"God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them" (•-' Cor. v. I'd). Here the manner of this reconciliation is expressly said to be not our laying aside our enmity, hut the non-im- putation of our trespasses to us by God; in other words, the pardoning of our offences and restoring us to favor. The promise on God's part to do this is expressive of his previous reconciliation to the world by the death of
Christ; for our actual n nciliation is distinguished
from this by what follows, "and hath committed to us the ministry of reconciliation." by virtue of which all men were, by 'he apostles, entreated and besougbl to he reconciled to God. The reason, too, of this reconcilia- tion of (hid to the world, by virtue of which he prom- ises not to impute sin. is grounded by the apostle, in the last verse of the chapter, not upon the laying-aside of enmity by men, but upon the sacrifice of Chrisl ; "For he hath made him to he sin" (a sin-offering) " for us, w ho knew no sin. that we mighl he made the righti of (iod in him." "And that he mighl reconcile both
unto < tod iii one body by the cross, bavin- -lain the en- mity thereby" (Eph. ii, 16). Here the act of reconciling is attributed to Christ. Man is not spoken ol a- recon- ciling himself to God; hut Chrisl i- said to reconcile •lews and Gentiles together, and both to God, "by bis
cross." Thus. sa\ S the apostle, " he is our peace ;" hut in what man tier i- the peace effected? Not, iii the lirst instance, by subduing the enmity of man's heart, hut by removing the enmity of •• the law." •• lla\ ing ah. dish- ed in." or by. "his flesh the enmity, even the law of
commandments." The ceremonial law only i- here probably meant ; for by its abolition, through its fulfil- ment in Christ, the enmiu between dew- and < ..utiles
RECONCILIATION
959
RECORDER
was taken awa}-. But still it was not only necessary to reconcile Jew and Gentile together, but to "reconcile both unto God." This he did by the same act; abol- ishing the ceremonial law by becoming the antitype of all its sacrifices, and thus, by the sacrifice of himself, ef- fecting the reconciliation of all to God, "slaying the en- mity by his cross," taking away whatever hindered the reconciliation of the guilty to God, which, as we have seen, was not enmity and hatred to God in the hu- man mind only, but that judicial hostility and variance which separated God and man as Judge and criminal. The feeble criticism of Socinus on this passage, in which lie has been followed by his adherents to this day, is thus answered by Grotius : " In this passage the dative Qi<{), to God, can only be governed by the verb airoica- raXk&Zy, that he might reconcile ; for the interpretation of Socinus, which makes to God stand by itself, or that to reconcile to God is to reconcile them among them- selves that they might serve God, is distorted and with- out example. Nor is the argument valid which is drawn from thence, that in this place Paul properly treats of the peace made between Jews and Gentiles; for neither does it follow from this argument that it was beside his purpose to mention the peace made for each with God. For the two opposites which are joined are so joined among themselves that they should be pri- marily and chiefly joined by that bond; for they are not united among themselves, except by and for that bond. Gentiles and Jews, therefore, are made friends among themselves by friendship with God."
Here, also, a critical remark will be appropriate. The above passages will show how falsely it has been assert- ed that God is nowhere in Scripture said to be recon- ciled to us, and that they only declare that we are rec- onciled to God; but the fact is, that the very phrase of our In ing reconciled to God imports the turning-away of his wrath from us. Whitby observes, on the words KciTaWciTTtiv and KaraWayi), "that they naturally import the reconciliation of one that is angry or dis- pleased with us, both in profane and Jewish writers." When the Philistines suspected that David would ap- pease the anger of Saul by becoming their adversary. they said, "Wherewith should ho reconcile himself to his master? Should it not be with the heads of these men ?" Not, surely, how shall he remove his own anger against his master? but how shall he remove his mas- ter's anger against him? — how shall he restore himself to his master's favor? "If thou bring thy gift to the altar and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee," not that thou hast aught against thy brother, "first be reconciled to thy brother," i. e. appease and conciliate him ; so that the words, in fact, import " See that thy brother be reconciled to thee," since that which goes before is, not that he hath done thee an injury, but thou him. Thus, then, for us to be reconciled to God is to avail ourselves of the means by which the anger of God towards us is to be appeased, which the New Test, expressly declares to be meritori- ously "the sin-offering" of him "who knew no sin," and instrumental!}', as to each individual personally, "faith in his blood."— Watson, Theol. Diet. s. v. See Propitiation.