2 Corinthians 5:19

To wit - (Greek, Ὡς ὄτι Hōs oti), namely This verse is designed further to state the nature of the plan of reconciliation, and of the message with which they were entrusted. It contains an abstract, or an epitome of the whole plan; and is one of those emphatic passages in which Paul compresses into a single sentence the substance of the whole plan of redemption.

That God was in Christ - That God was by Christ (ἐν Χριστῷ en Christō), by means of Christ; by the agency, or mediatorship of Christ. Or it may mean that God was united to Christ, and manifested himself by him. So Doddridge interprets it. Christ was the mediator by means of whom God designed to accomplish the great work of reconciliation.

Reconciling the world unto himself - The world here evidently means the human race generally, without distinction of nation, age, or rank. The whole world was alienated from him, and he sought to have it reconciled. This is one incidental proof that God designed that the plan of salvation should be adapted to all people; see the note on 2Co 5:14. It may be observed further, that God sought that the world should be reconciled. Man did not seek it. He had no plan for it, he did not desire it. He had no way to effect it. It was the offended party, not the offending, that sought to be reconciled; and this shows the strength of his love. It was love for enemies and alienated beings, and love evinced to them by a most earnest desire to become their friend, and to be at agreement with them; compare note on Rom 5:8. Tyndale renders this very accurately: “For God was in Christ, and made agreement between the world and himself, and imputed not their sins unto them.”

Not imputing their trespasses - Not reckoning their transgressions to them; that is, forgiving them, pardoning them. On the meaning of the word impute, see the note, Rom 4:3. The idea here is, that God did not charge on them with inexorable severity and stern justice their offences, but graciously provided a plan of pardon, and offered to remit their sins on the conditions of the gospel. The plan of reconciliation demonstrated that he was not disposed to impute their sins to them, as he might have done, and to punish them with unmitigated severity for their crimes, but was more disposed to pardon and forgive. And it may be here asked, if God was not disposed to charge with unrelenting severity their own sins to their account, but was rather disposed to pardon them, can we believe that he is disposed to charge on them the sin of another? If he does not charge on them with inexorable and unmitigated severity their own transgressions, will he charge on them with unrelenting severity - or at all - the sin of Adam? see the note on Rom 5:19. The sentiment here is, that God is not disposed or inclined to charge the transgressions of people upon them; he has no pleasure in doing it; and therefore he has provided a plan by which they may be pardoned. At the same time it is true that unless their sins are pardoned, justice will charge or impute their sins to them, and will exact punishment to the uttermost.

And hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation - Margin,” put in us.” Tyndale renders this: “and hath committed unto us the preaching of the atonement.” The meaning is, that the office of making known the nature of this plan, and the conditions on which God was willing to be reconciled to man, had been committed to the ministers of the gospel.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

2Co 5:19. Ὡς ὅτι) Explanatory particles.—ἦν καταλλάσσων) was reconciling, comp. 2Co 5:17, note. The time implied by the verb ἦν is shown, 2Co 5:21.[32]—ἐν Χριστῷ, ἘΝ ἩΜῖΝ, in Christ, in us) These words correspond to one another.—ΚΌΣΜΟΝ, the world) which had been formerly hostile.—καταλλάσσων· μὴ λογιζόμενος, reconciling, not imputing) The same thing is generally amplified by affirmative and negative words.—τὰ παραπτώματα) offences many and grave.—θέμενος, having committed) as it is committed to an interpreter what he ought to say.

[32] viz. the time when God made Jesus to be Sin for us, etc.—ED.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Co_5:19. Confirmatory elucidation of the previous ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, τοῦ καταλλάξαντος … καταλλαγῆς. I have reason for saying, from God, who has reconciled us, etc., because, indeed, God in Christ reconciled the world with Himself, etc. The recurrence of the same leading expressions, which were used in 2Co_5:18, gives to this elucidation a solemn emphasis. The θεός emphatically prefixed, however, looking back to ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ in 2Co_5:18, shows that the point is not a description of the καταλλαγή (Camerarius, Wolf, Estius, Billroth, and others), or of the διακονία τῆς καταλλαγῆς (Grotius, Rückert), but the divine self-activity in Christs reconciling work and in the bestowal of the office of reconciliation. The two participial clauses, μὴ λογιζόμενος κ.τ.λ. and καὶ θέμενος κ.τ.λ., stand related to θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χ. κόσμ. καταλλ. ἑαυτ. argumentatively, so that the words καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν κ.τ.λ., which serve to elucidate καὶ δόντος ἡμῖν κ.τ.λ., 2Co_5:18, are not co-ordinated to the καταλλάσσων (as one might expect from 2Co_5:18), but are subordinated to it,a change in the form of connecting the conceptions, which cannot surprise us in the case of Paul when we consider his free and lively variety in the mode of linking together his thought.

ὡς ὅτι θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χ. κόσμ. καταλλ. ἑαυτῷ] because, indeed, God in Christ was reconciling the world with Himself. On ὡς ὅτι,[238] utpote quod (to be analyzed: as it is the case, because), see Winer, p. 574 [E. T. 771]. The ἦν καταλλάσσων should go together (see already Chrysostom), and is more emphatic than the simple imperfect. Paul wishes, namely, to affirm of God, not simply what He did (κατήλλασσε), but in what activity He was; in the person and work of Christ (ἐν Χριστῷ) God was in world-reconciling activity. The imperfect receives from the context the definite temporal reference: when Christ died the death of reconciliation, with which took place that very καταλλάξαντος, 2Co_5:18. See, especially, Rom_3:24 f., 2Co_5:10. Ambrosiaster, Pelagius, Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Beza, Calovius, Bengel, and many others, including Rückert, Osiander, Neander, connect ἮΝ ἘΝ ΧΡΙΣΤῷ together: God was in Christ, while reconciling the world with Himself. This would only be possible in the event of the two following participial clauses expressing the mode of reconciliation, which, however, on account of the second clause (καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν κ.τ.λ.), cannot be the case; they must, on the contrary, contain the confirmation of θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χ. κόσμ. καταλλ. ἑαυτῷ. According to their contents, however, they do not at all confirm the fact that God was in Christ, but the fact that God was in Christ reconciling the world; hence it is at variance with the context to make the connection ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ. Theodoret was right in denying expressly this connection. Hofmann, after abandoning his earlier (in the Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 326) misinterpretation (see in opposition to it my fourth edition, p. 147), now explains it by referring ὡς ὅτι κ.τ.λ. merely to Κ. ΔΌΝΤΟς ἩΜῖΝ Κ.Τ.Λ.: because He was a God, who in Christ was reconciling to Himself a world in its sinful condition without imputation of its sins, and who had laid the word of reconciliation on him the apostle. A new misinterpretation. For, first, the qualitative expression a God, which is held to be predicative, would not only have been quite superfluous (Paul would have had to write merely ὡς ὅτι ἦν κ.τ.λ.), but also quite unsuitable, since there is no contrast with other gods; secondly, the relative tense ἮΝ must apply to the time in which what is said in ΔΌΝΤΟς ἩΜῖΝ Κ.Τ.Λ. took place (in the sense, therefore: because he was at that time a God, who was reconciling), which would furnish an absurd thought, because, when Paul became an apostle, the reconciliation of the world had been long accomplished; thirdly, θέμενος would be a participle logically incorrect, because what it affirms followed on the καταλλάσσων; lastly, ΜῊ ΛΟΓΙΖΌΜ. cannot be taken in the sense of without imputation, since a reconciliation with imputation of sins is unthinkable.

κόσμον] not a world, but the world, even without the article (Winer, p. 117 [E. T. 153]), as Gal_6:14; Rom_4:13. It applies to the whole human race, not possibly (in opposition to Augustine, Lyra, Beza, Cajetanus, Estius) merely to those predestinated. The reconciliation of all men took place objectively through Christs death, although the subjective appropriation of it is conditioned by the faith of the individual.[239]

μὴ λογιζόμενος αὐτοῖς κ.τ.λ.] since He does not reckon (present) to them their sins, and has deposited (aorist) in us the word of reconciliation. The former is the altered judicial relation, into which God has entered and in which He stands to the sins of men; the latter is the measure adopted by God, by means of which the former is made known to men. From both it is evident that God in Christ reconciled the world with Himself; otherwise He would neither have left the sins of men without imputation, nor have imparted to the apostolic teachers the word of reconciliation that they might preach it. If, as is usually done, the participial definition μὴ λογιζόμενος is taken in the imperfect sense (Ewald takes it rightly in a present sense) as a more precise explanation of the modus of the reconciliation, there arises the insoluble difficulty that θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν also would have to be so viewed, and to be taken consequently as an element of the reconciliation, which is impossible, since it expresses what God has done after the work of reconciliation, in order to appropriate it to men. θέμενος, namely, cannot be connected with θεὸς ἦν, against which the aorist participle is itself decisive; and it is quite arbitrary to assume (with Billroth and Olshausen) a deviation from the construction, so that Paul should have written ἔθετο instead of θέμενος (comp. Vulgate, Calvin, and many others, who translate it without ceremony: et posuit).

ἐν ἡμῖν] The doctrine of reconciliation (comp. on the genitive, 1Co_1:18; Act_20:32) which is to be preached, is regarded as something deposited in the souls of the preachers for further communication: sicut interpreti committitur quid loqui debeat, Bengel. Comp. on ἐν ἡμῖν, which is not to be taken as among us, the θεῖναι ἐν φρεσί, ἐν θυμῷ, ἐν στήθεσσι.

[238] In 2Co_11:21, the ὅτι in ὡς ὅτι does not specify a reason, but introduces the contents of λέγω. In 2Th_2:2, also, ὡς ὅτι is like that. At our passage it is: in measure of the fact, that God was, etc.,a more circumstantial and consequently more emphatic introduction of the ground than a simple ὅτι or γάρ would have been. It makes us linger more over the confirmatory ground assigned.

[239] The question whether and how Paul regarded the reconciliation of those who died before the ἱλαστήριον of Christ, and were not justified like Abraham, remains unanswered, since he nowhere explains himself on the point, and since the dead are not included in the notion of κόσμος. Still, Rom_10:7, Php_2:10 presuppose the descent of Christ into Hades, which is the necessary correlative of the resurrection ἐκ νεκρῶν, and it is expressly taught by Paul in Eph_4:9.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Co 5:19 . ὡς ὅτι Θεὸς ἦμ κ . τ . λ .: viz., that God was reconciling the world, sc. the whole human race ( cf. Rom 4:13 ; Rom 11:12 , and note the absence of the article), to Himself in Christ ( cf. Gal 2:17 ). The pleonastic ὡς ὅτι is not classical, but it is found in late authors (see reff.). The A.V., “God was in Christ, reconciling,” etc., is not accurate; ἦν goes with both καταλλάσσων and θέμενος , ἦν with a participle being more emphatic than a simple imperfect ( cf. Luk 4:44 ). If we take ἦν with ἐν Χριστῷ , we should have to treat θέμενος κ . τ . λ . as a parallel clause to λογιζόμενος κ . τ . λ ., which it is not. μὴ λογιζόμενος αὐτοῖς κ . τ . λ .: not reckoning unto them their trespasses , a parenthetical sentence explanatory of καταλλάσσων ; cf. Rom 4:8 (Psa 32:2 ). καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν κ . τ . λ .: and had placed in our hands ( cf. 1Th 5:9 , 1Ti 1:12 ; the verb is specially used of the Divine purposes) the Word of Reconciliation, i.e. , the Divine Message which speaks of reconciliation to God; cf. Act 13:26 , ὁ λόγος τῆς σωτηρίας ταύτης , 1Co 1:18 , ὁ λόγος τοῦ σταυροῦ , Phi 2:16 , λόγος ζωῆς , etc.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Used our labor and travail.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

God was in Christ, reconciling--that is, God was BY Christ (in virtue of Christ's intervention) reconciling," &c. Was reconciling" implies the time when the act of reconciliation was being carried into effect (Co2 5:21), namely, when "God made Jesus, who knew no sin, to be sin for us." The compound of "was" and the participle "reconciling," instead of the imperfect (Greek), may also imply the continuous purpose of God, from before the foundation of the world, to reconcile man to Himself, whose fall was foreseen. The expression " IN Christ" for "by Christ" may be used to imply additionally that God was IN Christ (Joh 10:38; Joh 14:10), and so by Christ (the God-man) was reconciling . . . The Greek for "by" or "through" Christ (the best manuscripts omit "Jesus"), Co2 5:18, is different. "In" must mean here in the person of Christ. The Greek Katallasson implies "changing" or altering the judicial status from one of condemnation to one of justification. The atonement (at-one-ment), or reconciliation, is the removal of the bar to peace and acceptance with a holy God, which His righteousness interposed against our sin. The first step towards restoring peace between us and God was on God's side (Joh 3:16). The change therefore now to be effected must be on the part of offending man, God the offended One being already reconciled. It is man, not God, who now needs to be reconciled, and to lay aside his enmity against God (Rom 5:10-11). ("We have received the atonement" [Greek, reconciliation], cannot mean "We have received the laying aside of our own enmity"). Compare Rom 3:24-25.

the world--all men (Col 1:20; Jo1 2:2). The manner of the reconciling is by His "not imputing to men their trespasses," but imputing them to Christ the Sin-bearer. There is no incongruity that a father should be offended with that son whom he loveth, and at that time offended with him when he loveth him. So, though God loved men whom He created, yet He was offended with them when they sinned, and gave His Son to suffer for them, that through that Son's obedience He might be reconciled to them (reconcile them to Himself, that is, restore them WITH JUSTICE to His favor) [BISHOP PEARSON, Exposition of the Creed].

hath committed unto us--Greek, "hath put into our hands." "Us," that is, ministers.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 19. That God was in Christ] This is the doctrine which this ministry of reconciliation holds out, and the doctrine which it uses to bring about the reconciliation itself.

God was in Christ:

1. Christ is the same as Messiah, the Anointed One, who was to be prophet, priest, and king, to the human race; not to the Jews only, but also to the Gentiles. There had been prophets, priests, and kings, among the Jews and their ancestors; and some who had been priest and prophet, king and priest, and king and prophet; but none have ever sustained in his own person the threefold office except Christ; for none have ever ministered in reference to the whole world but he. The functions of all the others were restrained to the ancient people of God alone.

2. Now all the others were appointed of God in reference to this Christ; and as his types, or representatives, till the fulness of the time should come.

3. And that this Christ might be adequate to the great work of reconciling the whole human race to God, by making atonement for their sins, God was in him. The man Jesus was the temple and shrine of the eternal Divinity; for in him dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, Col 2:9; and he made peace by the blood of his cross.

4. Christ, by his offering upon the cross, made atonement for the sins of the world; and therefore one important branch of the doctrine of this reconciliation was to show that God would not impute or account their trespasses to them, so as to exact the penalty, because this Jesus had died in their stead.

The whole of this important doctrine was short, simple, and plain. Let us consider it in all its connections:

1. You believe there is a God.

2. You know he has made you.

3. He requires you to love and serve him.

4. To show you how to do this he has given a revelation of himself, which is contained in his law, c.

5. You have broken this law, and incurred the penalty, which is death.

6. Far from being able to undo your offences, or make reparation to the offended majesty of God, your hearts, through the deceitfulness and influence of sin, are blinded, hardened, and filled with enmity, against your Father and your Judge.

7. To redeem you out of this most wretched and accursed state, God in his endless love, has given his Son for you; who has assumed your nature, and died in your stead.

8. In consequence of this he has commanded repentance towards God, and remission of sins, to be published in his name in all the earth.

9. All who repent, and believe in Christ as having died for them as a sin-offering, (2Cor 5:21,) shall receive remission of sins.

10. And if they abide in him they shall have an eternal inheritance among them that are sanctified.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

19. God was in Christ. Some take this as meaning simply — God reconciled the world to himself in Christ; but the meaning is fuller and more comprehensive — first, that God was in Christ; and, secondly, that he reconciled the world to himself by his intercession. It is also of the Father that this is affirmed; for it were an improper expression, were you to understand it as meaning, that the divine nature of Christ was in him. The Father, therefore, was in the Son, in accordance with that statement —

I am in the Father, and the Father in me. (John 10:38.)

Therefore he that hath the Son, hath the Father also. For Paul has made use of this expression with this view — that we may learn to be satisfied with Christ alone, because in him we find also God the Father, as he truly communicates himself to us by him. Hence the expression is equivalent to this — “Whereas God had withdrawn to a distance from us, he has drawn near to us in Christ, and thus Christ has become to us the true Emmanuel, and his coming is God’s drawing near to men.”

The second part of the statement points out the office of Christ — his being our propitiation, (1 John 2:2,) because out of Him, God is displeased with us all, inasmuch as we have revolted from righteousness. For what purpose, then, has God appeared to men in Christ? For the purpose of reconciliation — that, hostilities being removed, those who were aliens, might be adopted as sons. Now, although Christ’s coming as our Redeemer originated in the fountain of Divine love towards us, yet until men perceive that God has been propitiated by the Mediator, there must of necessity be a variance remaining, with respect to them, which shuts them out from access to God. On this point we shall speak more fully ere long.

Not imputing to them. Mark, in what way men return into favor with God — when they are regarded as righteous, by obtaining the remission of their sins. For so long as God imputes to us our sins, He must of necessity regard us with abhorrence; for he cannot be friendly or propitious to sinners. But this statement may seem to be at variance with what is said elsewhere — that, we were loved by Him before the creation of the world, (Ephesians 1:4,) and still more with what he says, (John 3:16,) that the love, which he exercised towards us was the reason, why He expiated our sins by Christ, for the cause always goes before its effect. I answer, that we were loved before the creation of the world, but it was only in Christ In the mean time, however, I confess, that the love of God was first in point of time, and of order, too, as to God, but with respect to us, the commencement of his love has its foundation in the sacrifice of Christ. For when we contemplate God without a Mediator, we cannot conceive of Him otherwise than as angry with us: a Mediator interposed between us, makes us feel, that He is pacified towards us. As, however, this also is necessary to be known by us — that Christ came forth to us from the fountain of God’s free mercy, the Scripture explicitly teaches both — that the anger of the Father has been appeased by the sacrifice of the Son, and that the Son has been offered up for the expiation of the sins of men on this ground — because God, exercising compassion towards them, receives them, on the ground of such a pledge, into favor.

The whole may be summed up thus: “Where sin is, there the anger of God is, and therefore God is not propitious to us without, or before, his blotting out our sins, by not imputing them. As our consciences cannot apprehend this benefit, otherwise than through the intervention of Christ’s sacrifice, it is not without good reason, that Paul makes that the commencement and cause of reconciliation, with regard to us.

And hath committed to us. Again he repeats, that a commission has been given to the ministers of the gospel to communicate to us this grace. For it might be objected, “Where is Christ now, the peacemaker between God and us? At what a distance he resides from us!” He says, therefore, that as he has once suffered, (1 Peter 3:18,) so he daily presents to us the fruit of his suffering through means of the Gospel, which he designed, should be in the world, as a sure and authentic register of the reconciliation, that has once been effected. It is the part of ministers, therefore, to apply to us, so to speak, the fruit of Christ’s death.

Lest, however, any one should dream of a magical application, such as Papists contrive, we must carefully observe what he immediately subjoins — that it consists wholly in the preaching of the Gospel. For the Pope, along with his priests, makes use of this pretext for giving a color of warrant for the whole of that wicked and execrable system of merchandise, which they carry on, in connection with the salvation of souls. “The Lord,” say they, “has furnished us with a commission and authority to forgive sins.” This I acknowledge, provided they discharge that embassy, of which Paul here makes mention. The absolution, however, which they make use of in the Papacy, is entirely magical; and besides, they inclose pardon of sins in lead and parchment, or they connect it with fictitious and frivolous superstitions. What resemblance do all these things bear to the appointment of Christ? Hence the ministers of the Gospel restore us to the favor of God in a right and orderly manner, when they bear testimony to us by means of the Gospel as to the favor of God having been procured for us. Let this testimony be removed, and nothing remains but mere imposture. Beware, then, of placing even the smallest drop of your confidence on any thing apart from the Gospel.

I do not, indeed, deny, that the grace of Christ is applied to us in the sacraments, and that our reconciliation with God is then confirmed in our consciences; but, as the testimony of the Gospel is engraven upon the sacraments, they are not to be judged of separately by themselves, but must be taken in connection with the Gospel, of which they are appendages. In fine, the ministers of the Church are ambassadors, for testifying and proclaiming the benefit of reconciliation, only on this condition — that they speak from the Gospel, as from an authentic register.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(19) To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world.—Better, perhaps, How that it was God who was reconciling in Christ a world unto Himself. Both “God” and “world” are, in the Greek, without the article. The English rendering is tenable grammatically, but the position of the words in the original suggests the construction given above. He seems to emphasise the greatness of the redeeming work by pointing at once to its author and its extent. The structure is the same as the “was preaching” of Luk_4:44. All the English versions, however, from Wiclif downwards, adopt the same construction. Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva version translate, making agreement between the world and Himself instead of “reconciling to Himself.” The “world” is, of course, the world of men, the “all” of 2Co_5:15.

Not imputing their trespasses unto them . . .—The two participial clauses that follow describe the result of the reconciling work. The first is that God no longer charges their transgressions against men: the pronouns being used in the third person plural, as being more individualising than the “world,” and more appropriate than would have been the first person, which he had used in 2Co_5:18, and which he wanted, in its narrower extension, for the clause which was to follow. The word for “imputing,” or reckoning, is specially prominent in the Epistles of this period, occurring, though in very varied shades of meaning, eight times in this Epistle and nineteen times in that to the Romans. The difficulty of maintaining a logical coherence of this truth with that of a judgment according to works does not present itself to the Apostle’s mind, and need not trouble us. (See Note on 2Co_5:10.)

And hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.—Literally, to maintain the participial construction, placing with (or in) us the word of reconciliation. Tyndale gives “atonement” here, as in Rom_5:11.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

19. to wit, that] i.e. this is the tenor of our message.

God was in Christ reconciling] Or ‘that God in Christ was reconciling.’ Either translation is grammatically and theologically admissible. The former translation, preferred by the Latin expositors, lays most stress upon the indwelling of God in Christ (cf. Joh_14:10; Joh_14:17). The latter, which has found most favour among the Greek commentators, indicates the fact, not merely that God reconciled the world, but that the process of reconciliation was carried on “in the Person and work of Christ.” Meyer.

the world unto himself] It is frequently declared in Scripture that God’s purpose embraces all mankind (“the whole world,” Alford). Cf. Joh_1:29; Joh_3:16; Joh_4:42; Joh_6:33; 1Ti_2:4; 1Ti_4:10; 1Jn_2:2, &c.

not imputing their trespasses unto them] παραπτώματα, trespasses, literally, fallings aside from the path. The English word is derived from an old French word trespasser, which, like transgress, has a similar meaning to the Greek, namely, to pass over the boundary. This passage explains the nature of the process of reconciliation. It is a very simple one. It consists in the fact that in consequence of Christ’s mediatorial work, God no longer imputes sin to man, i.e. regards his sin as though it had not been committed. Cf. Rom_3:25; Rom_3:4; Rom_8:1. Why this is so, and how it comes to pass that God is both ‘just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus,’ the Apostle does not explain, nor is any complete explanation given in Holy Scripture, which has concerned itself on this point less with theory than with fact. See however 2Co_5:15-18; also Rom_5:8-11; Heb_9:12-14; Heb_9:28; Heb_10:10-14, &c. The word here translated imputed is translated indifferently by that word, and by reckoned and accounted in the A. V. It signifies (1) to consider (as in Rom_8:18), and hence (2) to consider a thing as having been done, to reckon or impute.

and hath committed unto us] Literally, and placed in us (puttid in us, Wiclif). It signifies more than a simple entrusting with, including (1) the reception of the reconciliation by the first preachers of the Gospel, and (2) their proclamation of it as well by their lives as by their teaching.

the word of reconciliation] So Wiclif and the Rhemish Version. Tyndale, Cranmer and the Geneva Version render the preaching of the atonement. The Greek, which is here rendered by ‘word,’ signifies (1) the abstract reason of a thing, (2) the discourse which is held about it, and (3) the word which expresses it. The use of three distinct tenses in the three members of this sentence is not a little remarkable. The imperfect, used of God’s reconciling work in Christ, relates to the continuation of that work throughout the whole of His earthly ministry. The present, in the word ‘imputing’ signifies that this work of non-imputation is still going on. The aorist, used in the word translated ‘hath committed,’ relates to the moment when God ‘accounted’ St Paul ‘faithful, putting him into the ministry,’ 1Ti_1:12.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now then we are ambassadors for Christ,.... Since God has made reconciliation by Christ, and the ministry of it is committed to us, we are ambassadors for him; we come with full powers from him, not to propose terms of peace, to treat with men about it, to offer it to them, but to publish and proclaim it as made by him: we represent him, and God who made it by him,

as though God did beseech you by us; to regard this embassy and message of peace, which we bring from him; to consider from whence it takes its rise, what methods have been used to effect it, and how it is accomplished; which should oblige to say and sing with the angels, "glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, and good will towards men"; and to behave in peaceable manner to all men, and one another:

we pray you in Christ's stead; representing him as if he was present before you:

be ye reconciled to God; you, who are new creatures, for whom Christ has died, and peace is made; you, the members of the church at Corinth, who upon a profession of faith have been taken into such a relation; be ye reconciled to all the dispensations of divine Providence towards you; let your wills bow, and be resigned to his, since he is the God of peace to you; and as you are reconciled by Christ as a priest, be reconciled to him as your King, and your God; to all his ordinances and appointments; to all the orders and laws of his house; conform in all things to his will and pleasure, which we, as his ambassadors, in his name and stead, have made known unto you. You ought to be all obedience to him, and never dispute anything he says or orders.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Ver. 19. That God was in Christ, &c.] As the salt waters of the sea, when they are strained through the earth, they are sweet in the rivers; so (saith one) the waters of majesty and justice in God, though terrible, yet being strained and derived through Christ, they are sweet and delightful.

Reconciling the world] What the apostle meaneth by this, see his own exposition. {See Trapp on "Rom 11:15"}

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Not imputing, i.e. truly taking away our sins, blotting out the handwriting of the decree which was against us,...fastening it to the cross, as it is said, Colossians ii. 14. And to us, who are his apostles and the ministers of his gospel, he hath imparted and committed this word of reconciliation, by the preaching of his doctrine, and the administration of his sacraments, &c. In these functions we act and we speak to you as the ambassadors of Christ; we speak to you in his name, we represent his person, when we exhort you to be reconciled to God. "He that heareth you, heareth me." (Luke x. 16.) (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself; by world, here, some would understand all mankind, and by reconciling, no more than making God reconcilable; but this proceedeth from an over fondness of their principle of Christ’s dying for all, and every man. For as it is manifest from a multitude of scriptures, that world is many times taken in a much more limited and restrained sense; so there is nothing here that guides us to interpret it in such a latitude; nay, that which followeth, doth manifestly so restrain it; for God was not in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, that is, every man and woman in the world, so as not to impute their sins to them. This the apostle here affirmeth; which makes it manifest, that by world here is meant many, some of all sorts, as well Gentiles as Jews; even so many as he pleaseth not to impute their sins unto.

And hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation: now, (saith the apostle), the dispensing and publishing that word, by which this reconciliation is made known to the children of men, God hath committed to us; to us, that are apostles, and so to the ministers of the gospel that shall succeed us in the work of the ministry. This mightily commendeth the gospel, and the preaching of it, that it is the word by which, as a means, souls are reconciled unto God.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

19. In Christ—By indwelling and identification; so that what Christ does, as reconciler, God does through him. The reconciliation implies previous opposition on both sides. By it men who “were enemies” (Rom_5:10) have their enmity removed; and by it God, whose “wrath is revealed from heaven,” (Rom_1:18,) is enabled to cease imputing “their trespasses unto them.” Man’s enmity is the hostility of the criminal to righteousness; God’s enmity is the severity of righteousness against the unrighteous. Note on Rom_1:18. The enmity of wrong towards right is terrible; but the enmity of right towards wrong is infinitely more terrible, for it has Omnipotence as its supporter and executioner. The death of Christ, 2Co_5:14-15, the symbol and substitute for its executive infliction, is the token of God’s readiness to pardon; our consent to be reconciled to God, 2Co_5:20, and to receive not the grace of God in vain, are the condition of the appropriation of the power of that death in our individual behalf.

Imputing… unto them—Charging to men’s account and holding them liable for trespasses.

Word—The divine proposal from God to man of reconciliation.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. This and the many other passages of Scripture which always represent the atonement as the work of the blessed Trinity, and as being the result of the love, not of the wrath, of God, ought to have been a sufficient warning against the hideous extravagance of those forensic statements of the atonement which have disgraced almost a thousand years of theology (Rom_5:10; 1Jn_4:10) That God"s purpose of mercy embraced all mankind, and not an elect few, is again and again stated in Scripture. (see Col_1:20) Not imputing their trespasses unto them. See this developed in Rom_15:5-8. Hath entrusted unto us; literally, who also deposited in us, as though it were some sacred treasure.

Vers. 19, 20.

God"s work in Christ.

wit, that God was in Christ," etc. God is a great Worker. He is the eternal Fountain of life in unremitting flow. He is essentially active, the mainspring of all activity in the universe but that of sin. There are at least four organs through which he works material laws, animal instincts, moral mind, and Jesus Christ. By the first he leads on the great revolutions of inanimate nature in all its departments; by the second he preserves, guides, and controls all the sentient tribes that populate the earth, the air, and the sea; by the third, through the laws of reason and the dictates of conscience, he governs the vast empire of mind; and by the fourth viz Christ, he works out the redemption of sinners in our world. There is no more difficulty in regarding him in the one Person, Christ, for a certain work than there is in regarding him as being in material nature, animal instinct, or moral mind, The words lead us to make three remarks concerning God"s work in Christ.

I It is a work of RECONCILING HUMANITY TO GOD. "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself," The work of reconciling implies two thingsenmity on the side of one of the parties, and a change of mind in one of the parties. The enmity here is not on God"s part he is love; but on man"s. The "carnal mind is enmity with God." Nor is the change on God"s part. He cannot change, he need not change. He could never become more loving and merciful. The change needed is on man"s part, and on man"s exclusively. Paul speaks of the world being reconciled to God, not of God to the world. The "world;" not a section of the race, but all mankind.

II It is a work involving the REMISSION OF SINS. "Not imputing reckoning their trespasses unto them." The reconciled man is no longer reckoned guilty. Three facts will throw light on this. The state of enmity towards God is:

1. A state of sin. There is a virtue in disliking some characters, but it is evermore a sin to dislike God, for he is the All-good.

2. A state of sin liable to punishment. Indeed, sin is its own punishment.

3. In reconciliation, the enmity being removed, the punishment is obviated. What is pardon? A separating of man from his sins and their consequences. This God does in Christ.

III It is a work in which GENUINE MINISTERS ARE ENGAGED. "He hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ"s stead, be ye reconciled to God." Observe:

1. The position, of the true minister, he acts on behalf of Christ, and stands in "Christ"s stead.

2. The earnestness of the true minister. "We pray you.

From the whole we observe concerning this work:

1. That it is a work of unbounded mercy. Whoever heard the offended party seeking the friendship of the offender?

2. It is a work essential to human happiness. In the nature of the case there is no happiness without this reconciliation.

3. It is a work exclusively of moral influence. No coercion on the one hand, no angry denunciations on the other, can do it; it can only be effected by the logic of love.

4. It is a work that must be gradual. Mind cannot be forced; there must be reflection, repentance, resolution.

God the Reconciler.

was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself." "This is the first occurrence, in the order of time, in St. Paul"s Epistles, of this word "reconcile" as describing God"s work in Christ. The idea involved is that man had been at enmity and had now been atoned (at-oned), and brought into concord with God. It will be noted that the work is described as originating with the Father and accomplished by the mediation of the Son" (Plumptre).

I THE DISTURBANCE WHICH CALLS FOR RECONCILIATION. This may be presented as a disturbance occurring between

(1) a Creator and his creatures;

(2) a King and his subjects; or

(3) more worthily in this case, a Father and his children.

The point of impression is, that the disturbance is in no sense due to any action or neglect of God as Creator, King, or Father, but is wholly due to the self-willed and rebellious conduct of the creatures, subjects, or children. It involved a state of enmity, a withdrawal of pleasant relations, and acts of judgment on the part of God. All these statements need illustration and enforcement. Only as the difficulty is duly estimated can the grace of the remedy be fully understood.

II THE SIDE ON WHICH WAS THE EARLIEST DESIRE FOR RECONCILEMENT, Not man"s side. The offenders did not seek forgiveness and restoration. Show that this is true

(1) historically,

(2) experimentally.

None of us, now, are before God in seeking reconciliation. The offended Creator, King, and Father seeks to make both one, and break down the middle walls of partition. "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself." The deep ground of redemption is God"s pitying love for us sinners. We must not think that we claimed the love or that Christ persuaded God to show it. "God so loved the world as to give his only begotten Son." The enmity of man to him grieved him, and love found the ways in which to break the enmity, and win, by a free forgiveness, the very heart of the offenders.

III THE WAYS IN WHICH GOD EFFECTS THE RECONCILEMENT. All are summed up in Christ. He is the Agent through whom God practically carries out his reconciling purpose. We may gather all the ways under two heads.

1. God reconciles by removing the hindrances.

2. God reconciles by persuading the offenders. For both Christ is theAgency. He takes "the handwriting of ordinances that was against us out of the way, nailing it to his cross." He could say, "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto me." Plead, in conclusion, that God"s reconciling mercies, embodied in Christ Jesus, ought to be a mighty persuasion on us to yield ourselves to him. They should say in our hearts, "Be ye reconciled to God. R.T.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Namely - The sum of which is, God - The whole Godhead, but more eminently God the Father. Was in Christ, reconciling the world - Which was before at enmity with God. To himself - So taking away that enmity, which could no otherwise be removed than by the blood of the Son of God.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

world kosmos = mankind. (See Scofield "Mat 4:8").

tresspasses Sin. (See Scofield "Rom 3:23").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

In these words the apostle gives us a short but full account of the grand doctrine of a sinner’s reconciliation unto God by the death of Christ, which is the principal subject and substantial part of the gospel.

Where observe, 1. The privilege itself, reconciliation; this is two-fold; fundamental, in the death of Christ, he is our peace: God laid the foundation of our peace and reconciliation with himself in the death of his Son: actual, in the application of it, on our part, by faith. The death of Christ rendered God reconcileable. Faith renders him actually reconciled.

Observe, 2. The Author of this reconciliation, God the Father: he was the Person wronged by sin, declaring his anger against the sinner: hence we are said to have access to the Father through Christ, and by the Spirit. The Son brings us to the Father, and the Spirit directs us to the Son; Christ takes away God’s enmity against us, and the Spirit takes away our enmity against God.

Observe, 3. The medium or mean by which we become reconciled to God, Jesus Christ; Christ was the meritorious cause of this privilege; Christ is the centre of that agreement between the justice of God and the mercy of God.

Observe, 4. The parties at variance, and made one by reconciliation: God and the world, God and mankind. Almighty God, in consideration of Christ’s death, did so far reconcile and forgive the offending world, as to offer them pardon of sin, and salvation by a Redeemer, upon a conditon of their believing acceptance: but none are actually reconciled but believers, who actually accept the terms and conditions of peace and reconciliation by faith, which is a necessary receptive qualification.

Learn hence, That there is an happy peace and reconciliation made in and by Jesus Christ, between an offended God and an offending world.

Reconciliation is a repairing of decayed friendship, or the making up of a breach between two that were formerly friends, but now at variance. The reconciliation is mutual, because the enmity is such; yet the scripture speaks more of our being reconciled to God, than of God’s being reconciled tu us, because we are in the fault, and not God; we the cause of the breach, we offended God, not God us; and because we have the benefit of this reconciliation, and not God, ’tis no profit to him that we are at peace with him; and because all the difficulty of being reconciled lies on our part, and not God’s.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses, and having committed unto us the word of reconciliation . [Christ's love, I say, constrains me to sacrifice for men, and to persuade them when they grossly misconstrue me, and to seek reconciliation with them when they fight against me. For the whole dispensation under which I work is from God, and is an effort on his part to reconcile his human enemies unto himself. When I myself was such an enemy God reconciled me, and gave to me the work or ministry of reconciling others; so that I am obliged, both by a sense of duty and of gratitude, to proclaim to man that God sent Christ to reconcile the world to him through the forgiveness of those trespasses which made them fear and hate him; and that I may not fail in this sacred office I am likewise obliged to persuade men that this ministry of reconciliation is committed to me.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

19. That God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself. This explains more fully the ministry of reconciliation. It was not God who was to be reconciled, but the world. In Christ it is offered peace and shown the love of God. The ministry of reconciliation is to persuade men to accept God's love and mercy, and to repent so that he can forgive their trespasses.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

19. ὡς ὅτι θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ κόσμον καταλλάσσων ἑσυτῷ. The ὡς indicates that this is S. Paul’s view rather than an absolute statement: comp. 2Co 11:21; 2Th 2:2. There are three ways of taking this sentence: to wit, that there was God, in Christ reconciling the world to Himself (Theodoret); to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling &c. (A.V.); to wit, that God in Christ was reconciling &c. The last is to be preferred, making ἦν καταλλάσσων the periphrastic imperfect. Comp. Joh 1:9 and Luk 1:10 for similarly doubtful cases; but there the ἦν should probably be taken separately. For the omission of the article before κόσμος comp. Gal 6:14; 1Co 8:4; 1Co 14:10; Rom 4:13. The verse contains the Pauline doctrine that in redemption the Father is the Source, the Son the Mediator: Rom 3:24; Col 1:20. See Origen, Philocal. xiv. 10.

μὴ λογιζόμενος αὐτοῖς τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν, καὶ θέμενος κ. τ. λ. Comp. Col 1:19-20; 1Jn 2:2. There were two things which showed that God was working to win over the whole human race to Himself, (1) His not reckoning against them sins for which Christ had atoned, (2) His having deposited with the Apostles His message of reconciliation. The change from present to aorist participle indicates that the not reckoning sins went on continually, while the commission was given once for all. As in Gal 1:1, the Apostle claims to have received his commission direct from God. On the difference between the πάρεσις (Rom 3:25; comp. Act 17:30; Wis 11:23 [24]) and the ἄφεσις of sins see Trench, Syn. § xxxiii. The former is putting aside, praetermission, for future treatment, of foregone sins; the latter is putting away, full and unreserved remission.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

19.] how that (the ὡς imports that the proposition following it, introduced by ὅτι, is matter of indirect reference. So Xen. Hell. iii. 2. 14, εἰπὼν τῷ φάρακι ὡς ὅτι ὀκνοίη μὴ ὁ Τισσαφ. κ.τ.λ., and argum. Isocr. Busir. p. 520 (cited by Winer, edn. 6, § 65. 9), κατηγόρουν αὐτοῦ, ὡς ὅτι καινὰ δαιμόνια εἰσφέρει) God in Christ was reconciling the world to Himself (ἦν καταλλάσσων not exactly = κατήλλασσεν, any more than ἦν κηρύσσων Luk 4:44 = ἐκήρυσσεν: in both cases the habitual state is more emphatically implied than could be done by the imperfect merely: the shade of difference can, however, hardly be expressed in English.

ἦν cannot, as in Erasm., Luther, Calv., Beza, al., and E. V., belong to ἐν χριστῷ, ‘God was in Christ, reconciling’ &c.,—partly on account of the position of ἐν χρ., which would thus probably be before ἦν, but principally (Meyer) because of incoherence with θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν κ.τ.λ.: for in that case the two latter clauses must express the manner of reconciliation by Christ, which the second of them does not.

κόσμον,—without the article, as governed words placed for emphasis before their verbs often are—it would not be καταλλάσσων κόσμον, but τὸν κόσμον,—the whole world,—man, and man’s world, entire, with all that therein is, see Col 1:20, but considered, cf. αὐτῶν below, as summed up in man),—not reckoning to them their trespasses (present: on the expression see reff.), and having placed in us (past:—not merely = ‘committed to us,’ but ‘laid upon us,’ as our office and charge, and, besides, ‘empowered us for,’ ‘put in our souls by His Spirit.’ ‘Us,’ viz. Apostles and teachers) the word of the reconciliation (as ὁ λόγος ὁ τοῦ σταυροῦ, 1Co 1:18).

20,

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

19. ὡς ὅτι Θεὸς ἧν ἑν χριστῷ κόσμον καταλλάσσων ἑαυτῷ. The exact force of ὡς ὅτι is not clear. Greek commentators substitute καὶ γάρ and the Latins render it quoniam quidem. We may analyse it, ‘as was the case, because,’ or ‘how that,’ or ‘namely, that,’ which is much the same as ‘to wit, that’ (AV, RV).* Of the four possible constructions, (1) that of AV, which agrees with Luther, Calvin, Beza, and Bengel, is to be rejected; ‘God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself.’ Almost certainly, ἐν Χριστῷ belongs to καταλλάσσων, being parallel to διὰ Χριστοῦ in v. 18. The same objection holds good against (2) ‘was reconciling to Himself the world that is in Christ,’ i.e. those that are His members. This would require τὸν ἐν χριστῷ κόσμον. And do those who are already in Christ need reconciliation? (3) ‘There was God, in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.’ This is Theodoret’s rendering, reading ὁ Θεός. It is awkward, but it puts ἐν χριστῷ in the right place. (4) Almost. certainly, ἦν καταλλάσσων is the analytical imperfect of which Lk. is so fond (1:21, 2:51, 4:20, 5:116, 18, etc.). This periphrastic tense expresses, more decidedly than the simple imperfect, the duration of the action. There was a lasting process of reconciliation; ‘God in Christ was reconciling the world to Himself.’ The ‘world’ means all mankind. God did all that on His side is necessary for their being reconciled to Him; but not all men do what is necessary on their side. Aug. (In Joann. Tract. lxxxvii. 2, 3, cx. 4) characteristically explains mundus as meaning only those who are predestined to salvation, the Church of the elect gathered out of the world.

For κόσμος without the art. comp. Rom 4:13; Gal 6:14: ἑν κόσμῳ (1Co 8:4, 1Co 14:10) is not quite parallel, because there was a tendency, which appears in papyri, to omit the art. after a preposition; J.H. Moulton, p. 82.

μὴ λογιζόμενος … καὶ θεμενος. Just as τοῦ καταλλάξαντος ἡμᾶς explains how God brought about the new conditions, so these two participles explain how He brings about the reconciliation; ‘viz. by not reckoning to men their trespasses, and by having deposited with His ministers the message of reconciliation.’ Note the change from pres. part., of a process that is going on, to aor., of one that is complete. Although the μὴ λογιζόμενος (Rom 4:7, Rom 4:8; Col 1:14) is free and universal, yet it has to be made known to individuals, in order that they may appropriate it; hence the θέμενος ἑν ἡμῖν. By μὴ λογιζόμενος He does His part, and by θέμενος Κ.Τ.Λ. He aids men to do their part, in the work of reconciliation.

Both λογίζεσθαι and παράπτωμα are favourite words with Paul, especially the former. Παράπτωμα is a lapse from righteousness, and it sometimes indicates an offence that is less serious than ἁμαρτία, as perhaps in Gal 6:1, and more clearly in Psa 18:13, Psa 18:14; but this occasional distinction cannot be pressed. Comp. Eph 1:7, Eph 1:2:1, Eph 1:5 and Col 2:13, which are parallel in sense to this passage; and see Westcott, Ephesians, p. 166; Trench, Syn. § lxvi. For παράπτωμα in the Gospels, Vulg. always has peccatum; in the Epistles, always delictum, except Eph 1:7, Eph 2:5, where it has peccatum.

τὸν λόγον τῆς καταλλαγῆς. Cf. τ. λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας (Eph 1:13; Col 1:5), λόγον ζωῆς (Php 2:16), ὁ λόγος τῆς σωτηρίας (Act 13:26). “In determining the meaning of λόγος in Paul one must always keep in mind 1Co 2:12; ‘ I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified’” (Harnack, The Constitution and Law of the Church, p. 341).

Before τ. λόγον τ. καταλλαγῆς, D* E G, g insert (τοῦ) εὐαγγελίου.

5:20-6:10. From teh declaration that he is one of those to whom God has committed the word of reconciliation the Apostle goes on to show his credentials as a preacher of the Gospel. He is God’s ambassador, fellow-worker, and minister, and as such has had to suffer a great deal. This again is some evidence of his sincerity.

20 Ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ οὖν πρεσβεύομεν. ‘On behalf of Christ., therefore, we are acting as ambassadors.’ * Cf. ὑπὲρ οὖ πρεσβεύω ἐν ᾶλύσει (Eph 6:20), and seen on Phm 1:9. Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 379) points out that these “proud words of St Paul stand in quite different relief when we know that πρεσβεύς and πρεσβευτής were the proper words in the Greek East for the Emperor’s Legate.” Both verb and substantive are found in this sense in inscriptions, the latter very frequently. The dignity of an Apostle comes once more to the front. He is the representative of Christ the Reconciler, and behind Christ is God. As in 1:1; 1Co 1:1; Gal 1:16, he holds his office, not from any human being however distinguished, but from the Father. It is a high position, and it involves a great responsibility. “The ambassador, before acting, receives a commission from the power for whom he acts. The ambassador, while acting, acts not only as an agent, but as a representative of his sovereign. Lastly, the ambassador’s duty is not merely to deliver a definite message, to carry out a definite policy; but he is obliged to watch opportunities, to study characters, to cast about for expedients, so that he may place it before his hearers in its most attractive form. He is a diplomatist” (Lightfoot, Ordination Addresses, p. 48). This is what St Paul means when he says that he becomes all things to all men, that he may by all means save some (1 Cor. 9:32).

ὡς τοῦ Θεοῦ παρακαλοῦντος. Neither ‘as though God did beseech’ (AV), nor ‘as though God were entreating’ (RV), is quite exact; better, ‘seeing that God is entreating.’ The force of ὡς with a genitive absolute is not always the same. The ὡς always gives a subjective view of what is stated by the gen. abs., but that subjective view may be shown by the context to be either right or wrong. When it is given as right, as in 2Pe 1:3, ὡς may be rendered ‘seeing that,’ which RV. has in that place. Where the subjective view is given as wrong, ὡς = ‘as though,’ which RV. correctly has in 1Co 4:18; 1Pe 4:12; Act 27:30, following the Vulg. tamquam, Here it is manifest that God’s entreating is given as a fact, yet AV and RV. have ‘as though,’ and Vulg. has tamquam. Here Schmiedel rightly condemns als ob, and with Lietzmann adopts indem. Bachmann agrees, with indem ia. The fact that ‘God is entreating by us’ is a momentous one, and the declaration of it is analogous to the formula of the Hebrew Prophet, ‘Thus saith the Lord.’

διʼ ἡμῶν. Cf. 1:23. The acc. after παρακαλοῦντος The acc. after is omitted, as also after because he, is thinking of a wider field than Corinth. He is an Apostle to the Corinthians (1Co 4:2), but to many others besides, and so both verbs are left as general as possible in their scope. The second half of the verse is addressed urbi et orbi.

δεόμεθα ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, καταλλάγητε τῷ Θεῷ ‘We beseech on Christ’s behalf, Become reconciled to God.’ “He said not, Reconcile God to yourselves, for it is not He that bears enmity but you; for God never bears enmity” (Chrys.). In RV. the reader naturally puts an emphasis on ‘ye’; ‘Be ye reconciled to God’; and there should be no emphasis, for ὑμεῖς is not expressed. It is better, therefore, to omit it in translation. ‘Become reconciled,’ efficite ut Deo reconclliemini, effects this and does justice to the tense. ‘In Christ’s stead’ (AV) is probably wrong; see on ὑπὲρ πάντων and ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν in vv. 14, 15. Chrys. expands ὑπὲρ χριστοῦ thus; ‘Do not think that it is we who are asking you; it is Christ Himself who asks you, it is the Father Himself who entreats you, through us. What can be compared with such love? God’s innumerable benefits have been treated with contumely, and He not only exacted no penalty, but even gave His Son, that we might be reconciled. And when those to whom He was first sent were not reconciled to Him, but put Him to death, He has again sent other messengers, and it is by sending them that He is asking you.’ By the repeated ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ St Paul is characterizing the authority of an Apostle; it is of the highest, but it is official, not personal. An Apostle does not exhort in his own name or on his own behalf; he acts for Christ. On the other hand, those whom they exhort do not work out their reconciliation by themselves; they receive it (Rom 5:11). Their part in the process lies in their appreciating and appropriating it.

For δεόμεθα, D * F G, d e g, Hil. Ambrst. have δεόμενοι, and for καταλλάγητε, D * F G, d e g Goth. have καταλλαγῆναι. Both changes weaken the forcible independent clauses of the original text.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

God. Emphatic. It was God, as in ver. 18.

Was - reconciling [ην καταλλασσων] . These words are to be construed together; the participle with the finite verb marking the process of reconciliation. The emphasis is on the fact that God was reconciling, not on the fact that God was in Christ. God was all through and behind the process of reconciliation. The primary reference of the statement is, no doubt, to God 's reconciling manifestation in the incarnation and death of Christ; yet, as a fact, it includes much more. God was engaged in reconciling the world from the very beginning, and that in Christ. See on Joh 1:4, 5, 9, 10.

Hath given to us [θεμενος εν ημιν] . Lit., lodged in us.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.