The Sunday lectionary NT epistle for Lent 4 is 2 Cor 5.16–21. The gospel lectionary reading is Luke 15.1-3, 11b-32, the parable of the Forgiving Father (or the Prodigal Son), which works well with it.
Many people will be preaching on the theme of Mothering Sunday—but that is in danger of missing out on this remarkable text from Paul. In many ways it is the passage that summarises Paul’s understanding of the gospel, and his whole apostolic ministry. Humanity has gone astray, but Jesus has died for all, so that our sins will no longer be counted against us. More than that, his rising to new life has changed the world—the longed-for age to come, the new creation, has broken into this old age. And those who are ‘in Christ’ start to live this new creation life.
We are, naturally, at enmity with God—but Jesus has dealt with this, and so we can now be reconciled with God, turned from enemies to friends, to know his love and receive his gift of life. And once this has happened, he then entrusts us with this ministry of reconciliation; having been reconciled ourselves, we urge others to experience the same.
Come and join Ian and James as they explore the issues here!
Revd James Blandford-Baker is vicar of Histon and Impington, two villages just north of Cambridge. Revd Dr Ian Paul is Associate Minister of St Nic’s, Nottingham, and writes the widely-read blog www.psephizo.com.
The video on the gospel reading for Luke 15.1-3, 11b-32 of the loving father and the two sons can be found here.
Ah. ‘New creation’: ‘in Christ’. Does this open -up to the overlooked, undervalued, reformed, scriptural doctrine of the astonishing ‘ union with Christ ‘ and all that entails, including his righteousness?
Paul & James, thank you both for such an enjoyable video discussion and your obvious enjoyment enhanced your message.
In two weeks time I am talking to my house group about Jesus, God and their interrelationship with The Holy Spirit. In particular Jesus’ friendship with The Holy Spirit. Would you be so kind as to point me to articles, videos, books and or commentaries that would be instructive in helping me to prepare, including questions as personally I think the Trinity’s relationship is far far wider than friendship. Any help would be very much appreciated.
Ian – I wish you would get a spell checker: ‘longer-for’!
Er, ‘longer’ is a word in English, so would not be corrected by a computer spell checker…
AI?
Thanks very much for highlighting this passage in 2 Corinthians which is a brilliant distillation of Paul’s own experience, his pastoral priorities and the gospel wisdom he was proclaiming around the eastern Mediterranean. It’s got 5 of the 10 uses of katallage/ katallasso in the NT. I wonder why Paul and the other NT authors didn’t make more use of the words? Not just in Corinth in the C1 but today’s church it’s such a vital message.
I think that is a very good question. I think it is implicit in much of the NT—for example (as I think we say) that is effectively Paul’s agenda in 1 Cor, without using the word.
I wonder if part of this is the fact that it is a meta term—standing back, it is a word Paul uses when he reflects on what he has been engaging in…
Interestingly 3 of the other 5 uses are in 2 verses of Romans 5. Perhaps it was an idea he came to later on but didn’t have time to reflect on and employ as extensively as the ‘justification/ made righteous’ group of terms.. Jimmy Dunn seems to suggest that justification and reconciliation are almost synonyms; I think there is also a more personal and less juridical emphasis in the reconciliation terminology and it evokes the Prodigal Son more than the court room.
But even more so is Union with Christ, Tim .
If that isn’t Good News I don’t know what is. We get Christ himself in union. And in Triunity, Father and Holy Spirit.
To God alone be the Glory.
AH, Reconciliation.
“ a reconciliation of opposing views”
“The differences in their philosophies are beyond reconciliation. [=cannot be reconciled]”
Bearing in mind the Corinthian Church had some similarities to “the leaven of the Pharisees” and some of our “modern” churches, viz a viz dissentions, party spirits,
formations of alliances, discord, divisions.
The triumvate of Pharisees- Sadducees – Herodians
Two opposing theologies combined with politics in alliance
(In the OT Alliances we’re anathema in God’s eyes)
Here I think that Paul is restating the foundations of his Gospel and Missional purposes
Indeed, if the foundations are unstable how will the building fare?
Paul declares that on this foundation is the essence of his ministry
5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
5:19 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.
The ministry of reconciliation cannot succeed if the basis is not been established.
After decades of in fighting parties become entrenched and WW1 is re-enacted with the common man’s decimation ensuing.
Alas the parties involved have not understood the nature of “spiritual” warfare not having read the King’s Regulations.
Further on Paul says when he visits them, he will determine to know nothing about their disputes
He intended to know nothing but “Christ crucified” – not only For them but also In them.
Paul reminds us that all believers will appear before Christ to receive what is due for their actions. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive his due for the things done in the body, whether good or bad (2 Corinthians 5:10).
Praying hymns
Come bless the Lord all you servants of the Lord
Who stand by night in the House of the Lord
Lift up your hands in the Holy Place
And bless the Lord, (Psalm 134)
Limited/unlimited atonement?
New creation. Particular refemption.. Universal/cosmic and particular, personal.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevin-wax/why-limited-and-unlimited-atonement-debates-miss-the-point/
The discussion between Ian and James does not reach the last few verses and their significance and substance.
Righteousness: Is righteousness not central? And integral to justification? So what is it?
NT Wright: what does he understand God’s/Christs righteousness to be? Or who is a righteous God? It seems that NT Wright has a restricted view of God’s righteousness as critiqued by John Piper his book, ‘The Future of Justification’.
And amen and amen. It it worth raising hands and singing Doxology.
Geoff, thanks for your response. Perhaps the ‘in Christ’, ‘reconciliation, ‘justification’ and ‘peace with God’ terminology (and more besides) is flexibly interchangeable? I suspect Paul wasn’t working with precise definitions of these terms because they are seeking to express the complexities of relationships not static states or theories. So he could switch between them for reasons that are now very difficult to ascertain. We automatically adapt our language depending on the context rather than simply repeating the same words in every situation as if there is a standard formula of the faith that applies everywhere no matter the culture or context. And Paul may have been continuously reworking his theology as he explored the reality and mystery of God in Christ reconciling the world to himself.
Spot on, Tim, (and a more gracious response than mine). Thanks.
Thanks, Bruce. Glad to know it made some sense!
Hello Tim,
Reconciliation: union with Christ.
I’m not a disciple of Piper nor Wright, and in Piper’s book, I mentioned as I was reading it years ago, noting comments in pencil, I wrote that there seemed to be at core, a dispute over the ‘order of salvation’ between them both and what is and how.
However, on further skimming of the book in the the last few days, and subsequently,
few years later, received what I consider to be substantial and significant teaching on Union with Christ, of which I was not aware at the time, I consider that NTW has not given sufficient scripural and metaphysical weight to it ( nor did Piper).
And it seems to me that NTW is unconvincing in his understanding of righteousness, that is God’s righteousness, our righteous God. Piper is more compelling and cogent on that point, to me.
I have Mike Reeves to thank for drawing me into union doctrine. And then I came across great teaching from Sinclair Ferguson.
What is odd is the push back to any idea of union. This isn’t the place to elaborate with links.
Piper, quotes NTW on 2 Corinthians 5:21 as a “detached statement” and Wright makes no comment on becoming the ‘righteousness of God in him’.
It is close parallel with v 17 “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.” The logic follows through in v14, 17 21.
Piper ‘ Paul is explaining ‘ How it is that people can be this reconciled. That is the point of 1 Corinthians 5:19.”
” The paragraph is about Paul’s ministry of reconciliation. But it is also about How that reconciliation is possible. That is explicit and unmistakable. Paul is jealous to draw attention to the way reconcilation works in verses 14, 17, 19 and 21.
(It seems that NTW limits God’s righteousness to his
covenant faithfulness.)
‘ It seems that NT Wright…’ ‘It seems…’!!?? Geoff, please explain how NT Wright has demonstrated his ‘restricted view of God’s righteousness’ — you could use his volume 4 (_Paul and the Faithfulness of God_) or his own response to John Piper’s critique _Justification: God’s Plan and Paul Vision_. A clues may even be in those book’s titles. If you can’t do this, please at least stop making these unfounded claims.
‘Clues’ not ‘A clues’.
steve phillips
March 24, 2025 at 1:01 pm
Hi Steve.
I wonder if this might be helpful to you.
http://www.austin-sparks.net/english/000478.html “By My Spirit”
From the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit so to speak Shalom.
Isn’t a Righteous God
irreduciby central to the questions of who, why and how of reconciition?
BS,
Yet again as is your wont, more avoidance of questions and no substantance to your response , to what you say is error.
Please state what NWT sets out as his view of
1. Union with Christ
2 Righteousness of God
Piper has cited Wright, in my comment at 8:15 pm to Tim.
I think you are more than able to give a specific response to each point. Thanks.
Correction.
My comment to Tim at 8:58 pm
Geoff, I am not the one avoiding questions. Please answer my previous question to you — why should *I* respond to each point John Piper makes, when NT Wright specifically in more than 200 pages responded himself to Piper’s book with his _Justification_?
Part 2 of NTW’s book is headed ‘Exegesis’ (significant in itself?) and pp.135-144 deals *specifically* with 2Cor. Within that he says ‘”God’s righteousness”, in Paul as in the Psalms and Isaiah, regularly refers to God’s own righteousness, not in the mediaeval sense which _iustitia Dei_ generated, but in the Old Testament and intertestamental sense of “the covenant faithfulness of God, through and because of which God is faithful to the promises to Abraham, the promises through which the-single-plan-through-Israel-for-the-world can come into operation, the promises through which, ultimately, all creation will be set right.” [BS: a quote from NTW himself?] “Righteousness” carries the overtones both of “justice” … and of “faithfulness”. …
‘2 Corinthians 5.21 is the climax of a long argument in which Paul has set out how it is that *God has renewed the covenant in Jesus the Messiah,* [BS’ emphasis — read *anything* in Wright to see how ‘in’ and ‘Messiah’ are crucially related] making him, Paul, a minister of that new covenant (3 .6-18), … and thereby a minister of the new creation (5.17), while doing so through putting Paul in the uncomfortable but gospel-revealing position of re-embodying the Messiah’s dying and rising, [BS: as in 4:10] the very events which in Romans 3 Paul declares to be the revelation of God’s righteousness.’ (141)
Geoff, is that enough reading of Wright to be going on with?
Thanks Bruce.
In union with Christ, Christ’s covenant faithfulness, (sinless) obedience is ours.
Yet God’s righteousness is more, not reduced to NTW redefinition.
(Nor does what you have put up answer Piper’s exegesis of 2 Corinthians 5:19 that was set out in my comment to Tim.)
It includes ethics and morals, God’s holiness.
BTW Colin Hamer introduced NTW in his comments. Colin’s thesis is that God divorced Israel. Though I stand to be corrected by Colin who now appears to have vacated the comments here.
Geoff, you might be interested in this:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/what-n-t-wright-really-said/
Found through Andrew Cowan’s essay in the Wright FS: _One God, One People, One Future_. (But I do think AC’s essay there has some linguistics issues … just saying 🙂 )
Union with Christ
There are some tremendous quotes on this subject @
https://gracequotes.org/topic/jesus_christ-union/
For example;-
The subject of spiritual union is the most important, the most profound, and yet the most blessed of any that is set forth in the sacred Scriptures; and yet, sad to say, there is hardly any which is now more generally neglected. The very expression “spiritual union” is unknown in most professing Christian circles, and even where it is employed it is given such a protracted meaning as to take in only a fragment of this precious truth.
A.W. Pink Spiritual Union and Communion, Baker, 1971, p. 7.
This is the stunning message of Christianity; Jesus died for you so that He might live in you. Jesus doesn’t merely improve your old nature; He imparts to you and entirely new nature – one that is completely united with His.
Follow Me by David Platt
We must seek to know something of heart-felt, experimental communion with Him. Never, never let us forget, that “union” is one thing, and “communion” another. Thousands, I fear, who know what “union” with Christ is,
know nothing of “communion.”
SICKNESS.
J.C. Ryle
Abide in Me says Jesus. Cling to Me. Stick fast to Me. Live the life of close and intimate communion with Me. Get nearer to Me. Roll every burden on Me. Cast your whole weight on Me. Never let go your hold on Me for a moment. Be, as it were, rooted and planted in Me. Do this and I will never fail you. I will ever abide in you.
J.C. Ryle
Jesus has many who love his kingdom in heaven, but few who bear his cross. He has many who desire comfort, but few who desire suffering. He finds many to share his feast, but few his fasting. All desire to rejoice with him, but few are willing to suffer for his sake. Many follow Jesus to the breaking of bread, but few to the drinking of the cup of his passion. Many admire the miracles but few follow him to the humiliation of his cross. Many love Jesus as long as no hardship touches them… They who love Jesus for His own sake, and not for the sake of the comfort for themselves, bless Him in every trial and anguish of heart, no less than in the greatest joy. And were He never willing to bestow comfort on them, they would still always praise Him and give Him thanks.
Of the Imitations of Christ.
Thomas a Kempis
Alan, Thanks for the wonderful Thomas a Kempis quote. It reminds me of the Methodist Church Covenant Service prayer in a similar vein.
Covenant service Tim? Which one as they were water- down in various iterations weren’t they? It is recalled that one contained the words, put me to nothing!
I don’t think a Kempis is a precursor for the reformed doctrine of union with Christ!
A for book length writings on Communion with God see a book of that name by John Owen.
Thanks Tim.
Jesus is truly a prodigal Saviour(as is The Father)
He gave everything of Himself for our Salvation
Not just for our forgiveness alone
but that He might lavish upon us His riches.
As in the parable of the prodigal.
The prodigal son was filled with remorse
He repented saying “I have sinned against heaven…..”
There was and is “Joy in heaven over one sinner who repents
Even the abhorrent king Ahab
(1 King 16:30 – 33 and 1 King 21:27 – 29)
discovered the efficacy of repentance.
The elder brother thought little of Repentance and Reconciliation
He was only filled with bitterness and envy.
Thus placed himself beyond reconciliation and had to be left
to himself until perhaps he too “came to himself”.
In deed Wesley understood that salvation require both
Justification and Sanctification as essential to Salvation
His Mother Church missed a trick then and subsequently.
He recognized, the Apostles’ Doctrine
It is not only Christ for you but “Christ in you which is the hope of Glory”.
And that the ministry of the church has this one mission
EPH. 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
Union is not a position alone but also a process.
Alas, few seem willing to “continue in the apostles ‘doctrine.”
Try Alan all the indicatives, facts, of what of what God has done for us in Jesus in the first 3 chapters of Ephesians. It is not based on what we have done, works. The imperatives of the following chapters flow from that.
In union we have already died and been raised with Jesus. None of that prevents suffering for a believer, more likely to guarantee it, it is not a health, wealth and happiness gospel.
Although it includes sanctification, (believers are saints) sanctification is a growth, growing more like Christ.
(Being ‘in Christ’s is the overwhelmingly dominant way the New Testament describes believers as ‘in Christ’ an expression, in one form or another, occurs well over 100 times in Paul’s thirteen letters – James Dunn- as cited by Sinclair b Ferguson in The Whole Christ – Crossways 2016)
Try Alan all the indicatives, facts, of what of what God has done for us in Jesus in the first 3 chapters of Ephesians. It is not based on what we have done, works. The imperatives of the following chapters flow from that, those truths, facts.
In union we have already died and been raised with Jesus. None of that prevents suffering for a believer, more likely to guarantee it, it is not a health, wealth and happiness gospel.
Although it includes sanctification, (believers are saints) sanctification is a growth, growing more like Christ.
(Being ‘in Christ’ is the overwhelmingly dominant way the New Testament describes believers as ‘in Christ’ an expression, in one form or another, that occurs well over 100 times in Paul’s thirteen letters – James Dunn- as cited by Sinclair b Ferguson in The Whole Christ – Crossways 2016)
In Ephesians, ‘in Christ’ appears 31 times; 11 times in. Chapter 1:4-13. (Dr RT Kendall, Understanding Theology Volume 1.
The “mystical union” is seen by some as You in Christ and Christ in you.
One is positional the other is experiential, observable and goal orientated.
For an in depth discussion of these I recommend: –
Christ in You and You in Christ
@/artlicursi.com/articles/christ-you-and-you-christ
by Rudi Steenhui
And
The Biblical Anatomy of Man by Arthur J. Licursi,
Concerning How Man was Created to be specially Suited to
Believe and Partake of the Divine Eternal Life of the Resurrected Christ!
@artlicursi.com/articles/the biblical anatomy of man
Shalom.
It would help Alan, if you could provide a link.
Union with Christ is not merely positional; believers get Christ himself, the whole Christ, not only benefits nor goals. A New Creation in Christ is a reality experientially, a communion with the Triunity. A new life, transformed. We, in union have died and been raised into the throne room of God, in reality, in truth.
There has been a divine exchange. Jesus lived the life we should live in perfect covenental sinless faitgh, faithfulness and died the death we should die, bearing our sin.
Geoff
See the link(s) at the end of my last post .