YOu are making the mistake of reading INTO the text what’s not there. There is nothing in that text even intimating what you are suggesting.
No, 2 Corinthians 5:19 has it that God is conciliated to the world. The Greek word for “reconcile” is “apokatallaso.” In 2 Cor.5:19 it is only “katallaso.” It is a one sided peace. This is why God uses us as ambassadors to entreat the world to be conciliated to God:
Yet all is of God, Who conciliates us to Himself through Christ, and is giving us the dispensation of the conciliation, how that God was in Christ, conciliating the world to Himself, not reckoning their offenses to them, and placing in us the word of the conciliation." For Christ, then, are we ambassadors, as of God entreating through us. We are beseeching for Christ’s sake, “Be conciliated to God!”
(2Co 5:18-20)
Also Colossians 1:20 is different than what you state:
Col 1:20 and through Him to reconcile all to Him (making peace through the blood of His cross), through Him, whether those on the earth or those in the heavens."
“to reconcile all” is incomplete. It is yet future. 1:21 has just believers reconciled NOW.
Col 1:21 And you, being once estranged and enemies in comprehension, by wicked acts, yet now He reconciles"
That’s a good point. We have been conditioned to believe we have a stake in our salvation. I don’t agree with it or buy it, though like you I sat through countless services shoving it down my throat. So, if I accept Jesus, I was in. But then if I did something that the church deemed sinful enough, I obviously did not accept Christ. A horrible vicious circle, that sent many folks running to find churches that would not condemn them.
So Paul says, Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
Eph 2:9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
So we see that the saving faith that is called grace is by Him and not us.
Tit 3:4 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared,
Tit 3:5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,
Tit 3:6 whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,
So Christianity is not mere reformation that can be argued or turned back, but a new creation:
2Co 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.
2Co 5:18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation;
Which leads us to Davo’s text:
2Co 5:19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.
And for me the clincher…
Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 3:24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
Notice it says all are justified.
SO now we Go full circle and say well if Jesus has redeemed all what is the sense or reason for spreading the gospel?
Answer: So people can have a more free, and fulfilling life in Christ here on earth, becoming the sons and daughters we were meant to be. And going back to Ephesians he said: Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for [size=150]good works [/size], not to keep folks from going to hell. This truly is good news.
No, I differ, I meant it! It is truly my opinion that Davo was correct…
You have your opinion, but are you ready to say without a doubt that IT (your one opinion) is THE TRUE GOSPEL? My friend, it is merely an opinion that you have worked yourself into. For the time being.
The Orthodox Church uses a great deal of terminology that cannot be found in the Bible. This is because ever since the days of the Apostles the hydra of heresy has attacked the Church, and heresy typically uses the language of the Bible to defend itself. Therefore over the centuries the Church has defined new terms to express the faith of the Apostles.
For example, because of heresy it is no longer certain what one means when he says that he has faith in “Jesus”. What “Jesus” is being referred to here? Is this a created Jesus? Or a Jesus who only pretended to be human? Or a demigod in a human body but with no soul? Or the Father Himself pretending to be another person? Or a phantom? Or a simple prophet? Or a type of zombie with no human will? Or an extraterrestrial astronaut? Or an avatar of one of several Hindu divinities? Or etc.? All of these and more have been described as “Jesus” by various heretical groups.
Thus the Church has adopted more precise terminology to describe Jesus: God the Son, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity Who became incarnate, Who is one Person with two natures (divine and human).
If it wasn’t for those squirrelly heretics with their bizarro-world Jesuses, the Church would have been content to just keep saying plain and simple, “Jesus”.
Eusebius, from what you have been saying, we have no free will. We are at enmity with God because of His will. It seems to me that if this were the case, why would we need to act as ambassadors in order to reconcile people to God if it is only through God’s will that we are reconciled?
Maintenanceman, from what I understand, we are to be doing good works, not only for our own fulfillment, but also to be a light to others; that is to help those who are “in hell” find the way to God. It makes no sense to me to say that we are reconciled(compatible)to God if in our sin, we are against God.
With all due respect Eusebius this demonstrates you have absolutely NO idea. The Greek word rendered “reconciling” in 2Cor 5:19 means EXACTLY that… <καταλλάσσων> katallassōn = “reconciling” – 1) to change, exchange, as coins for others of equivalent value 1a) to reconcile (those who are at variance) 1b) return to favour with, be reconciled to one 1c) to receive one into favour.
<ἀποκαταλλάσσω> apokatallassō is the SAME WORD… with the preposition <ἀπο> “apo” simply defining the particular parsing. <καταλλάσσων> katallassōn does NOT change in any way, shape or form the word, as you errantly say, to “conciliate”.
You do manage to get this right… “it is a one sided peace” – AND that’s what counted, i.e., God did it, that settles it. Whether you believe it or not in NO way changes God’s established reality. HOWEVER, in a very real way… when people gain the revelation of this great truth they benefit immensely… hence Paul’s injunction “be ye therefore reconciled.” IOW… come into the FULLNESS of that which God HAS done.
SERIOUSLY!? The reconciliation “is incomplete”!? How many times would you have Christ nailed to the cross till he finally gets it right and COMPLETE. You have an INCOMPLETE salvation… good going!
And yet again you leave off the most important qualifier preceding this where they were first… “alienated and enemies”, which is what Paul has already made clear here…
Thus the reconciliatory work of the Cross WHEN all sinners WERE (past / established / COMPLETED) reconciled, leads THEN to the salvation IN LIFE of those who in faith grasp it… again, thus Paul’s “be ye therefore reconciled.” IOW… come into the FULLNESS of that which God HAS done.
Paul’s “saved by His life” refers to Jesus’ “life from the dead” i.e., his resurrection. This is the DIFFERENCE between ‘reconciliation’ (generic) and ‘salvation’ (specific). Which is WHY the writer to the Hebrews says no one saves like Jesus saves i.e., not only has Jesus reconciled ALL to God but those who then grasp this truth are doubly blessed IN LIFE… this is the essence of pantelism.
The Greek word rendered “uttermost” or ‘completely’ or ‘to the full’ is the word <παντελὲς> panteles… hence the fullness of redemptive eschatology as proposed in pantelism.
If you notice I did say ‘reason for Spreading the Gospel’. But I do agree with the first half of the above premise. For my self, believing that reconciliation is complete in Christ, our mission is to spread that good news about a God that so loved us. My understanding is that this reconciliation Paul talks about is the eradication of the sin condition of the first Adam, the thing that separated us (humanity) from God. So yes, because of the cross we are now compatible, to use your term. For while we have sinned and fallen short of His glory, we are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.
We are at enmity to God because we were created flesh.
God has ambassadors entreating people to be at peace with God to prove to those people that they presently are at enmity to God and to prove they will remain at until they are changed from fleshly to spiritual.
Only those chosen to be at peace with God, whom God opened their eyes and heart to be at peace were at peace with God.
God also entreated Israel through the prophets to do all the law when they rebelled. Did God think they could do the law? NO. But God entreated them anyway to prove to them that they could not.
If we are not free, then what s God’s purpose - in these examples?
***So if I was born to Donald Trump, Mr. Putin, Kim Jong-un, some Middle Eastern family or into Povery in India - this is God’s will? *** [list] Why? **What purpose is served? **All of this is “causality” - right?. I can become a spoiled rich kid (i.e. Trump), a Russian tyrant (i.e. Putin), an atheist (Kim Jong-un), a Muslim (where I can be killed, if I wish to become Christian) or born into an Indian untouchable class (where I am scorned by society). ***And nothing I do can change this - right? ***[/list:u]
Now the novelist Ayn Rand, lives in Russian - during the cold war. She graduates from a Russian university and visits the US - under the guise of visiting relatives. She wants to become a famous writer. She eventually goes on to write Hollywood screenplays - in perfect English (with no help from anyone). She then goes on to write the famous novels **the Fountainhead **and Atlas Shrugged. [list] **Since free will doesn’t exist, how did she fulfill her lifelong ambition? **. Or is it God’s will, for her to be a successful writer and promote atheism? [/list:u]
Eusebius replies:
No, it actually shows I do know what I am talking about.
If “katallasso” meant “reconcile” then both humans and God would be at peace with each other already. Katallasso is just a one-sided peace. That is why in 2 Corinthians 5:19 etc. God has ambassadors entreating mankind, who are at enmity to God, to be at peace with God Who is not at enmity to mankind and is not reckoning their offenses to them. It is just a one-sided peace.
Yes, of course all in the heavens and earth are not reconciled to God yet, only believers who are NOW reconciled. There are still spiritual forces of wickedness among the celestials. Why do you think we have to wear the full armor of God? It not just to have a fashion show you know.
Christ only needs to be nailed to the cross once to effect the reconciliation of the universe. But only believers are said to NOW be reconciled to God. The rest come later.
And yet again you leave off the most important qualifier preceding this where they were first… “alienated and enemies”, which is what Paul has already made clear here…
That is right, believers WERE alienated AND enemies but they are the ones who are NOW reconciled to God. The rest of mankind are still alienated and enemies to God. The world is condemned. Believers are judged NOW so as not to be condemned with the world when they are judged:
1Co_11:32 Yet, being judged, we are being disciplined by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world."
In Romans 5:10, Paul is dealing only with believers who have been justified and conciliated to God:
Rom 5:10 “For if, being enemies, we were conciliated to God through the death of His Son, much rather, being conciliated, we shall be saved in His life.” 5:1-10 is a continuation of Romans 4 and those who believe God as Abraham did. Those who believe God that Christ died for our sins are those who are conciliated to God (at peace with God) and God is at peace with them and so for them there is a reconciliation where two parties come together in peace.
If all mankind are reconciled to God, why are so many humans still at enmity to God? Only God has conciliated the world to Himself. Mankind needs entreated to be conciliated to God. Otherwise there is still estrangement. You want to see estrangement? God to any atheist message board and tell them God loves them.
No, it actually shows I do know what I am talking about. He is ABLE to save to the uttermost those who come to Him. Not all mankind come to Him. They are still at enmity to God. They are not conciliated to God. They hate God. That does not speak well of your reconciliation if that is the outcome of your reconciliation.
If “katallasso” meant “reconcile” then both humans and God would be at peace with each other already. Katallasso is just a one-sided peace. That is why in 2 Corinthians 5:19 etc. God has ambassadors entreating mankind, who are PRESENTLY at enmity to God, to be at peace with God. God is not at enmity to mankind and is not reckoning their offenses to them. It is just a one-sided peace. Hence it is only katallasso.
[size=150]This is so typical of Christians fighting over peace![/size]
Again, you suggest that God entreats people to be at peace with Him. The definition of entreat is “to ask someone earnestly to do something, request, beg, implore.” How is this possible if they have no choice in the matter? It seems to me that entreating would not be necessary if it be only by God’s will that they can do so. As you mention, God asked the people of Israel to return to Him, however they were not willing, as it says in Matthew 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were NOT WILLING!” God does not ask us to do something that we are not capable of doing. Yes, I believe God expected them to follow the law, that is the divine law to do unto others…
If we are not free, then what s God’s purpose - in these examples?
So if I was born to Donald Trump, Mr. Putin, Kim Jong-un, some Middle Eastern Muslim family or into Povery in India - this is God’s will?
Why? What purpose is served?All of this is “causality” - right?. I can become a spoiled rich kid (i.e. Trump’s child)… a Russian tyrant (i.e. Putin’s child)…, an atheist (Kim Jong-un’s child)… a Muslim child (where I can be killed, if I wish to become Christian)… or born into an Indian untouchable class (where I am scorned by society). And nothing I do can change this - right?
Now the novelist Ayn Rand, lives in Russian - during the cold war. She graduates from a Russian university and visits the US - under the guise of visiting relatives. She wants to become a famous writer. She eventually goes on to write Hollywood screenplays - in perfect English (with no help from anyone). She then goes on to write the famous novels **the Fountainhead **and Atlas Shrugged.Since free will doesn’t exist, how did she fulfill her lifelong ambition?. Or is it God’s will, for her to be a successful writer and promote atheism? If so,why?
How do folks who never heard of Christ and have only will - in a deterministic theological system - supposed to attune their will to God’s will? How do they know right from wrong? How will they know, what God expects from them?
If we live in a theological deterministic universe, wouldn’t God want us to discover it - via science? If so, they why do quantum physicists **insist **that we have indeterminism (some physical indeterminism in the universe), in quantum mechanical uncertainty? Why do they insist that quantum mechanical indeterminism, normally has no observable effect on large physical structures (hence, the average man won’t see any difference)? Are the most brilliant scientific minds, getting the science wrong? When they say there is some physical indeterminism in the universe (quantum mechanical uncertainty)?
How can a determined will, making unpredictable actions or thoughts (since they are determined), be morally responsible for their actions?
Why does all the research in experimental psychology, show folks are statically more creative, happy, positive and caring - who believe in free will? If determinism is true, why didn’t God wire our brains, to respond to a belief in determinism - by being statically more creative, positive and caring (as opposed to a belief in free will)?
Sure God does, but then of course God helps each of us in his time to do what God requires, and thus God gets the glory for all. So the sovereign God is praised by believers, who have been made willing and able by his help. No praise for ‘free will’ remains.
No… this is what you’re NOT getting. The one-sided-ness is indicative of the unilateral nature of God’s doing-ness in the whole matter, i.e., He alone (one sided) initiated and established humanity’s reconciliation in Christ… the subsequent invitation or injunction of the ambassadors was… come and partake of that which has “once for all” now been established. As Jesus said… “it IS finished!”
WHY?… mainly because too many misinformed self-righteous religionists keep telling them they are “at enmity with God” and as such therefore God is pissed off with them; when He is NOT! “…God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, NOT imputing their trespasses to them…” – you ought to try something really novel like actually believing this – it could set you free by having a relevant message to give people!
Davo, this answer of yours should be expanded for there is a yes and a no element to the thought. Yes, some do preach a false gospel. They preach conditional love and that we need to jump through a hoop whether great or small to win or earn or secure God’s love. That is terrible as you say. However, you seem to miss the observation that man’s birth nature is wired to actually prefer conditional love. The natural man is works oriented by nature. Super natural new birth is needed to re-wire our natures with a new nature that is able to receive grace. You are a Christian and should understand these things.
I think all that Eusebius is saying that that mankind is fully reconciled for God’s part and God’s part is all that matters as far as eternal destiny is concerned. However, since unbelieving mankind remains unregenerate and dwelling in the natural man they cannot love God in return. God loves them, but they do not love God… at least not yet. As such their hearts are ruled by their sinful nature and not the Holy Spirit. And likewise if they do not repent there will be regrettable temporal punishment.
Paul was speaking about this very thing in 1 Corinthians 2:13-15
God loves all, but not all have the indwelling spirit, otherwise all would be Christian. You certainly do not believe all mankind is Christian! Why even your endless arguments with people prove that your opponents do not have the Spirit or else there would be no argument, unless of course they have the Spirit and you do not. Either way something is a miss, because where the Spirit is there is peace.
Please consider my very useful answer to your predicament… you are preaching great hope to say that the work of Christ is a finished work and that the sins of all mankind are completely and finally paid, past, present, and future! Amen and preach it brother. However, also consider the courage you need in answering the question why does not everyone stop and immediately believe this message? We believe the good news because we have been touched by the Holy Spirit and so now we need to partner with God as his ambassadors as He brings His message to his entire creation and wait patiently as he alone is the heart changer. We will mess things up terribly if we think we are the heart changers. Join me brother!
Like, groovy man.
