BIG IDEA:
GOD’S WORK OF RECONCILIATION IN CHRIST MOTIVATES US TO PURSUE A MINISTRY OF RECONCILIATION WITH INTEGRITY
INTRODUCTION:
Talking both about reconciliation of the unsaved (many of Paul’s opponents who were putting themselves forwards as teachers were actually unsaved) as well as the Corinthian believers putting aside whatever sin was affecting their relationship with the Apostle Paul and hence with God.
Scott Hafemann: In 5:6–10, Paul drew the first conclusion that comes from knowing that his eternal home was secure with Christ, the sovereign judge of all humanity. From such knowledge comes his own courageous ambition to please the Lord through walking by faith (5:7a, 9). In 5:11 – 6:2, this same awareness leads to an equally courageous commitment to persuade others to join him in living in a way that pleases God (5:11a, 14–15, 21). In view of Paul’s self-defense (5:11b–13) and his self-understanding as “Christ’s ambassador” (5:18 – 6:2), this persuasion has as its goal the acceptance of the gospel as it is proclaimed and embodied in Paul’s ministry.
Frank Matera: The material of the unit, as noted above, can be divided into three subunits.
- In the first (vv. 11–13) Paul defends his personal integrity.
- In the second (vv. 14–17), he explains how the death of Christ undergirds his ministry. These verses fall into two parts: verses 14–15, which appear to be indebted to traditional material about the significance of Christ’s death, and verses 16–17, each of which begins with hōste (“so”), thereby providing supporting arguments for what Paul says in verses 14–15.
- In the third subunit (vv. 18–21) Paul introduces the theme of reconciliation, which provides him with yet another way to describe his ministry: as the minister of a new covenant, his ministry is one of reconciliation.
These verses can also be divided into two parts.
- In the first (vv. 18–19) there is a remarkable focus on the role of God in reconciling humanity to himself through Christ.
- In the second (vv. 20–21) Paul presents himself as Christ’s ambassador, who calls people to the reconciliation that God has initiated (v. 20), and concludes with a remarkable description of the divine interchange that God has effected in Christ (v. 21).
Thus the whole unit moves from an affirmation of Paul’s apostolic integrity to a description of him as Christ’s ambassador, who exercises the ministry of reconciliation.
John MacArthur: Though there is variety in leadership styles, several common qualities are indispensable, especially for effective spiritual leaders.
First, leaders who make an impact are focused. They have a clearly defined mission, which they pursue with unrelenting clarity of purpose.
Second, leaders who have an impact are internally motivated. They do not usually depend on favorable external factors to achieve.
Third, leaders who impact are courageous. They are usually so dedicated to their tasks and goals that they refuse to back down in the face of adversity or be stopped by hindrances or obstacles.
Fourth, leaders who succeed are knowledgeable. They understand what they need to know, are sure of what they believe, and are eager to learn more.
Fifth, leaders who make an impact are strong. They have the strength to endure the arduous, difficult labor that achievement demands.
Sixth, for leaders to have an impact they need to be optimistic, to believe the best about their plans and their people.
Seventh, leaders who ennoble others are enthusiastic and persuasive. They generate a contagious excitement about their visions and ministries that enables them to enlist the eager support of others.
Eighth, effective leaders are willing to take risks. They put everything on the line for what they believe must be done.
Ninth, leaders who have an impact are skilled communicators. They can articulate their visions, ideas, and plans effectively so as to motivate those with them.
Tenth, leaders who impact are imaginative. They are usually not content with maintaining the status quo but pursue greater things.
Finally, impactful leaders tend to be independent, strong enough to stand and survive on their own.
Tying all those essential qualities together is consistency or integrity. Without it, the rest of the above-mentioned leadership qualities add up to nothing more than superficiality. Integrity solidifies and unites all the other qualities; it is the glue that holds all attitudes and actions together.
Integrity (from the Latin word integer, “entire”) may be defined as the condition or quality of being undivided. It describes those who adhere to their ethical or moral standards without hypocrisy or duplicity. People with integrity lead lives that are one with their stated convictions; they “practice what they preach.” They are honest, sincere, and incorruptible. In biblical terms, those with integrity are “above reproach”—a quality that is to characterize all believers (Phil. 2:15; 1 Tim. 5:7), but especially elders (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:6–7).
The Bible stresses the value of integrity by condemning hypocrisy. Jesus repeatedly denounced the religious leaders of His day as hypocrites (Matt. 6:2, 5, 16; 15:7; 22:18; Luke 12:1, 56; 13:15). . .
Leaders must also protect their integrity against the false accusations that could destroy it. It is this second aspect of guarding integrity that prompted Paul to write. He knew the importance not only of guarding his life against sin but also of guarding his reputation against lies. As has been noted in previous chapters of this volume, the theme of this epistle is Paul’s defense of his integrity (cf. 2 Cor. 1:12–13; 2:17; 3:5; 4:2, 5; 5:9–10; 6:3–4, 11; 7:2; 8:20–21; 10:7; 11:5–6, 30; 12:11–12; 13:5–6). The apostle’s credibility was under attack from false teachers who had infiltrated the church at Corinth (cf. 6:8). Before they could get a hearing for their lies, they first had to tear down Paul’s credibility in the minds of the people. Though their accusations were false, they were nonetheless dangerous; if the Corinthians believed the allegations, confidence in the Word of God through Paul would be destroyed.
Sadly, the false teacher’s slanderous lies had convinced many in the Corinthian assembly that Paul was not a man of integrity. His usefulness as an authoritative messenger of divine truth hung in the balance. It was that danger that motivated Paul to defend himself for the sake of the truth and the God of truth.
But Paul faced a dilemma. If he did not defend himself, the Corinthians might abandon him in favor of the false teachers. Yet if he did defend himself, he left himself open to the charge that he was pridefully commending himself. To refute the false accusation that he was guilty of self-commendation, Paul was forced to give a defense of himself.
The key to understanding this passage lies in the meaning of the verb peith? (persuade). Some commentators believe that it refers to persuading people of the truth of the gospel, as it does in Acts 17:4; 18:4; 19:8, 26; 26:28; and 28:23–24. But the gospel is not the issue in 2 Corinthians; this is not primarily an evangelistic epistle. Paul was not trying to persuade the Corinthian believers of the truth of the gospel, but rather of the truth of his integrity. Therefore, peith? could be better rendered “seek the favor of,” as it is in Galatians 1:10. Paul sought a favorable judgment from the Corinthians on his integrity.
(:10) Context: Judgment Seat of Christ
“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one
may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done,
whether good or bad.”
5 MOTIVATIONS TO PURSUE RECONCILIATION
I. (5:11-13) CONSTRAINED BY THE FEAR OF GOD – ACCOUNTABILITY DRIVES OUR MINISTRY URGENCY AND INTEGRITY
A. (:11a) Motivation Stated = Fear of God
“Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord”
Raymond Collins: As a wise man, Paul conducts his life and his activity in awe of the ever-present Lord. The judicial imagery of the previous verse (5:10) suggests that Paul has evoked the biblical notion with a particularly Pauline nuance. First of all, the “Lord” to whom his phrase makes reference is none other than Christ, who was mentioned in the preceding verse. In addition, 5:10’s mention of the judgment seat suggests that, for Paul, the biblical concept is not without some sense that the Lord in whose presence a person stands in awe is a judge. The Lord’s judgment might well provoke fear in those who do not follow his ways.
The “fear of the LORD” is a well-known biblical idea that refers to the awe that human beings experience in the presence of God (cf. Pss. 34:11; 111:10; Prov. 1:7; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10; 10:27; 14:26; 15:16, 33; 19:23; Sir. 1:12; Eccles. 8:12–13; 12:13; etc.). The fear of the Lord is a way of speaking about a person’s profound reverence in the presence of God.
David Garland: Fear refers to a religious consciousness, a reverential awe of God, that directs the way one lives. Paul does not live in unhealthy dread of God’s judgment because he knows the love of Christ who gave himself for him. His extraordinary experience of God’s love and forgiveness, however, does not deaden his consciousness that God remains a holy and righteous God. The “fear of the Lord” reappears in 7:1 (see 7:11). . .
The rich fool is a classic example of one who did not fear the Lord. He forgot to factor God into his successful business spreadsheet, and God calls him a fool (Luke 12:20). The epithet recalls the words of the psalmist who says, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There’s no God’” (Ps 14:1; see Ps 36:1 cited in Rom 3:18). Persons may never say anything like this out loud, but they live as if there were no God, fooling themselves into believing that earthly realities such as money and power will somehow protect them from their tottering finitude as they plan how to make their futures more happy and secure. Others may try to anesthetize themselves from any perturbing fear of God. They contrive a sugary theology with an indulgent and permissive God who winks at all we do or have become. By contrast, Paul works knowing that God will scrutinize all he says and does.
B. (:11b) Fear of God Makes Us Urgent Transparent Persuaders
“we persuade men, but we are made manifest to God;
and I hope that we are made manifest also in your consciences.”
Nothing worse than persuasion that is crafty manipulation and exploitation.
Raymond Collins: Adding a complementary thought, and I hope to be well known in your consciences, Paul expresses the hope that in the depths of their consciences the Corinthians will be as convinced of Paul’s apostolic integrity as God is. He hopes that they will fully appreciate what he has done among them and what he continues to do even as he writes to them. Paul wants them to know that his motivation and intentions are upright, despite the tensions that have arisen between him and some members of the Corinthian community.
Scott Hafemann: Paul does not reject the need to persuade (5:11), but he does reject relying on the persuasive techniques of rhetoric to do so, since his own reputation is not on the line, but the eternal destiny of God’s people (cf. 1 Cor. 2:1–5). It is not the power of human eloquence that persuades, but the presence of God’s Spirit. Conversely, it is not the desire for recognition from others, but the fear of God that motivates Paul’s persuasion.
C. (:12-13) Our Testimony of Integrity Not Self Serving
“We are not again commending ourselves to you but are giving you an occasion
to be proud of us, so that you will have an answer for those who take pride in
appearance and not in heart. For if we are beside ourselves, it is for God; if we are of sound mind, it is for you.”
Paul could defend himself with a clear conscience because he was innocent of the charges leveled against him by his opponents in Corinth.
When we have done something wrong there is a need for repentance as the foundation for reconciliation.
Charles Ryrie: Lit., we went mad, probably referring to some specific occasion when Paul’s critics charged him with madness.
Paul Barnett: Paul’s allusion to those who take pride (12) brings the newcomers into focus once more. In what do they take pride? It is in what is seen, their position (literally, ‘face’, prosōpon, 12), which Paul explains as being out of their mind (13; cf. Mark 3:21), a reference to their ecstatic behaviour. It seems that the new ministers were seeking recognition on the basis of bizarre religious trances or gibberish, doubtless as a sign of their inspiration by God. . .
What matters is that the would-be minister is active in ‘persuading’ others to become Christians and that he or she does so in a ‘self-controlled’ way in the public exercise of ministry.
David Garland: Whoever they are, they boast in appearances — what is external, superficial, and transitory — instead of the heart — what is internal, essential, and eternal. Paul knows that what he is has been made plain to God. First Samuel 16:7 could provide a theological basis for his confidence. There the Lord warns Samuel that Eliab, Jesse’s firstborn son, was not the one who was to be anointed by the prophet: “But the Lord said to Samuel, ‘Do not look at his appearance or his stature because I have rejected him. Humans do not see what the Lord sees, for humans see what is visible, but the Lord sees the heart.” God chose the least expected one, the youngest of the sons. When humans make judgments based on appearances and normal expectations, they are likely to make false judgments. The visible realm is incomplete, illusive, and subject to the ravages of decay. Worldly primacy and power, even ecclesiastical power, does not always equate with success in God’s eyes. The eternal realm provides the only definitive and lasting values from which to make sound spiritual judgments. The Corinthians are inclined to be biased by fleshly appearances and consequently have fallen for Paul’s opponents and have failed to look at Paul’s heart as God does. They should be making their judgments from the Spirit’s vantage point rather than looking at such things as earthly status, worldly honor, and physical appearance.
R. Kent Hughes: Paul’s healthy fear of the judgment seat of Christ induced him to place the public persuasion of people far above the pursuit of personal ecstasies. Knowing the fear of the Lord, Paul’s consuming passion was to persuade others through the Scriptures about the truth of the gospel and the authenticity of his ministry, as they were inseparable. He did not need to persuade God, as God knew his heart and, likewise, the Corinthians would know it if they listened to their consciences. Paul argued his case so that the Corinthians would have a basis to boast about his apostolic heart.
II. (:14-15) CONSTRAINED BY THE LOVE OF CHRIST — CHRIST’S LOVE MAKES US MINISTER UNSELFISHLY
A. (:14a) Motivation Stated = Love of Christ
“For the love of Christ controls us”
Translation here could be “holds us together”; we have a desperate need for unity in the truth; not a bunch of separate cliques within one fellowship.
Paul Barnett: How is it possible to be motivated by the fear of the Lord and the love of Christ? Are not fear and love irreconcilable? It all depends on a proper understanding of fear and love, which, it should be noted, are not opposites. The opposite of love is hate. In the Bible ‘fear’ is not cringing terror but holy reverence, and ‘love’ is not romantic feelings but sacrificial care. The two words are consistent and reconcilable. Indeed, the fear of the Lord and awareness of the love of Christ fit perfectly together to provide the true motivation for Christian ministry.
Raymond Collins: The love of Christ about which he writes is not his love for Christ; rather, it is the love that Christ has for him. The genitive is a subjective genitive (hē agapē tou Christou), indicating that the love comes from Christ. The love that Christ has for the apostle overpowers him. It takes control of him and directs him to do what he does. Paul’s verb can be translated in different ways, but in the context of this letter, the connotation of the verb (synechei) is “taking control of and directing.” Essentially Paul is saying that the love of Christ provides direction and energy for his apostolic activity.
John MacArthur: It controlled him. Sunech? (controls) describes pressure that produces action. The magnitude of Christ’s love for believers like Paul compelled him to serve Him wholeheartedly, as an act of grateful worship. If he were to be discredited and his ministry lost, he would lose that opportunity to express his gratitude to Christ through his ministry. That threat was a key factor that constrained the apostle to defend his integrity.
B. (:14b) Love of Christ Manifested in the Significance of His Death
“having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died”
We do not have to judge whether a specific Christian is worthy of our reconciliation; Christ died for him as well and he is worthy!
Scott Hafemann: Christ’s death “for all” brings about the “death” of “all” for whom he died (cf. the “therefore” of v. 14c). Together with Christ’s death as a model for his own behavior, this accomplished fact concerning the consequences of Christ’s death “compels” Paul in his ministry. The “all died” of 5:14 must therefore be limited to God’s people, otherwise Christ’s death would mean that all people are now a new creation in Christ, living for him rather than themselves (5:15–17). For Christ’s love-motivated death for all is not merely an example of what his people should do, but also the very means by which his followers are impelled and enabled to do it. Nor is the death of all in 5:14c merely a potential to be actualized by all people, but the compelling cause that leads those for whom Christ has died to follow him in their lives. Thus, the striking feature of Paul’s statement is that all those who died in 5:14 are then identified in 5:15 as those who now live, which is surely limited to those who actually participate in God’s salvation in Christ (cf. 5:21 – 6:1). Christ died for his people.
C. (:15) Love of Christ Manifested in the Significance of His Resurrection
“and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves,
but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.”
Raymond Collins: One and many was the dominant antithesis in Paul’s speaking about the death of Christ; dying and living is the dominant antithesis as he writes about Christians. Believers have died to sin because of Christ; now they live for the sake of Christ, who died and was raised for them (1 Cor. 15:4–5; 1 Thess. 4:14).
David Garland: The gift of redemption that comes through Christ’s death and resurrection requires that we change the way we live. We are no longer to allow our selfish desires to twist the way we regard or treat others. To accept death with Christ so that our own longings, purposes, and securities are also put to death requires the risky venture of faith. Paul insists, however, that Christ controls the reins of his life so that he no longer is driven to kick against the goads. He instead lives to serve others, particularly the Corinthians (4:12, 15; 5:13).
Scott Hafemann: This, then, is the gospel in a nutshell:
(1) The basis of the gospel is Christ’s love for his people (not his people’s love for Christ or any other human characteristic, act, or distinctive);
(2) as a result, Christ died for them (to atone for their sin and to free them from its power);
(3) therefore, they too died (to their old way of life under the power of sin);
(4) the consequence of Christ’s death for them and their death in Christ is a new life lived out for others.
III. (:16-17) CONSTRAINED BY A RADICALLY NEW PERSPECTIVE — WE EVALUATE MEN FROM A SPIRITUAL PERSPECTIVE
George Shillington: Of all the celebrated statements in Paul’s letters, none surpasses that of 2 Corinthians 5:16 – 6:2 in lyrical grandeur, cosmic scope, theological depth, and emotional appeal. These elements combine to make it one of the more complex of Paul’s arguments in this letter. . .
A closer examination of the whole argument (5:16 – 6:2) reveals how Paul employs reconciliation language and thought to convince the Corinthians to act accordingly.
OUTLINE
New Creation out of the Old, 5:16-17
Reconciliation in Principle, 5:18-19
Reconciliation in Practice, 5:20-21
Transitional Word of Appeal, 6:1-2
A. (:16a) Motivation Stated = Radically New Perspective
“Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh”
B. (:16b) New Perspective Towards Christ Contrasted with the Old
“even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know
Him in this way no longer.”
Paul had made himself the standard and the judge; he was the one who decided what personality types he liked; etc. But now he (and we) must allow the Spirit to be the standard. We are to view others as a new creation in Christ.
Charles Ryrie: Before his conversion, Paul regarded Christ as merely another man.
Ray Stedman: What did he think of him? Why, he thought he was a lowdown, worthless rabble-rouser, a tub-thumping street preacher from a dirty little obscure town that nobody thought anything good could come out of. He thought because Jesus had no political standing, no family position, no training and no education that he was worthless. He tried his best to exterminate the religion that gathered about him because he regarded him as an imposter and a phony.
Paul Barnett: Before the Damascus Road event Paul’s knowledge of Jesus had also been ‘according to the flesh’, not in the sense of having known the historical Jesus, but of having a false and superficial view of him. For Paul, Jesus had been a dangerous messianic pretender whose crucifixion was proof that he was indeed the accursed of God – for the Scriptures said, ‘anyone who is hung on a pole is under God’s curse’.
But from now on, he writes, he regarded Christ in this way . . . no longer (16). At and since Damascus he became convinced (14) that in reality ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself’ (19, nasb). It became clear, in an instant, that the glorified, crucified one could only be the Son of God who in death received God’s curse; not a false Messiah, but the divinely appointed agent through whom forgiveness and reconciliation would be mediated to sinful humanity. How shallow and erroneous Paul’s earlier views of Jesus were compared with the new and profound appreciation of the unique figure who alone was qualified to ‘die for all’! Paul’s stern opposition to the new ministers arose out of his conviction that Christianity stood or fell depending on one’s view of the person and work of Jesus. False views of Jesus have been promoted throughout history, including in these present times. Such views must be as firmly opposed in our generation as they were then by Paul if the true gospel is to have its power to mediate salvation.
Raymond Collins: At one time Paul viewed Christ in a merely human fashion, specifically, perhaps, as a violator of the law and a deluded preacher whose disciples departed from what Paul believed to be the canons of Jewish orthodoxy. Consequently Paul persecuted the church (1 Cor. 15:9; Gal. 1:13). Now Paul has a different idea about Christ; he no longer understands Christ as he did in the days when, as a zealous Pharisee, he persecuted the church of God.
C. (:17) New Perspective Towards Believers (and Self) Contrasted with the Old
“Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature;
the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.”
Allows us to easily forgive one another and pursue reconciliation.
Paul Barnett: While Paul’s reference to a new creation (17) summarizes the changes which occur within the life of any believer (if anyone), these changes are dramatically focused within his own life. Love was now the controlling motive (14) in place of hate. Serving the one who died for him had taken the place of selfishness (15). True understanding of Jesus, his identity and achievement have replaced ignorance and error (16).
David Garland: In this next verse Paul makes four crisp, antithetical statements. They are launched by a condition, “If anyone is in Christ.” This phrase, “in Christ,” can mean several things that are not mutually exclusive: that one belongs to Christ, that one lives in the sphere of Christ’s power, that one is united with Christ, and that one is part of the body of Christ, the believing community. Paul’s assumption is that the new creation depends entirely upon being in Christ and that being in Christ brings about a radical change in a person’s life. Campbell concludes that a believer’s union with Christ involves the following:
(1) Believers are situated in the realm of Christ rather than in the realm of sin and death (p. 408).
(2) Believers are identified with Christ in the sense of belonging to and being under the lordship of Christ as opposed to belonging to fallen Adam and being committed to all that is opposed to God (p. 408).
(3) Believers participate “in the events of Christ’s narrative, including his death and burial, resurrection, ascension and glorification.” Believers have been crucified with Christ, have been buried with Christ in baptism, and will be raised with Christ (Rom 6:3–11). Since they have participated in his fate, they will participate in his glorious destiny.
(4) Believers are incorporated into Christ’s mystical body and temple, the community that is “founded, shaped, and directed by Christ” (p. 409).
(5) Believers receive the effects of God’s will toward them through the instrumentality of Christ. They are saved “through Christ” because they are “in Christ.”
(6) Believers become immersed in the inner life of the Trinity and not simply limited to the relationship with Christ. “The Father’s will is enacted through the Son, by the Spirit and for the glory of Christ and the benefit of humanity” (p. 409).
In other words, “In Christ are found redemption, forgiveness, election, salvation, reconciliation, peace, grace, vocation and holiness.”
Philip Hughes: The expression “in Christ” sums up as briefly and as profoundly as possible the inexhaustible significance of man’s redemption. It speaks of security in Him who has Himself borne in his own body the judgment of God against our sin; it speaks of acceptance in Him with whom alone God is well pleased; it speaks of assurance for the future in Him who is the Resurrection and the Life; it speaks of the inheritance of glory in Him who, as the only-begotten Son, is the sole heir of God; it speaks of participation in the divine nature in Him who is the everlasting Word; it speaks of knowing the truth, and being free in that truth, in Him who Himself is the Truth. All this, and very much more than can ever be expressed in human language, is meant by being “in Christ.”
IV. (:18-21) CONSTRAINED BY A HEART FOR RECONCILIATION — OUR CHANGED RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD IS THE BASIS FOR OUR RECONCILIATION WITH FELLOW CHRISTIANS
A. (:18) Motivation Stated = Changed Heart
“Now all these things are from God,
who reconciled us to Himself through Christ
and gave us the ministry of reconciliation”
Scott Hafemann: Paul’s understanding of salvation as reconciliation most likely derives from his own conversion-call experience on the road to Damascus. In revealing to Paul his glory in Christ (cf. 4:4–6), God reconciled the rebellious Paul to himself and gave him a ministry of reconciliation among the Gentiles (cf. 2:14; 5:16, 18–19 with Gal. 1:12–16).
John MacArthur: The glorious good news of the gospel is that the sin-devastated relationship between lost sinners and the holy God can be restored. That at first glance seems impossible. God’s perfect, infinite, righteous justice demands the punishment of all who violate His law. Standing before the bar of His justice are helpless, guilty sinners, unable either to satisfy God or to change their condition. But through God’s plan of reconciliation all the hostility, animosity, and alienation separating the Holy One and sinners vanishes, and those who were once His enemies become His friends. The high calling and noble privilege of preaching this message of reconciliation is the most important duty in the world, since it deals with eternal destinations.
B. (:19a) God’s Global Work of Reconciliation in Christ
“namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself,
not counting their trespasses against them,”
David Garland: Paul is the only NT author to use the noun “reconciliation” (katallagē) and the verb “to reconcile” (katallassein). When the verb is used in the active voice, Christ or God is always the subject. When it is used in the passive voice, humans are the subject. In other words, “God reconciles; man is reconciled.” Reconciliation assumes broken relationships, alienation, and disaffection. The problem is not with God, as if God were some cruel taskmaster from whom humans rebelled. Human sinfulness created the problem, and this sinful condition had to be dealt with before there could be any reconciliation. Sin incurs God’s holy wrath, so it could not be treated lightly or swept under the rug. God can never be reconciled to sin, but God does not turn away from sinners in disgust and leave them to their just desserts. Instead, while humans were still in open revolt, God acted in love (Rom 5:8) to bring the hostility to an end and to bring about peace (see Rom 5:1; see Isa 32:17). This peace is not simply a cessation of hostilities or an uneasy truce. It refers to the mending of the broken relationship that results from God justifying us (making us right) through faith and changing us from enemies to friends. It is important to recognize that sinful humans do not reconcile themselves to an angry God. Instead, a loving God has taken the initiative in reconciliation, and our reconciliation and being put right comes through Christ’s death and our being in Christ (5:21).
John MacArthur: Sinners cannot be reconciled to Him on their own terms. Unregenerate people have no ability to appease God’s anger against sin, satisfy His holy justice, or conform to His standard of righteousness. They are guilty of fatally violating God’s law and face eternal banishment from His presence. The deadly, deceptive premise of all false religion is that sinners, based on their own moral and religious efforts and achievements, can reconcile themselves to God. But God alone designed the way of reconciliation, and only He can initiate the reconciliation of sinners; that God … reconciled us to Himself is precisely the good news of the gospel.
God so loved the world that He made the way of reconciliation. He desired to reconcile sinners to Himself—to make them His children. Such a desire is not foreign to God’s holy character but consistent with it. One of the glorious realities of God’s person is that He is a Savior by nature.
From before the foundation of the world, God freely and apart from outside influence determined to save sinners in order to eternally display the glory of His grace. He chose those He would rescue from His own wrath on sin and wrote their names in the Book of Life. He is no reluctant Savior; in fact, Scripture frequently gives Him that title (Ps. 106:21; Isa. 43:3, 11; 45:15, 21; 49:26; 60:16; 63:8; Hos. 13:4; Luke 1:47; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3, 4; 2:10, 13; 3:4, 6; Jude 25).
From Genesis 3:8–9 where God said, “Where are you?” He has been seeking to save sinners. Ezekiel 34:16 says, “I will seek the lost, bring back the scattered, bind up the broken and strengthen the sick.” He Himself is the eager reconciler, as Paul wrote to the Romans:
Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation. (Rom. 5:9–11)
It is to God’s plan through Jesus Christ that we owe the gratitude for our reconciliation.
The phrase reconciling the world must not be understood as teaching universalism, the false doctrine that all people will be saved. If God has reconciled the world, universalists simplistically argue, then the barrier between God and man has been removed for all, and everyone will be saved. . .
the universal language (e.g., “world,” “all,” “everyone”) in the above-mentioned passages must be understood as referring to mankind in general. Christ did not die for all men without exception, but for all men without distinction. World, in this context, indicates the sphere in which reconciliation takes place; it denotes the class of beings with whom God seeks reconciliation—people from every national, racial, and ethnic group.
R. Kent Hughes: Reconciliation is not something we do — it is something God has accomplished. The ministry of reconciliation is not telling people to make peace with God, but telling them that God has made peace with the world.
C. (:19b-20) Our Ministry of Reconciliation to Others
“and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation;
Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ,
as though God were entreating through us;
we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”
Raymond Collins: Being an ambassador entails being named or commissioned to serve in that capacity, speaking on behalf of the commissioning authority, and expecting to receive the respect that is owed to the authority. Conveying a message on behalf of the sending individual or group, an ambassador represents that authority. Paul’s ministry of reconciliation is a function of his ambassadorial role.
Ray Stedman: Why do we send ambassadors? Well, because countries do not always relate to each other very well. Things need to be explained, need to be approached with diplomacy and caution and carefulness. That is what an ambassador is to do. He is to be a representative of a government, handling himself with such care and confidence that the message that his government seeks to convey is given in the most painless and least offensive way possible. Now that is dangerous. You can get yourself killed or taken captive as an ambassador in this world today.
Charles Swindoll: The first obvious sign of our transformed life is to fulfill our ministries of reconciliation (katallagē [2643]; 2 Cor. 5:18-19). God has commissioned each of us to show others that Jesus’ death on the cross paid for our sin, appeasing God’s wrath and bringing about forgiveness. His resurrection from the dead opened us up to a new life in relationship with Him through the powerful indwelling of the Spirit of resurrection (Rom. 8:11). To us, then, who have personally experienced this reconciliation with God, Christ has committed the message of reconciliation —the gospel of the person and work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 5:19). . .
Ambassadors represent their homeland and its messages, promoting its policies to the people among whom they live. Their country is often judged by their actions as their deeds are watched and their words scrutinized. The same is true for us. Our true home is in heaven; our true sovereign is the Lord Jesus Christ. As His ambassadors, we represent King Jesus to those around us, even though they do not acknowledge Him as their own sovereign Lord. R. V. G. Tasker gives a succinct description of our unusual role as ambassadors for Christ:
Ambassadors engaged upon human affairs are chosen especially for their tact, their dignity and their courtesy, and because they are gifted with persuasive powers. The ambassadors for Christ should show the same characteristics. They must never try to bludgeon men and women into the kingdom of God, but must speak the truth in love . . . by the gentleness and meekness of Christ.
Our task as ambassadors is simple: to “beg” others on behalf of Christ to “be reconciled to God” (5:20). The simple content of this message of reconciliation is succinctly stated: “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (5:21). This verse is the heart and soul of the saving power of the gospel. Jesus, the perfect God-man, the spotless Lamb of God, was made a sin offering in our place, just as Isaiah had prophesied centuries earlier, “But the LORD was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief, if he would render Himself as a guilt offering” (Isa. 53:10).
Through faith alone in the person and work of Jesus Christ, we become the righteousness of God. A real transfer occurs at the Cross: We trade our guilt for His innocence. Having been declared righteous (justified), we are completely free of guilt and shame and have become full heirs of a glorious promise.
David Garland: For divine reconciliation to be complete, they need to be reconciled to the one who first preached the gospel of divine reconciliation to them.
The fundamental problem behind the Corinthians’ misunderstanding of Paul and the resulting friction is that they are not fully reconciled to God. It explains why the values of the pagan society with its hyperfactionalism, enmity, and power plays to gain supremacy and influence over others continue to influence their lives and to interfere with their obedience to God. It explains why they are so easily beguiled by false apostles. Paul tells them to be reconciled to God because they have fallen short on account of their bickering, sinful behavior, and participation with idols, all of which necessitate his frank reproof. Paul has made known his eagerness to be reconciled with the Corinthians and the provocateur who abused him (2:5–11), and later in the letter he rejoices at their repentance (7:12). He will not retract his bold criticism that caused the hard feelings just to win them back and gain an uncertain peace. The breach was caused by serious transgressions, and it is not enough to let bygones be bygones. He wants to purge them of all animosity and misgivings toward him so that he can then build on the reconciliation and strengthen the bonds between them and strengthen their Christian commitment, hence the renewed plea to be reconciled to God.
Scott Hafemann: Paul’s argument in 5:18–20 has made it clear that to be reconciled to God entails aligning oneself with Paul and his message. The Corinthians cannot claim to have received God’s grace while at the same time rejecting Paul’s ministry, since Paul is the one through whom God is making his appeal (5:20). As a result, Paul is concerned in 6:1 that those Corinthians who are still siding with his opponents, with their “other” Jesus, “different spirit,” and “different gospel” (11:4), may have accepted God’s grace “in vain.” He therefore urges them “not to receive God’s grace in vain” by returning to Paul’s gospel.
D. (:21) Substitutionary Atonement = Grounds for Reconciliation
“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf,
that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
Steve Zeisler: This word, “righteousness,” is a magnificent term. Every desire you have for beauty, wholeness, value, purity; every time your heart calls to you to be something worth being, you are longing for the righteousness of God. “Jesus said, ‘Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.’” Our bodies were made for physical sustenance and call out for it when deprived even for a short time. Our souls were made to know righteousness, and a sensitive conscience implores us to be made right with God. “Be all that you can be,” says the Army recruiting slogan, referring, of course, to this life. In some ways (on a much more profound level) this is the message of the Bible: “Be all that you can be.” Be the righteousness of God himself in Christ. Jesus became sin so that we might become in him the righteousness of God. What a wonderful truth!
Raymond Collins: “Righteousness” is not a static concept. It is a matter of a relationship, of being in a proper relationship with God. Transformed by the righteousness of God, we express our righteousness by the way we behave in relationship to God and to those with whom God is in relationship, meaning all those who constitute humankind.
David Garland: The next question is whether Paul’s sees this death as representative (“on behalf of us,” “for our benefit”) or substitutionary (“in our place”). Hooker argues for the representative position: “It is as man’s representative, rather than as his substitute, that Christ suffers, and it is only as one who is fully human that he is able to do anything effective for mankind, by lifting man, as it were, into an obedient relationship with God.” Widespread evidence, however, exists for the use of the preposition hyper in a substitutionary sense to mean “instead of another” or “in the place of another.” McLean argues that “Christ does not become human in order to stand in solidarity with humanity but to stand in its place and to participate in a twofold imputation: he receives the burden of humanity’s sin while humanity receives God’s righteousness.”
R. Kent Hughes: As to how God made him to be sin, we must first understand that it does not say that God made him to be a “sinner.” This would do away with the ground of redemption. So then, how did God make Jesus, who never ceased being sinless, sin? Some would suggest that Jesus’ being made sin means a “sin offering,” which, of course, he was as the Lamb of God who fulfilled the Old Testament’s vast promises. But I think that Dr. Murray Harris gets to the true depth of Christ’s being made sin, as he explains:
It seems Paul’s intent to say more than that Christ was made a sin offering and yet less than he became a sinner. So complete was the identification of the sinless Christ with the sin of the sinner, including its dire guilt and its dread consequences of separation from God, that Paul could say profoundly, “God made him . . . to be sin for us.”
Thus Christ became sin while remaining inwardly and outwardly impeccable. He became sin as our substitute and sacrifice.
John MacArthur: When repentant sinners acknowledge their sin (Ps. 32:5), affirm Jesus as Lord (Rom. 10:9), and trust solely in His completed work on their behalf (Acts 4:12; 16:31), God credits His righteousness to their account. On the cross God treated Jesus as if He had lived our lives with all our sin, so that God could then treat us as if we lived Christ’s life of pure holiness. Our iniquitous life was legally charged to Him on the cross, as if He had lived it, so that His righteous life could be credited to us, as if we lived it. That is the doctrine of justification by imputation—the high point of the gospel. That truth, expressed so concisely and powerfully in this text, is the only cure for the sin plague.
V. (:6:1-2) CONSTRAINED BY URGENCY — PROFITABLE CHRISTIAN SERVICE DEPENDS UPON IMMEDIATE RECONCILIATION
A. (6:2b) Motivation Stated = Urgency
“Behold, now is the acceptable time, behold now is the day of salvation”
R. Kent Hughes: The urgency with which Paul feels this is indicated by his twin repetitions of “behold” or “look.” Earlier he had said, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold the new has come” (5:17). Here he passionately declares, “Behold, now is the favorable time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” In other words, don’t receive the grace of God in vain! Don’t put it off! I implore you on behalf of Christ.
B. (6:1) Profitable Christian Service at Risk
“And working together with Him,
we also urge you not to receive the grace of God in vain”
Paul was working together with God because he was striving for the same goal;
Christians should not be working against one another – Deut. 22:10 “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together” – sometimes God must marvel at what kind of animals we manifest ourselves to be.
Don’t act like a donkey!
Danger of losing one’s reward at judgment seat of Christ
Frank Matera: Since the Corinthians have called into question the apostolic integrity of the one who exercises this new covenant ministry of reconciliation among them, they will have received the grace of God in vain if they are not fully reconciled with Christ’s ambassador; for one cannot be at enmity with the ambassador through whom God makes the appeal for reconciliation and still be reconciled with God. The appeal “not to receive the grace of God in vain,” then, is an appeal to be reconciled with Christ’s ambassador.
Paul grounds this appeal in a quotation from Isa 49:8 that reproduces the text of the Septuagint exactly. The text is part of the Servant Song (Isa 49:1–13) in which God calls the servant (vv. 1–7) and then announces the salvation that the servant will effect (vv. 8–11). Paul, however, interprets the text christologically and eschatologically. The “favorable time” and “the day of salvation” have occurred in the Christ event, by which God has reconciled humanity to himself (5:14–21). Consequently in commenting on this text Paul emphatically writes “now” is the favorable time and “now” is the day of salvation. Since God’s eschatological act of salvation has occurred in Christ, in whom God’s new creation has made its appearance, the Corinthians must respond to Christ’s ambassador “now”; otherwise they will have received the grace of God in vain.
C. (6:2a) God Stands Ready to Do His Part
“for He says, ‘At the acceptable time I listened to you,
and on the day of salvation I helped you.’”
Must deal with the conflict immediately; it takes priority; no time to try to schedule something for weeks down the road.
Murray Harris: In its original context the quotation belongs to a section of Isaiah 49 (vv. 7-9) where Yahweh directly addresses his Servant who has been “deeply despised, abhorred by the nations” (Isa 49:7, RSV), promising him vindication before men in due time and calling on him to carry out the work of restoration after the return from exile.
Richard Pratt: We are in the day of great opportunity because the final saving work of God has come to earth. Yet, we are in a day of great danger because failing to receive this salvation through enduring faith will bring a severe judgment. The New Testament age is the climax of history. There will be no possibility of salvation beyond the New Testament. Paul wanted the Corinthians to prove faithful because of the critical moment in history that they occupied.
* * * * * * * * * *
PREACHING CHRIST:
1) The “fear of the Lord” is not just an OT doctrine. Christ’s work as Judge of believers makes us sober-minded and circumspect in ordering our motivations and action to be pleasing to Him. The prospect of reward is very great.
2) The supreme love of Christ for us as shown in being made sin for us and dying for us should control all that we do and mortify our selfishness.
3) He rose again “on our behalf” so that we might live in right relationship with the Father and with one another with the power of a changed heart.
4) Christ is carrying out His present ministry through us … so that the exhortations we make are actually coming from Him.