HOME (Basic Presentation)

1. 2Co 5:18-19 (Cf. 5:14-6:1)

¹⁴ For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. ¹⁵ And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

¹⁶ So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. ¹⁷ Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! ¹⁸ All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: ¹⁹ that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. ²⁰ We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. ²¹ God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

6 ¹As God’s fellow workers we urge you not to receive God’s grace in vain.

¹⁸ τὰ δὲ πάντα ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ καταλλάξαντος ἡμᾶς ἑαυτῷ διὰ Χριστοῦ καὶ δόντος ἡμῖν τὴν διακονίαν τῆς καταλλαγῆς, ¹⁹ ὡς ὅτι θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ κόσμον καταλλάσσων ἑαυτῷ, μὴ λογιζόμενος αὐτοῖς τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν, καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν τὸν λόγον τῆς καταλλαγῆς.

1. Though the focus will be on v19, vv 14-18 are included to show that Paul has shifted the pronoun “us” from the majestic plural used earlier in the chapter to those who believe. V15 -He died for all … those who live; v17—anyone in Christ, a new creation; v18—God, the one who reconciled us to himself in Christ—gave us the ministry – “us” is believers to whom the ministry is given. The ministry has not been given to unbelievers.

      The three forms of katallassw should be noted: Aorist participle (v18) indicating the completed action on those to whom the ministry of reconciliation is committed (believers); the Imperfect for God’s ongoing dealings with the world up to the present time; and present Imperative for those whom God is calling into his kingdom through the message/messengers of reconciliation.

Error 1: “For there to be a change in status, the sin that bars access to God and prevents reconciliation with God must be removed. All of this has been completed in Christ. In Christ its substitute the world has now been declared sin-free, and since the barrier to peace with God has been removed from the world and laid upon Christ, reconciliation has been achieved.”  ^{5 WELS  Essay}

Error 2: In discussions (which I have faced) some have asserted a change in God, i.e., they use the passive to assert that “God was reconciled.” The passive is not used for God! It is, however, used for man in the appeal: “Be reconciled to God!” The change is in man, who is declared holy through justification/ reconciliation/forgiveness. God is the essential agent of that reconciliation.

2. A key issue is the main verb: Is it parsed as ἦν + present participles ^{6 Research 12b vii, 12d, 12e} or as ἦν … καταλλάσσων … μὴ λογιζόμενος, a periphrastic. In both cases the main verb is imperfect, i.e., ongoing from an origin in the past.^{7 Research Sect. 14}
3. This imperfect is juxtaposed with an aorist participle (τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ καταλλάξαντος ἡμᾶς ἑαυτῷ) in v18. In that statement the “new creatures in Christ” have been reconciled (a completed action) through Christ” and are entrusted with the ministry of reconciliation. Since the apostle used the aorist when speaking of believers, it seems reasonable to conclude that, when he predicated an imperfect regarding the world in v19, he was saying something different.
4. So why the imperfect? An imperfect verb form ^{7 Research Sect. 12a; 12b iii, 12b vi; 12c, 12d, 14} indicates an act begun in past time without indicating an end—the conclusion of the action is indicated by some time marker, stated or implied, in the context. There is no time marker here, and it must be noted that the present passive imperative in v20 assumes God is the agent. God is still reconciling the world to himself whenever the ministers of the reconciliation reach out with the Gospel.
5. As the NIV translates with an English progressive form (“was reconciling”), it reflects the ongoing nature of God’s acting throughout history to reconcile the world to himself – begun at the time of Adam and continuing to the present. The KJV and EHV present the same continuity with present participles following and imperfect main verb (‘was’).
6. The stem αλλ means “other.” Therefore αλλάσσω means to “make other.” Then καταλλάσσω means to “make thoroughly other,” and so comes to mean “reconcile.” The change brought about by reconciliation ^{8 Research Sect 10} is described in v. 17: “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.”
   NOTE: the passive of καταλλάσσω is not predicated of God. A holy God does not change. He changes others to be reconciled to himself through the ministry of reconciliation.

Error 3: In discussions the term “in Christ” has been offered as a time marker, meaning “during Christ’s lifetime,” i.e., that the reconciliation was completed at the time of Christ’s resurrection.

7. In v17 Paul has defined his current usage of the term “in Christ.” “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation/creature” – i.e. he is a child of God. The same sense of “in Christ” occurs in v21: “so that in him (in Christ) we (those who are reconciled) might become the righteousness of God.” Cf. Jn 15:1ff –the branches “in” the vine and the various statements using “in” in the Christ’s high priestly prayer.
8. So there is no time marker in 2Co 5:19. Therefore the reconciling of the world that began with the Protevangel is ongoing to the present time. Therefore I suggest that the translation should be: “God has been reconciling the world to himself in Christ and has not been charging up their sins against them.” Cf. God’s ‘forbearance” also for unbelievers in Ro 3 & 4. (Note: That the imperfect may denote an action starting in the past and continuing to the present, which is precisely communicated by the English perfect progressive, and is illustrated by the EHV translation of the following passages: Philemon 7; 2Co 9:3; Gal 3:1; 2Co 9:3 or Lk 2:38 “Anna kept on speaking”
9. 2Co 5:19 then means: God has been reconciling the world to himself by making new creatures in Christ. That work is in progress through the word of reconciliation used in the ministry of reconciliation. It has been ongoing from the protevangel to the present time.

Error 4:  2Co 5:21 is included above because in some discussions it has been suggested that the “us” in that verse means “all.”

10. But Paul is clearly speaking of believers acting in service to God’s ministry. (Imagine the absurdity of an atheist urging people to be reconciled to a God that he doesn’t believe exists.)
11. The statement about redemption in v21 (‘God made him who had no sin to be sin for us’) is in this case a pastor inviting appropriation by saying to listeners that Christ died for them. To be sure, the proclamation of the message invites non-believers to trust the universal truth of the redemption and then also “in him (i.e., through faith in Christ) become the righteousness of God.”

Conclusion:

1. Since the imperfect tenses in 2Co 5:19 do not indicate a completed past act; and
2. Since the imperfect communicates the continuing activity of God as, from the time of Adam to the present, he works in support of the ministry of reconciliation, in full accord with his desire to bring all people to repentance and the knowledge of the truth.

THEREFORE this passage does not support UOJ, which is defined as an act completed at the time of Christ’s resurrection.

Why God at the present time is not charging up sins during a person’s time of grace and why all are not reconciled is poignantly stated in Christ’s lament over Jerusalem: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, … how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.”

Colossians 2:13, 14

¹³When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, ¹⁴having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross (NIV).

¹³καὶ ὑμᾶς νεκροὺς ὄντας ἐν τοῖς παραπτώμασιν καὶ τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν, συνεζωοποίησεν ὑμᾶς σὺν αὐτῷ· χαρισάμενος ἡμῖν πάντα τὰ παραπτώματα, ¹⁴ἐξαλείψας τὸ καθ’ ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τοῖς δόγμασιν ὃ ἦν ὑπεναντίον ἡμῖν, καὶ αὐτὸ ἦρκεν ἐκ τοῦ μέσου προσηλώσας αὐτὸ τῷ σταυρῷ·

Error 1: “But when Paul speaks of forgiveness he ties it not to the personal regeneration or quickening that a believer has experienced but to the once-for-all act of Jesus on the cross, by which he canceled the condemnation of the law for all mankind, “nailing it to the cross.” Here Scripture identifies forgiveness with the cross, not with faith.” ^{24 WELS Essay} 

1. This argument is based on the English punctuation, not on the structure of the Greek sentence.
2. The main verb of the Greek sentence is “God made you alive in Christ.” So the main clause points to the “personal regeneration” of the recipients. The two participles (χαρισάμενος— forgave —and ἐξαλείψας— canceled) modify “God,” the subject of the sentence; Then another main verb (ἦρκεν) is used as God “took away it (the written code)” and another participle (προσηλώσας – nailing) modifying God.
3. The “forgiving,” the “canceling,” and the “nailing” are all vitally related to the fact that God in his grace “made (the Colossians) alive in Christ.” These were the gracious gifts God gave the Colossians when he brought them to faith, the same faith that Paul, as the apostle to the Gentiles had in his own heart. So it is very natural to slide from “you” to “us.” This is a blessing from God that we share.

Error 2: “Paul includes himself with the Colossians, not only as a fellow believer, but as part of the world of sinners for whom Christ canceled the written code and against whom Christ blotted out the handwriting of the law.” ^{25 WELS Essay}

4. St. Paul would surely have conceded that he was a sinner—saved by grace. But he gives no indication that he is including “the world of sinners” as already saved by grace.  By this erroneous statement the author changes another pronoun to include far more than anything in the text would indicate.
5. It is very natural that the apostle, as he exults in the gift of life given to the Colossians, would include himself as a life-gifted, fellow-believer as he describes the full range of things that God has done to give life—forgiving, canceling the debt, nailing to the cross, — blessings that Paul (and all believers) also receive.
6. I note that, when a sudden change to the 1^st pl pronoun is intended to include the whole of mankind, the adjective “all” is typically included. E.g. “We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ” Ro 14:10. There is no “all” in this sentence.
7. Since I have no desire to exegize church fathers, I will only note that the quote from St. Ambrose is used in the Apology to support a section on justification through faith, not justification by divine decree.  Please, note also that Ambrose ^{25 Research 9} does not use the normal world for “forgive” in this quote, a fact which is borne out by the word “donavit” in Latin and “geschenkt” in German.

Conclusion:

1. Since changing from ‘you’ (2^nd pl) to “us” is normal and natural; and
2. Since broadening the “us” to include all people is no way indicated in the text; and

• Since, as demonstrated under Ro 4:25, it is proper to ascribe redemption to any group within the “all” for whom Christ died.

THEREFORE Col 2: 13-14 does not support UOJ.

Positive: What fantastic pastoral love the apostle shows, as he asserts that the Colossians have the new life in Christ, but includes himself as he points out that also he himself was among those whose sins were forgiven, canceled and nailed to the cross.

1 John 2:2

²He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but for the sins of the whole world.

²καὶ αὐτὸς ἱλασμός ἐστιν περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, οὐ περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων δὲ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου.

“St. John the Apostle calls Jesus the ἱλασμός for our sins and for the whole world. An ἱλασμός is a “sin-offering,” an “expiation” or “propitiation.” The word indicates not only an offering that is presented, but an offering that is actually accepted and is the real satisfaction that expiates sin. It’s well translated by the NIV as “atoning sacrifice.”
John says explicitly that Jesus is the ἱλασμός . . . περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου. The preposition περὶ with the genitive means “for” in the substitutionary sense. Jesus is the covering for the sin of the world.” ^{26 WELS Essay}

These paragraphs are excellent. But it is when “(hakapporet) the cover of the Ark of the Covenant, the mercy seat” is changed to the verb “to cover (completely)” the exegesis becomes flawed.

Error: “Since Jesus atoned for the sin of the world, the world’s sin is covered and goes unseen. It is not possible to teach universal atonement, universal payment, and universal covering of sin as accomplished realities without also teaching universal forgiveness as an accomplished reality in the sacrificed body of Christ. The sin of the world really was covered by Jesus’ propitiation. It is a false dichotomy to say, “The sin of the world was covered by Christ,” or “The sin of the world was paid for by Christ,” but to be unwilling to say, “The sin of the world was forgiven by Christ.” How can sin be covered, paid for, borne away and removed, but not forgiven?” ^{27 WELS Essay}

1. In Leviticus 4ff. the basic instructions for sin offerings and trespass offerings are presented. Specific details are given about the priest’s actions in various situations, and then statement is made in each case: “In this way the priest will make atonement for the community (person), and they (he) will be forgiven.”

Note that it does not say: “and the sin is paid for.”  

2. But not every sacrifice brought forgiveness. The people at Isaiah’s time were making the same sacrifices, but God through Isaiah made it clear that there was no forgiveness for impenitent people. So the priests at Isaiah’s time were making the atonement, but the forgiveness did not follow. God says: “I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls … stop bringing meaningless offerings! … Your New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations—my soul hates” (selected from Isa 1).
3. So the atonement and the forgiveness are separate. What brings them together is a “broken and contrite heart,” of a penitent believer like David (Ps 32 &51), the tax collector in the Temple—they are forgiven.
4. Atonement <> forgiveness, though forgiveness is based on atonement so that God can “be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus” (Ro 3:26). To consider atonement and forgiveness as synonymous is to confuse preparation for justification with distribution of justification.

Conclusion:

1. Since the atonement offering is separated from the forgiveness in the OT; and
2. Since also in the OT the actual forgiveness is granted to the person who delighted in God’s grace rather than in the sacrifice as payment for sin; and
3. Since Christ’s passion was an atonement offering on the basis of which the Gospel promise of forgiveness is based;

THEREFORE 1 John 2:2 does not support UOJ

Positive: The “our” of 1Jn 2:2 is clearly defined earlier as those who “walk in the light,” and “Jesus … purifies us from all sin,” and “we confess our sins.” It is perfectly legitimate for believers who fall into sin to say: “He died for our sins,” and to say: “He died for the sins of the whole world.” This is proper because if he died for all, he died for any group or individual within the “all.” However, the atoning sacrifice brings forgiveness only to those who repent and believe.

1 Timothy 4:10

¹⁰That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe (NIV).

¹⁰εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ κοπιῶμεν καὶ ὀνειδιζόμεθα, ὅτι ἠλπίκαμεν ἐπὶ θεῷ ζῶντι, ὅς ἐστιν σωτὴρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, μάλιστα πιστῶν.

Error 1: “God is not merely the potential Savior of all people; he is the Savior of all people. If God is the Savior of all people, and Christ’s redemptive work is complete, then we can say that God saved all people in Christ. To say that God did not save all people in Christ would be to say that Jesus’ work was incomplete or not for all. Consider these parallels in the way we speak:

Christ is the atoning sacrifice for the world: Christ atoned for the world.

Christ is the world’s Redeemer: Christ redeemed the world.

Christ is the world’s Savior: Christ saved the world.” ^{287 WELS Essay}

1. Christ as Redeemer did all that was necessary to save the whole world. Hoenecke ^{28 Research Sect.  2} describes it as a “universally applicable justification” (Note: NOT “universally applied justification”). That is the sense in which Jesus is the Savior of the world—even if no one were to be saved.
2. His completed work of redemption provided a potentiality that is expressed in various purpose clauses (“desired result” clause, if you prefer):
   1. Jn 3:15— so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that (ina) everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. (Note: Subjunctive verb, not indicative)
   2. Jn 3:16— “that (ina) whoever believes in him shall … have eternal life.” (Note: Subjunctive verb, not indicative)
   3. Jn 3:17— For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save (ina) the world through him. (Note: Subjunctive verb, not indicative)
   4. 1Ti 1:15— Christ Jesus came into the world to save (infinitive to express purpose) sinners … that in me, the worst of sinners, … as an example for those who would believe on him and have eternal life. (“would” – expressing a coming event, not  completed action)
   5. Acts 16:31— Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved and your house.”  (Future verb)
3. μάλιστα πιστῶν  focuses on the same group — believers. He is the Savior for all, but he is the Savior “specifically” of those who believe.
4. Here there is basically a confusion about what Christ is and what Christ does/did. He is the Savior of the world. The scope of his work included the whole world throughout all of history. What he did was provide a redemption that was so comprehensive that it included everyone. Therefore it is legitimate to use the word “redeemed.” This is history.
5. What he does now do in his priestly office is to present the Gospel and to save those who believe his promises. This gracious activity has been carried on throughout the history of the world through His prophetic office, the preaching of the Gospel. Those who believe are the people who are saved (when “saved” is used as it is in the Bible to mean “have eternal life”)!!!
6. I have no example of the Bible using the word “saved/salvation” as a temporary change.

Error 2: “Thinking people recognize that words are used in different ways. So it is with the words “saved” and “salvation”:

(1) All people were saved at the cross.

(2) “Brother, are you saved?”

(3) Not all people will be saved.” ^{28 WELS Essay}

1. It is true that words can have different meanings. However, I have not found an instance in which saved is used as a temporary state, as it is used in UOJ in #(1) above.
2. The statement “All people were redeemed (atoned for) at the cross” (Cp. Hoenecke’s “universally applicable justification”) is a totally different concept than “All people were saved at the cross.”
3. To deflect the accusation of universalism, those who defend the statement “All people were saved at the cross” postulate that the saving is temporary as people continue in sin.
4. Note that this ‘loss of being saved’ CAN’T BE that they fall from faith, since no faith was created. This assumed ‘saving’ is done without any use of the Gospel.
5. Apparently God by divine fiat “saved” all people—and then changed his mind. Or can man resist when God acts in nuda maiestate?
6. If being ‘saved’ is nullified by sin, there is no hope for anyone since we sin daily.
7. This use of the word “saved” is equivalent to telling a first responder who has dragged a lifeless body from a lake: “You saved him.”
8. “Saved” designates a terminal act (like: finish, condemn, kill, justify). “Saved” has the connotation of a desirable terminal act. To suggest that a person can be saved and then be ‘unsaved’ produces a communication conundrum.
9. Does Acts 16:31 mean a temporary save or a permanent save?
10. The same question for John 3:16 where the noun ‘salvation’ is used.
11. Can I have faith till I die and then find out that the “saving” was temporary or that my sin nullified it?
12. Please, note when in Ro 8:29-30 God does give us a bit of insight into his “majestic” actions from eternity past to eternity future. He clearly states that the calling (through the Gospel) precedes the justifying.
13.  Then the glorification of believers is also certain.

Conclusion:

1. Since purpose (intended result) clauses show that the “saving” is in the future (a potentiality) and so it is incorrect to say that Christ saved the world; and
2. Since “saved” is a terminal act when it is used in the sense of eternal salvation; and
3. Since Christ’s redemptive act established in history that He is the Savior of the world, even though many will reject him as Savior and be lost because of that rejection,

THEREFORE 1 Timothy 4:10 does not support UOJ.

Positive: That Jesus is the Savior of the world is a correlative of the fact that God would have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of that truth. No person is outside of the scope of Christ’s redemptive work. Therefore we can say to anyone anywhere: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.”