s trespasses against them.” God was reconciling the world by not crediting the world with their trespasses because Jesus was made sin for us, and this exactly the idea of the passage in question.
Present reconciliation
“Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (2 Cor. 5:20). What is the relationship between the past and the present reconciliation? In the past reconciliation, God “reconciled us to Himself through Christ” (2 Cor. 5:18), and “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself” (2 Cor. 5:19); but in the present reconciliation, the appeal of the ambassadors is, “be reconciled to God” (2 Cor. 5:20).
The ministers (cf. 2 Cor. 5:18), or ‘ambassadors’ (2 Cor. 5:20) do not have a different message. They explain the meaning of the cross, and invite the audience to accept God’s reconciliation because accepting the historical reconciliation equals with being reconciled to God. The ministry of reconciliation is the announcement that “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them” (2 Cor. 5:19), and if the listener believes in such an incredible pronouncement, he/ she is reconciled with God. The individual reconciliation is nothing less and nothing more than the act of believing in the unbelievable, in the foolishness of the cross. Anyone who believes that God became sin on his/her behalf, becomes “the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21).
Conclusion
In 2 Corinthians 5:19-21, Paul defines ministry, defines preaching, and also defines appeal. The “ambassadors” keep fresh in the minds of the listeners the penal and substitutionary meaning of the cross, which a very powerful moral influence.
<references/>

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu