Church of Christ Studies

Reconciliation

I want to discuss with you tonight the subject of reconciliation, a basis for which is found in 2 Cor. 5:18-20, where Paul said: "And all things are of God, who bath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and bath 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."

 

In the announcement of a theme like this, I am sure that all present appreciate the importance of our being reconciled unto God. Before I further pass, I want to determine the definition or meaning of the term thus proposed.

 

"Reconciliation" is a compound word, composed of the little prefix R-E, "re," which simply means "again." The latter part of it, "conciliation," is from the word that means "to make friends." Hence, the word "reconciliation" means nothing more nor less than the making of friends again. But that implies, of course, that once the parties under consideration were united; that they were harmonious and in perfect accord; that something or other has come to pass that has alienated and separated them the one from the other. This being true, reconciliation may be possible and in order.

 

I want to try to illustrate that thought by two men who, perhaps, have formerly been friends and neighbors, who have walked together harmoniously along the pathway of life; but in the course of time something or other has come to pass, and friendship no longer exists, such as hitherto bound them together. They have been broken asunder, and they have become enemies and march in different directions the one from the other. Maybe the two gentlemen I thus presented are of equal standing with reference to their may be that one of them is quite the superior of the other; or it is possible that one of them is absolutely innocent of any wrong and the other wholly guilty. Now, instead of going into the courts and having a long-drawn-out lawsuit, sometimes men have coolness enough to decide upon the arbitration of their differences and the settling of the matter outside of the court by means of a mediator, or some one to act as a middleman, unto whom their respective cases may be told and his judgment and decision in the matter be made final.

 

Now, it is not every person that can serve in the capacity of a mediator. In the first place, if the parties concerned are of equal footing, it is rather easy to find a man suitable for the place; but if one be superior to the other, then the selection becomes more difficult; and if one party is wholly in error and the other innocent, I am not certain but that the task of selecting is even greater still.

 

So, then, as a matter of fact, there are some requisites and demands that must be characteristic of him who would serve in the capacity thus mentioned. In the first place, I submit to you that the mediator must not be a party to the difference under consideration. In the second place, such a person must be adapted to both parties. He must be able to march up and feel on equal footing with the superior, and must be able to assimilate himself and stand on a parallel with the character that is the inferior.

 

Having these requisites, he is still not prepared. Suppose a man thus suggested be a kinsman of one and not related to the other. Let all things else be said of him in his favor, that one fact will disqualify him to act as mediator, for the man to whom he is not related would have a right and a reason to suggest that, however, things may be, by virtue of the fact that he is related to the other party, his verdict will very likely be biased.

 

The demand or requisite No. 3 is that the party stand equal with reference to those of the controversy, equally related, both by blood and by association.

 

But you have all of those requirements first, that he is not a party to the conflict or difference; second, he can approach both parties; third, he is equally related to both of them. There is another thing absolutely necessary for him to have, and that is, he must become acquainted with all of the facts and details that led up to the separation and alienation; for, unless a man know about those things, he is unprepared to render a verdict and give a decision characterized by anything like justice or fairness.

 

Now, with those things peculiarly true of the mediator, when he honestly and sincerely forms the very best judgment and renders a verdict, it is obligatory upon both parties to accept the same. For either to refuse this is but an insult to the mediator. He can do nothing further but turn away offended because of the fact that he has done his best; and when rejected, there remains nothing else to do but for the parties to fight it out the best they can and take whatever consequences may come.

 

With that simple illustration before you, I want to introduce to you to-night the parties that are connected with this matter of reconciliation—namely, God and man. Thus they stand. It is a case, ladies and gentlemen, of a superior and an inferior. It is a case of an innocent party and a guilty party. It is a case that implies that once they were together, on good terms, associated harmoniously and of one accord; but as time rolled on, for some reason or other, the cords of friendship that hitherto bound them were broken. They are alienated and parted one from the other, and thus the matter stands.

 

Now, as a matter of fact, there needs to be a mediator— one to stand between and try to bring about a readjustment or reconciliation of the parties thus mentioned.

 

But I submit to you that it is not amiss to ask about the responsibility connected with this situation. Is God to blame for the difference that has come about in the world? What did he do the result of which needs to be reconciled and made right tonight? On the other hand, what has man done? And I think I do not have to argue, but that all of us agree, that the human family, our original federal head, was wholly to blame, in that, with eyes wide open, not deceived, not blinded nor deluded, he deliberately walked across God's law, knowingly so, and violated Heaven order and Jehovah's command. And, as a result, in order that the law might be upheld and the dignity thereof preserved, the ties that hitherto bound were now severed. Hence, Isaiah (59:1, 2) said: "Behold, the Lord's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither is his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: but your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear."

 

Therefore the responsibility rests upon man; and I just submit to you that if there be a reconciliation brought about, it must be on the part of the character that is responsible for the separation. That leads me to make emphatic now and stress as much as I possibly can the idea that the direction of reconciliation, that the trend and movement thereof, must be a movement on the part of man toward God, and not on the part of God toward man. Let me say to you that there is not a single passage bearing on the subject in all the Bible but that declares that the reconciliation is to be brought about on the part of man unto God, and never God to man.

 

The very text of the evening is suggestive of that. Hear it again: "All things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given unto us the ministry of reconciliation; to-wit, that God was in Christ." What doing? "Reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and bath committed unto us the word of reconciliation."

 

I would not stop to emphasize that but for the fact that there are those who have deliberately written down in their articles of faith, to which numbers of good people have subscribed, doctrines the reverse of that told in Holy Writ. For instance, one very popular statement in the creeds of uninspired men is that Jesus Christ was begotten of God, born of the Virgin Mary, lived upon the earth for about a third of a century, suffered, bled, and died. What for? Answer: "That he might reconcile his Father unto us."

 

I want to say to you, ladies and gentlemen, that two theories were never more opposite and antagonistic to each other than the statement found in the creeds and that found in the word of God. God says, "Reconcile men to God ;" the creed says: "Reconcile God to man ;" and it is left as a matter for our decision as to which one we want. Now, I never wrote either one of them; and should anybody want to find fault, he need not come to me; but either go to the Bible or the makers of the creeds. One thing I do know is that they are exactly opposite the one from the other; and as for me and mine, I will take what God said and discard the creeds of uninspired men. I cannot afford to do otherwise.

 

Be it remembered, then, that the process of reconciliation is a movement on the part of man toward God. Remember that Jehovah has provided, the Christ has executed, the Holy Spirit has revealed, the church is anxious and inviting, all things are ready," and it depends now wholly upon whether or not man will submit to Heaven's terms and be reconciled to God.

 

Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men, not God; we persuade men, not Christ; we persuade men, not the Holy Spirit. Why ? Because God is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever. Man wandered away and man must return, and hence the labor of gospel teachers is to persuade their fellows to be reconciled unto God.

 

Paul said: "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."

 

But who can serve tonight as a mediator between God and man? Can humanity? Can some man? Well, look at the conditions. Weigh the matter and see. Man cannot serve as a mediator on the ground that he is a party to the difficulty. Can an angel? O. no! On the ground that an angel is not equal to God, and, therefore, cannot approach him on equal footing. An angel cannot descend to the level of man. Hence, that cannot be.

 

Paul said in 1 Tim. 2:5: "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Now, I submit to you Jesus the Christ as the one character who proposes to become the mediator between us and Him from whom all blessings must forever flow. Question: Is Jesus Christ suited? Is he adapted? Does he possess the requisites? As stated at the beginning, how does he stand with reference to both parties? He is not a party to the difficulty, neither on Heaven's side nor on man's side. Thus he fulfills one of the requisites demanded.

 

How does Christ stand with reference to the possibility of approach unto both parties? In Phil. 2: 5-9, Paul says: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name." As Jesus Christ is the equal of God, it would be no conceit whatsoever for him to stand on a perfect parallel and approach the Father, commensurate with Divine authority. On the other hand, Jesus Christ came down, assimilated himself with men to be on an equal footing with those who travel over the bosom of the earth.

 

What about kinship? Now, if Jesus Christ were wholly Divine, I think the world could well say: "Lord, although you may be honest, upright, and sincere, yet when you come to the plane of eternal judgment and there render the account, by virtue of the fact that you are akin to God and not akin to man, your judgment will be biased and necessarily prejudiced." Hence, I can appreciate the fact that Jesus Christ is not wholly Divine. On the other hand, if he were wholly human, I think it not amiss to suggest that Jehovah might not have justice rendered as a result of that relationship; and, therefore, Jesus Christ stands that unique character in the midst of the ages. He reaches up with one hand and says, "God is my Father;" and with the other he reaches down to man and says, "humanity is my mother." Hence, as before stated, he is related both to God and man. Why? That he might be the proper mediator.

 

My friends, have you ever thought why it is that Jesus Christ is going to be the Judge of the world? Why not God judge humanity? The Bible says Christ will do it. "God Almighty has authorized the Son to execute judgment." Why? Because he is the Son of man; and, therefore, humanity will not be defeated by any bias or prejudice or lack of sympathy on the eternal day of judgment.

 

If Christ had always lived and associated with heavenly things and dwelt in the Father's house of many mansions and then finally judged you and me, I would surely have this kind of a plea to make. I would say: "Lord, I appreciate your candor and your fairness; but I just want to tell you before you pronounce the sentence, 'Depart,' that if you had had to live in yonder old world as I did and mix and mingle with all the allurements, attractions, and influences of earth, and had been subject to the trials and tribulations I have, I know you would have more mercy, more love, more grace, and more favor to grant unto me."

 

Jesus Christ said: "O. no! Before I came to be the mediator of the world, I lived, it is true, with God. I tasted the beauties, the grandeurs, and the glories of the eternal home. But that is not all. I bade all that good-by. I came to the earth to be in touch with all the infirmities of man. I know what it means to be tired, hungry, and weary. I know what it means to be persecuted and at last condemned and made to die a felon's death. I understand all that. I have lived with you; therefore judgment at the last shall be tempered with mercy, because I am acquainted with the trials and tribulations and difficulties of mankind."

 

Not only that; Jesus Christ knows all about the things that have transpired. Back in the very beginning of time, when God spoke the worlds into existence and set all in motion, Jesus Christ was present. In the beginning was the Word, and by him were all things created; and when finally Jehovah said, "Let us make man," Jesus the Christ was there. He saw the first pair pluck the forbidden fruit; he saw God's law transgressed, and saw them march out condemned and doomed unto darkness and despair. He followed their path forty centuries, while the Father was developing, evolving, unfolding a system of redemption, until by and by the climax was reached in the coming of Christ as the Son of God. He is, therefore, qualified to execute that judgment.

 

But between man and God three things stand—first, the law; second, sin; and third, death. Jesus Christ came, the very embodiment of perfection itself, not as a violator of the law, but as a fulfiller; and when on the tree of the cross he expired, he bowed his head and said: "It is finished."

 

Paul says in Col. 2:14: "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." In its stead he has given unto us a better covenant, founded upon better promises. Hence, obstacle No. 1 has been removed.

 

There had been thousands of lambs offered upon Jewish altars, but they only atoned for sins temporarily. Jesus Christ, as the great sin offering of the world, was crucified outside the city's wall, and upon the cross he gave his life as a ransom for the sons and daughters of men; and thus sin is made possible to be atoned for by the wonderful death and the efficacious offering of the blood of the Son of God. Hence, obstacle No. 2 is overcome.

 

But there is a third. Death stands between man and God. All of us are on our rapid march to the charnel house of death itself; and before friendship can be renewed, before the possibility of a reunion can be had, the last enmity between God and man must be overcome. When the Christ died, when he was buried in the new tomb and there lay for three days and three nights, and when on the morning of the third day Jesus our Lord, in the final triumphant victory, burst the bars of the tomb and came forth, he overcame death by demonstrating the possibility of a resurrection therefrom. Hence, he is ready to wend his way back to glory, to be seated at the right hand of God and sway the scepter of authority over all the united forces of earth as mediator between God and man.

 

But you ask: "What effect did Christ's death, as the mediator, have upon the world?" There are different answers to that. Universalists and Calvinists suggest that it had all effect; that there is nothing else to be done; that "Jesus paid it all," and man is wholly passive and inactive with reference to the matter. On the other hand, I think it safe to say that the Unitarians would declare that it had no effect; that the death of the man called "Christ," said to be Divine as well as human, was of no effect whatever.

 

The truth, as in most cases, lies, perhaps, between the two. God's will must be upheld, heaven's authority must be respected, the dignity of the sovereign government of God Almighty must be preserved; and yet mercy must be shown. When Jesus Christ died on the tree of the cross, God's law was respected, in that atonement was made for violation and for transgression thereof. At the same time there was mercy extended, needing only to be appropriated by every son and daughter of Adam's lost and dying race.

 

I have read the story of old Zaleucus, king of the Locrians, who lived about 500 years B.C. His government was severe, but just. In one of his decrees he ordered that any man in his sovereign kingdom who was guilty of adultery, should be punished by the loss of both eyes. That was an iron decree that went forth from what was considered a hard-hearted old king. Strange to say that, according to history, his own son was the first one to violate it and to subject himself to the penalty. Question: What, my friends, is the king to do? There stand the law and the authority and the responsibility. On the other hand, there stands the father, whose son is guilty. After much reflection, perhaps, history suggests this was the course pursued by the father: In order to maintain the authority of the law and at the same time to show a father's mercy and lenity, he ordered that one of the eyes of the boy be plucked out, and then said: "Come and take one of mine." Thus the demands of the law were satisfied, and at the same time the love of a father was demonstrated. Then it was that Mercy and Truth met together and Righteousness and Peace embraced each other in the sublimity of the thought that the majesty of the government is maintained and his own character magnified in the eyes of his subjects.

 

God's law must be respected. At the same time mercy and love are accorded and extended unto men, as shown in the gospel plan of salvation. Hence, Christ Jesus, our Lord, died the death of the cross, shed the last drop of blood in his body, that he might execute judgment upon the earth, touched and tendered, if you please, by the feelings and passions and weaknesses of mortal man. He comes at last to announce the terms of reconciliation and the final decision. What is the verdict from Him who is the mediator? Turning unto man, if I may thus picture it, he says: "Sir, as the mediator between you and God, I suggest this: That you believe in Him whom God had the right to select [because the innocent party thus has the preference]; that you repent of all your sins; that you be buried in the name of the sacred Three upon the confession of that faith. Now, sir, that is my decision. It is my honest verdict." Then he says to God: "You should forgive their sins, graciously grant unto them the Holy Spirit, and extend unto them the hope of eternal blessedness." God says: "Mediator, that is satisfactory to me. I will be glad thus to do. I will forgive their sins. I will grant unto them the Holy Spirit. I will give unto them the hope of everlasting bliss and all the glories of the eternal home beyond the sunset's radiant glow."

 

My friends, it is left wholly with you and with me as to whether or not we accept the Lord's terms. If we do, we strike hands with God in Jesus Christ and there become reconciled unto him. If we will not, Christ can but turn away and say: "Sirs, that is my verdict, my decision; and if you refuse, you must subject yourselves unto the consequences that are certain to follow."

 

So I come at the close again to-night, begging you in Christ's stead, praying unto you to be reconciled unto God.  Accept the verdict and the terms laid down by the mediator, Christ Jesus our Lord, and God will stand upon his promises, for he is faithful; and if our part is faithfully carried out, he will love us and lead us and at last take us home to glory.

 

Now, while we stand and sing, will you not come?

​