I made the statement that it
can be said that Christ's redemptive work has reconciled God to us
in the sense of making it possible for a holy God to look with favor
upon sinful men. The removal of God's wrath, I
stated, does not oppose immutability. Now I'm not going into that anymore
this morning. Let me give to you now two or
three quotations, and I'm not even going to give the names
of the men. I want you to find them. But a great number of you
have, I think, these works in your home libraries. Here is
a statement. Reconciliation affects no change
in God himself, but it does in the administration of his government. His law now regards with approbation
those against whom it was formerly hostile. There has been a change
of relation between those for whom Christ died and the judge
of all. Reconciliation with God does
not mean a change of heart in him from an angry disposition
to a friendly affection. Please notice that now, we'll
be commenting along that line in our message this morning.
Rather does it refer to an effect which has followed from that
proper and full satisfaction which Christ offered to the violated
law and offended justice of God. Another man said, and there is
no place in the New Testament where the meaning conciliation
of an offended party would not well suit the Greek word that
is translated reconciliation, he said the present passage,
and he was talking about Romans 5, 10, and 11, would be practically
meaningless otherwise. The whole thought is of the divine
mercy providing a way for accepting grace. Now a final statement. there is not only a wicked opposition
of the sinner to God, but a holy opposition of God to the sinner. Now those statements come from
great men who have given an exposition on the subject of reconciliation. Now open your Bibles, please,
to Romans 5. We will read once again verses
6 through 11. And when we come to the ninth
verse, I'll make a few comments as I read. As I make these comments,
I believe that the subject of objective reconciliation will
just leap from the page and take hold of your mind. Let us begin
with verse 6. For when we were yet without
strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely
for a righteous man will one die, yet peradventure for a good
man some would even dare to die. But God commended his love toward
us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. When did Christ die for us? It
was while we were yet sinners. Please notice the tense of the
verb. Now beginning with verse 9. Much
more than. Being now. Underscore the little
word now. And I want you to connect it
with the same word in verse 11. much more than being now justified
by his blood. Let's pause for a moment. Paul
was addressing the Christians at Rome. They had already been
declared just. In fact, they had already been
justified by faith. It had been experienced in their
innermost being. According to the first verse,
and we have not as yet studied verses 1 through 5, but we will
in connection with justification by faith. Much more than being
now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through
him. Now verse 10, we get into the
subject of reconciliation. I affirm upon the authority of
this passage of Scripture, I will be the first to admit that for
a great number of years I didn't see it, and the reason I didn't
see it was because of a preconceived idea. Now look at it. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by
the death of the Son, let's stop My question is, when were we
reconciled? We were reconciled even while
we were enemies. Now, beloved, if that be true,
then the reconciliation that is discussed in this passage
is not subjective reconciliation, but it is objective. What do you mean by objective?
I mean by objective reconciliation, the propitiation of Christ, satisfying
divine justice, thus enabling the righteous and holy God to
look upon me with favor. When did that take place? When
Jesus Christ died. when he shed his blood, not when
I believed, not when I was regenerated. Look at it, beloved. Don't read
over it. This is the tragedy today. People
don't read the scriptures. All of us are guilty of this
at times. We don't even read the scriptures properly. Now
let's look at the 10th verse again. For when we were enemies
we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son. Much more
being reconciled we shall be saved by his life. Now, go back
to verse 9 for a moment. Both justification in verse 9
and reconciliation in verse 10 are effected by God and not by
us. Do you see it? I said both justification and
reconciliation are effected by God and not by us. What can be said concerning justification
can be said about reconciliation. Now wait a minute, I want to
show you something. Our first message, R2, dealing with justification,
we showed from the scriptures that it is a forensic term. It is a legal term. a legal term, God declaring us
just on the basis of the finished work of Jesus Christ. And, beloved, that takes us back
to eternal justification, something done outside of us by God himself. Now look at reconciliation. Reconciliation
is used in the same way. It is also a forensic term here. The language is identically the
same. Look at verses 9 and 10 now as
we read them together. Much more than being now justified
by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. And then
in verse 10, for if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to
God by the death of the son, much more being reconciled, we
shall be saved by his life. Same terminology. Now verse 11,
you say, but verse 11 destroys it, I beg you a pardon. And not only so, but we also
joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now,
what did I say when we read verse 9 a moment ago? Much more than
being now justified? By whom we have now received what? the Atonement, and notice the
marginal reference in your Bible, Reconciliation. Beloved, Reconciliation
is an important subject. I said it is an important subject. Now how is one to look at the
doctrine of Reconciliation? Most people look at Reconciliation
as something having taken place subjectively. and they put that first. They make that the most important
factor of reconciliation. That is simply the result of
reconciliation. The result. So when it comes
to both action and result, both are attributed to the sovereign
God. And that's exactly what he's
talking about in verse 11. We have received, we have received
reconciliation. In our development of this subject
this morning, I think I can point out some things that will be
very clear to us. But now what is the key to the proper understanding
of the doctrine of reconciliation? After thinking this through to
a great extent, I came up with this thought. I hadn't any more
than come up with a thought until I read it almost in the very
same words in a book that I picked up later in the week. Reconciliation
begins with the offended and not the offender. There's the
key. To misunderstand that, beloved,
is to misunderstand the doctrine of reconciliation. Now the very
verses, the very illustrations that some people use to try to
prove that it begins with us actually refute the very view
that many try to support. And I'll illustrate that in a
very simple manner this morning. Now there are a few other introductory
things that I want to give before we really get into the heart
of the subject. First of all, propitiation presupposes the
holy displeasure of God. I said propitiation presupposes
the holy displeasure of God. Therefore, propitiation is God-ward,
and when the holy law of God is satisfied, that, beloved,
is objective reconciliation. I said that is objective reconciliation. So the purpose of propitiation
is to remove the displeasure of God. Thus the Lord Jesus in his death
on the cross propitiated the righteous, holy anger of God
and rendered him propitious to those for whom Jesus Christ died. Now, beloved, I said a lot in
that statement. If you think you can remember
it well and good. But I wouldn't run the risk if I were you. Let
me repeat it. I said the Lord Jesus Christ,
in his death on the cross, propitiated the righteous or holy anger of
God, thus rendering him propitious to those for whom Jesus Christ
died. Now, we need to be warned about
some things. You will be confronted with these
things as you read the works of many men. and as you listen
to a different person speak. I have and you ought to study
every reference in the New Testament where the word reconciliation
or its equivalent is used. Propitiation does not constrain
God to love sinners. Notice what I said. Propitiation
does not constrain God to love sinners. All one has to know
is 1 John 4.10. You see, it's not that we first loved
him, but he first loved us and gave his son to be a propitiation. See the order? Don't forget the
order. So propitiation does not constrain God to love sinners. In other words, it does not turn
God's wrath into love, but is the provision of God's eternal
and unchangeable love. through the propitiation of divine
wrath, God's eternal love fulfills its purpose in harmony with holiness,
not at the expense of holiness. I want to show you what would
be a false statement. It would be a false statement for you
or me to say that the wrathful God is made a loving God by propitiation. That would be an erroneous statement.
Don't ever be guilty of stating. And yet this is what many religionists
are saying today. Now it is, on the other hand,
a true statement to say the God of wrath is the God of love. You see what I'm saying? I said
it would be a true statement to say that the God of wrath
is the God of love. But it would be a false statement
to say that the wrath of God is made a loving God by propitiation. You see, He loved us even before
the work of Jesus Christ on the cross. It is not that we first
loved him but that he first loved us and because of that love he
gave his son to be a propitiation. First John 4 10. It is also true that the wrath
of God against the elect is propitiated through Christ's redemptive work
on the cross. Christ's propitiation is the
fruit of God's eternal love. So, propitiation doesn't cause
God to love us. Propitiation is the result of
God's love. There is no reconciliation apart
from propitiation. Notice what I said. I said there
is no reconciliation apart from propitiation. It has been said
that just as propitiation presupposes wrath, so reconciliation presupposes
the removal of that wrath. Reconciliation, therefore, presupposes
disrupted relations between God and men. Both anger and alienation are
implied in the subject of reconciliation. But I must go further to say
alienation is twofold. Notice what I'm saying. Alienation
is twofold. Not only are we alienated against
God, but God, because of our sin, is alienated against us. Now you can't argue with that
if you know anything about the scriptures. How can it be proved? Listen
to this in Isaiah 59 too. But your iniquities, Isaiah the
prophet said, have separated between you and your God. And
your sins have what? Have hid his face from you that
he will not hear. Now do we believe that? Do we
believe that? I believe it. So I said alienation
is twofold. Not only are we alienated against
God, but God is alienated against us. And the alienation from God's
point of view must be removed and how is it removed? Right
by propitiation. When we turn to John 9 verse
31, God heareth not sinners. Why? because of alienation. That's why. That's why. Neither can the sinner hear God
and God doesn't hear the sinner. God heareth not sinners. Why?
Because of two-fold alienation. That's why. So this is not something
that is taught merely in the Old Testament Scriptures. It
is also taught in the New Testament Scriptures. Now I want to give to you some
unusual views of reconciliation. I'm not going to quote the men.
I'm not going to give their name. I'm not going to give the bargain
or the systematic theology from which I'm giving this. But listen
to this statement. There is a reconciliation which of itself secures no one. but which is the basis for the
reconciliation of any and all who will believe. Now I can understand
why that man made the statement he did. He said there is a reconciliation,
now listen to this, which of itself secures no one. Do you
know why he made that statement? He made that statement because
he does not believe in particular redemption. And in order for
his doctrine to harmonize with his previous teaching on universal
redemption had to make that statement. Beloved, that is not a biblical
statement. It is contrary to the scriptures.
I am not so foolish as to say to you this morning that objective
reconciliation does not secure persons. Objective reconciliation
secures every person for whom Jesus Christ died. Have I made
it plain? Here's another statement by a
well-known author. I have his works. I enjoy reading
his works, but I don't agree with him on this. I'm not going
to give his name. I think I'm getting to the place
I'm not going to give names. That just leaves the impression
of some people that you think you're smart. Listen to this
statement now. Man sinned and fled from God
and became his enemy. It would naturally appear that
the offended God would have to be reconciled to man, but this
is not the way the Bible puts it. It should be noted that the word
reconcile is never used of God. It is used only of men. God who
is light holds nothing against the sons of darkness and is willing
to bring them into the light if they will only come. End of
quote. It is true, beloved, that the
New Testament does not say in so many words that God is reconciled
to us, but the principle is there nevertheless, as I'll show you
and I can show you from every reference where the word is used
in the New Testament. That's a pretty strong statement,
isn't it? But I'm in a position to do it.
I won't have time to do it this morning. That is all of them,
but I'll give you some of them. I'll tell you what gets me. The
thing that gets me in the reading of so many works today, men who
claim to believe in the doctrines of grace, and they'll give a
little lip service or a little paragraph on a subject here,
and then they get clear away from it and forget all about
the real meaning of grace. Reconciliation has been presented
by many as consisting only in what God has done, follow me
now, in order that man's enmity against God may be removed. However, it is not our enmity
against God that comes to the forefront in the study of reconciliation. Notice what I'm saying. It is
not, I said, our enmity against God that comes to the forefront
in biblical reconciliation, but it is what? God's displeasure
against mankind. You might say, are you in a position
to prove that? I surely am. And I'll tell you what, when
I got into this, the more I studied the bigger it got. the bigger it got. So it is God's
alienation from us that is brought into the foreground, whether it be reconciliation
viewed as action or reconciliation viewed as result. I want to state
that again because that is an important statement. I said it
is God's alienation from us that is brought into the foreground
where the reconciliation is viewed as action or as result. Now I'm going to take you to
a familiar passage of Scripture. I'm not getting into the other
passages yet. I want to use some that different
individuals refer to. And they think that they refute
the very doctrine that we are presenting this morning. Will
you turn, first of all, to Matthew 5? I want us to read these two
verses. We're familiar with the verses,
but I want us to read them. We want to read verses 23 and
24. I'm sorry I don't have my watch
because this is a big subject and I may get started and do
what I did last Sunday, preach the long last Sunday morning.
I didn't have anything left for Sunday night. Verses 23 and 24. I don't mean I didn't have any
truth left, but I didn't have anything to give you. Therefore if thou bring thy gift
to the altar, Notice this now. And there remembers
that thy brother hath ought against thee. Leave there thy gift before
the altar, and go thy way. First be reconciled to thy brother,
and then come and offer thy gift. Now has something already jumped
out at you? If it hasn't, it better. What do you think this verse
teaches? Now we're told that it is the anger or the enmity
of the individual against God that is brought to the forefront.
Now I would ask you a question of a lot of these two verses
where the word reconcile is used. Is it the displeasure of the
offended that is brought to the forefront or is it the enmity
of the offender? When you look at the two verses,
come on now, look at them. The further I go, the more simple
it will get, which is really brought to the forefront. Here's
a man who goes to the altar. Now, just picture yourself. I
want to describe it. Say, for instance, you come to the altar
this morning to offer your offering. And as you start to make your
offering, you remember someone whom you have offended. Now before you are to what? Make your offering, you are to
leave your offering at the altar and go to the offended and make
reconciliation there before you come and make the offering. Now I want to raise a question. Who's brought to the forefront?
Is it the offended or the offender? Beloved, it is the offended that
is brought to the forefront, not the offender. You see, if
it were simply the offender, I do not know of a better place
for him to make things right than the altar of God. Are you
following me? Wouldn't that be the suitable
place for him to make things right? At the very altar where
he is? But no, he is to leave the altar.
And he is to go to the offended. The offending and reconciliation
must be made there and then come back. Now the difference between
that illustration and the sinner is this, and it's quite a difference.
You and I cannot go to God and make reconciliation. It is
true that our sins have offended God, and God looks with displeasure
upon all sinners. But you and I can't go to God.
You and I can go to God only, only in the person of Jesus Christ. It is Jesus Christ that is satisfied
divine justice for us. So the principle that I'm showing
is that it is the offended rather than the offender that is brought
to the foreground in reconciliation. It is not the offender as some
would have you to believe, but it is the offended. Now I want
you to turn to another illustration where the word reconciliation
is used. Turn to 1 Corinthians chapter 7 and look with me at
verse 11. We'll get into the heart of our
subject this morning, but I wanted to use some verses that are ordinarily
employed by individuals to try to disprove the biblical doctrine
of reconciliation. You know what this does? I appreciate
what Brother Penance said last Sunday night after the service.
He said it puts man right where he belongs. And that's why religionists don't
want any part of it. They want to lift man up. Man's
got to have a part. Beloved, you don't have any part
in your reconciliation. Any more than you have any part
in your faith. Any more than you have any part in your justification.
You're the recipient of reconciliation, by whom we have received reconciliation. Isn't that what the verse says?
That means it's the gift of God. That means it's the work of grace.
1 Corinthians 7, 11. But and if she departs, Let's
go back to verse 10 so you'll get the connection. Now here's
a woman who has left her husband. She is to remain unmarried or
be reconciled to her husband. Now I'm simply looking at the
word reconcile. Now let's illustrate it. It doesn't
make any difference, you see, what the problem might have been.
Something had taken place between that man and woman, and so the
woman had left the husband, but she was to remain unmarried or
be reconciled to her husband, that's what the book says. Now
even though the woman, she wanted to be reconciled, say, she wants
to really be reconciled to her husband, It doesn't make any
difference how much she might want to be reconciled. She can
never be reconciled until there's a change of attitude on the part
of the man. Now, but that's simple. For instance,
I'm not anticipating this, but say Brother Pennington and I,
we had a falling out. I can use him because he doesn't
mind. Some of you may think that I'm taking a poke at you. And
so, I've offended Brother Pennington. Now it doesn't make any difference
how repentant I may be about what I have done to offend him,
unless he's willing. You see? Unless he's willing,
there'll never be any reconciliation. So reconciliation, there must
be a change of attitude on the part of both offender and offendant
before there can ever be any reconciliation. It doesn't take
a smart person to understand that. Every once in a while you'll
see a couple that are having problems and one mate wants to
be reconciled to the other but the other does not want to be
reconciled. It doesn't make any difference how much one party
might want to be reconciled to the other party. There can never
be any reconciliation until there's a change of attitude on the part
of both of them. But I'm here to say to you this
morning that God's attitude toward the elect has been changed. How? By the propitiation of Jesus
Christ. God is reconciled. Beloved, if
that is not objective reconciliation, tell me what it is. And it is
because of that objective reconciliation That subjective reconciliation,
which is the result of objective reconciliation, is made possible.
If that's not the truth of Holy Scripture, then I'm as wet as
water. And I'll tell you what, I'll remain wet. That's the language of Holy Writ. Now it doesn't make any difference
how much. In the first place, no person who is at enmity with
God will want to be reconciled to God until there has been a
work of grace in his heart changing his own attitude, his own mind,
and that is the result of God's attitude toward him already having
been changed. What am I saying? I'm saying
what I've always said. Salvation is by grace, that's
what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying. Reconciliation does not refer
to the putting away of the subjective enmity in the heart of a person
said to be reconciled, but to the alienation on the part of
the person to whom we are said to be reconciled. I challenge
reputation of that statement. Let me give it again. I said
reconciliation does not refer to the putting away of the subjected
entity in the heart of the sinner I'm talking about, of a person
said to be reconciled, but to the alienation on the part of
the person to whom the person is said to be reconciled. Now
when you go back to Romans 5, and let's study verses 8 through
11 briefly. In these verses, attention is
drawn not to the subjective, but to the object. You say, well, now Paul was addressing
people who were already reconciled. That's true. They had received
it. That was the reserve. But the
action, as well as the reserve, both were of God. And that's
the teaching of the whole context. You can't get away from it. All right, notice the tense.
The tense indicates that reconciliation is an accomplished fact. I challenge reputation of that
statement. It was wrought once for all by the death of Jesus
Christ. Therefore, we can say, objectively,
reconciliation is a historical fact. just like justification is an
eternal act of God. Objective reconciliation was
accomplished by Jesus Christ. Now get this, I said objective
reconciliation was accomplished by Jesus Christ, the second person
of the Godhead. Subjective reconciliation is
accomplished by the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration. thus changing the attitude of
the sinner toward God. The enmity is thus removed. It has been suggested that if
Romans 5, 8 through 11 taught subjective reconciliation, now
I want you to look at the verses, open your Bibles, every one of
you. I said it has been suggested that if Romans 5, 8 through 11
taught subjective reconciliation, then the passage would have to
read like this. Now look at verse 10. I'm going
to read it now like they say it has to read. You look how
it is in the Bible. For if when we were enemies we
laid aside our enmity against God through the death of That is exactly the way it would
have to read if it were subjective reconciliation. Are you following
me? Look at the verse. Look at verse
10. I said if it were subjective,
he would have to read in this manner, for if when we were enemies
we laid aside our enmity against God through the death of the
Son, how much more having laid aside our enmity shall we be
saved by his life. Do you think that is the teaching
of that verse? No. No. Beloved, I want you to know
when you see the truth you can be dogmatic. This proves that the word reconcile
has a different meaning than what is commonly understood by
it. Now, notice this. Reconcile to
God through the death of the Son, verse 10, is a parallel
statement to justify it now in His blood of verse 9. You can't deny that. as justification
is forensic or legal and does not refer to any subjective change
in man's disposition, so reconciliation must be understood in the same
way as that which came to pass in the objective sphere of the
divine action. Now look at verse 11. Reconciliation
is something received. What does this mean? This means
that it is made over to us as a free gift. That means reconciliation
is the work of grace in us. We would have the wrong concept
of reconciliation if we were to say, now look at verse 11,
we have now received the removal of our enmity. are, we have now
received the laying aside of our enmity. You see, if it were
subjective, then that's the way it would have to read. But it
is objective, and we have received it. It's the gift of God. It's the work of grace. We are
the recipients of it. What does it mean? Beloved, it
means that we have received reinstatement. in the favor of God. Paul said this reconciliation
occurred, now get this, while we were yet enemies, verse 10. Isn't that what he says? He said,
we receive this reconciliation while we were yet enemies. And if we receive this reconciliation
while we were yet enemies, then, beloved, that is objective, not
subjective. It's talking about the work of
Jesus Christ for us and not the subjective work of the Holy Spirit
in us, thus reconciling us to God. Now I want you to turn to 2 Corinthians
5, 18-21. And I'll have time just to go
into this one a little bit. 2 Corinthians chapter 5. This is
the other passage that is ordinarily used and yet not understood. Let's begin with verse 18 and
read through 21. 2 Corinthians 5, 18-21. And all things are of God. There it is. I don't have to
say any more. All things are of God, who hath reconciled us
to himself, how? By Jesus Christ. When? When Jesus Christ died and hath
given to us, and that's in time, isn't it? The ministry of reconciliation. to wit that God was in Christ,
doing what? Reconciling the world to himself,
not imputing their trespasses unto them, and have 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, Ted, be ye reconciled to God. Beloved, I am to beseech
people to be reconciled to God in the same manner I'm to say,
believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, repent of your sin in the same
manner. Just as simple as it can be. Now let's look at this for a
moment, this passage. Reconciliation is represented as a work of God,
verse 18. It begins with God and is accomplished
by the sovereign God. All things are of God who hath
reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ. Then in the 19th verse,
to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself,
not imputing their trespasses unto them. According to this
passage, reconciliation excludes human action. I said it excludes
human action. This does not sound like a statement
that I read two weeks ago in the study of this subject, I
quote. He was giving the meaning of
the word reconciliation as changing, like the changing of money, and
I haven't gone into that, but listen to this. He said, change
your money here. In other words, the Lord is saying
to people today, to sinners today, change your money here. Change
your money here. I will give my power for your
helplessness. I will give my godliness for
your sinfulness. I will give my love for your
enmity, end of quote. Beloved, God doesn't want our
enmity. God doesn't want your own black
heart either. You see that's wrong terminology.
But it leaves the impression with sinners that it's all subjective
and by change of their own attitude then they can get God to change
his attitude and thus receive them. They've got the cart before
the horse. What did I say? I said they've
got the cart before the horse. Reconciliation begins with God.
It's objective. objective. It's the work of Jesus
Christ. Subjective reconciliation is
the work of the Holy Spirit within. Reconciliation is a finished
work. If you notice the tenses of verses 18, 19, and 21 of 2
Corinthians 5, the tenses of these verses prove that it is
finished. I'm talking about objective reconciliation. It is not something continuously
wrought by God. Now what do you mean by that?
It is not something that when you repent then God changes his
mind about you. The change of your mind is the
result of God already having changed his mind. Do you know why things are in
the shape they are today in the religious world? People have
the wrong concept of God. The accomplished work of reconciliation
is God's message committed to ministers and the message is
a fact accomplished. Thus, when I stand before you
and preach reconciliation, I'm talking about a fact that is
accomplished. objectively and will be accomplished
subjectively by the Holy Spirit when you're regenerated. Does that sound like Bible to
you? Now I must give another reference or two. Will you turn
with me to Colossians 1 20 and 21? Colossians 1 20 and 21. I'll have to bring the message
to a close after we refer to this passage. Colossians chapter
1 verses 20 and 21. And having made peace with the
blood of his cross, that's an accomplished fact, is it not?
That's historically true, is it not? By him to reconcile,
now notice this next statement, all things unto himself. All things unto himself. Then he goes on to say, whether they be things in earth,
are things in heaven. And you that were sometime alienated
and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled. Reconciliation effected through
the blood of Christ's cross is not limited to men, if you'll
notice in this context. I said it is not limited to men.
He talks about all things. It includes the whole order of
creation affected by sin. Please notice that Paul did not
say all men here. He said all things and there
is a reason for it. It suggests the completeness
of God's eternal purpose. not only is sinful man reconciled,
but the created order which he has made subject to vanity because
of sin, Romans 8, 20 and 21, will share in the fruit of Christ's
redemptive work on the cross. Now, an important question. Paul
does not include things under the earth as in Philippians 2.10. Why? Why? Now will you look at
this please? Do you read your Bible? Now turn with me to Philippians.
Philippians 2 and look at verse 10. I want you to make a contrast
between these two statements, one in Philippians and the one
in Colossians. In Philippians 2, at the name
of Jesus every knee should bow, things in heaven and things in
earth, same language now that you have in Colossians, but this is omitted, and things
under the earth, under the earth. Now why does Paul omit the phrase
under the earth in Colossians 1 and he includes it in Philippians
2. Do you know why? I'm asking you
a question, do you know why? Paul is emphasizing the sovereignty
of Christ in Philippians 2. The time is going to come, listen
now, all of you who are outside of Christ, listen The time is going to come when
every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. Those who are
in heaven, those who are on the earth, and even those who are
under the earth, and that means those who have died in their
sins. Paul is not talking about the
sovereignty of Christ in Colossians. He's talking about reconciliation.
Reconciliation. He's not magnifying sovereignty.
He's emphasizing reconciliation. And through the blood of Jesus
Christ, all things will be reconciled, whether they be things in heaven
or things on earth. Now why did he omit under the
earth? Because those who have died in
their sins will never be reconciled to God. Why? So in Philippians Paul is dealing
with the sovereignty of Christ, whereas in Colossians he is dealing
with reconciliation. And there is no reconciliation
for those under the earth that they shall bow before the sovereign
cross. I don't have time to go any further
this morning, so I bring this to a close by saying, well, let
me raise a question. Why does the Bible place the
emphasis on our being reconciled to God? Thomas Matten has given the greatest
answer to that that I have read by anyone. Here's what he said. First, because we're involved. We offended God. God didn't offend
us. Isn't that great? As a person outside of Jesus
Christ, you have offended God. God has never offended you. So first, because we're involved,
we offended God, not He us. Second, we have the benefit It
is no profit to God, said the Puritan, that the creature enters
into peace. Listen to this. It is no profit
to God that you enter into peace. He is happy with himself, without
our love and without our service. But we are undone if we are not
upon good terms with him." That's it. If you don't see that, your
eyes have never been illuminated by the Spirit of God. What did
I say at the beginning of this subject this morning? I said
that reconciliation begins not with the offender, but with the
offended. Propitiation looks God with that. That's objective reconciliation. Reconciliation looks manward
as far as you and I are concerned, and that means the Holy Spirit
has wrought a work of grace in our hearts, thus removing what? The enmity toward God. But that
enmity being removed is the fruit, is the result of objective reconciliation
which is a historical fact. Will you reconcile to God? Now,
beloved, I believe in a message like this, saints have been edified,
not here to convert the person in whose heart there has been
a work of grace, and many other things have been
discussed that are of great profit. You know within your own heart
if you have enmity toward God. If the enmity has been removed,
then that's the proof of God's objective reconciliation. You
have no one to thank but God himself. All the praise is to
go to him. And if that enmity has been removed,
I want you to know as a believer who has the witness that the
enmity is removed, you want to do the will of God. That's the
test.