2 Corinthians 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.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(19) To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world.—Better, perhaps, How that it was God who was reconciling in Christ a world unto Himself. Both “God” and “world” are, in the Greek, without the article. The English rendering is tenable grammatically, but the position of the words in the original suggests the construction given above. He seems to emphasise the greatness of the redeeming work by pointing at once to its author and its extent. The structure is the same as the “was preaching” of Luke 4:44. All the English versions, however, from Wiclif downwards, adopt the same construction. Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva version translate, making agreement between the world and Himself instead of “reconciling to Himself.” The “world” is, of course, the world of men, the “all” of 2Corinthians 5:15.

Not imputing their trespasses unto them . . .—The two participial clauses that follow describe the result of the reconciling work. The first is that God no longer charges their transgressions against men: the pronouns being used in the third person plural, as being more individualising than the “world,” and more appropriate than would have been the first person, which he had used in 2Corinthians 5:18, and which he wanted, in its narrower extension, for the clause which was to follow. The word for “imputing,” or reckoning, is specially prominent in the Epistles of this period, occurring, though in very varied shades of meaning, eight times in this Epistle and nineteen times in that to the Romans. The difficulty of maintaining a logical coherence of this truth with that of a judgment according to works does not present itself to the Apostle’s mind, and need not trouble us. (See Note on 2Corinthians 5:10.)

And hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.—Literally, to maintain the participial construction, placing with (or in) us the word of reconciliation. Tyndale gives “atonement” here, as in Romans 5:11.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

5:16-21 The renewed man acts upon new principles, by new rules, with new ends, and in new company. The believer is created anew; his heart is not merely set right, but a new heart is given him. He is the workmanship of God, created in Christ Jesus unto good works. Though the same as a man, he is changed in his character and conduct. These words must and do mean more than an outward reformation. The man who formerly saw no beauty in the Saviour that he should desire him, now loves him above all things. The heart of the unregenerate is filled with enmity against God, and God is justly offended with him. Yet there may be reconciliation. Our offended God has reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ. By the inspiration of God, the Scriptures were written, which are the word of reconciliation; showing that peace has been made by the cross, and how we may be interested therein. Though God cannot lose by the quarrel, nor gain by the peace, yet he beseeches sinners to lay aside their enmity, and accept the salvation he offers. Christ knew no sin. He was made Sin; not a sinner, but Sin, a Sin-offering, a Sacrifice for sin. The end and design of all this was, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, might be justified freely by the grace of God through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. Can any lose, labour, or suffer too much for Him, who gave his beloved Son to be the Sacrifice for their sins, that they might be made the righteousness of God in him?

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

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

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

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

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

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

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

19. God was in Christ, reconciling—that is, God was BY Christ (in virtue of Christ's intervention) reconciling," &c. Was reconciling" implies the time when the act of reconciliation was being carried into effect (2Co 5:21), namely, when "God made Jesus, who knew no sin, to be sin for us." The compound of "was" and the participle "reconciling," instead of the imperfect (Greek), may also imply the continuous purpose of God, from before the foundation of the world, to reconcile man to Himself, whose fall was foreseen. The expression " IN Christ" for "by Christ" may be used to imply additionally that God was IN Christ (Joh 10:38; 14:10), and so by Christ (the God-man) was reconciling … The Greek for "by" or "through" Christ (the best manuscripts omit "Jesus"), 2Co 5:18, is different. "In" must mean here in the person of Christ. The Greek Katallasson implies "changing" or altering the judicial status from one of condemnation to one of justification. The atonement (at-one-ment), or reconciliation, is the removal of the bar to peace and acceptance with a holy God, which His righteousness interposed against our sin. The first step towards restoring peace between us and God was on God's side (Joh 3:16). The change therefore now to be effected must be on the part of offending man, God the offended One being already reconciled. It is man, not God, who now needs to be reconciled, and to lay aside his enmity against God (Ro 5:10, 11). ("We have received the atonement" [Greek, reconciliation], cannot mean "We have received the laying aside of our own enmity"). Compare Ro 3:24, 25.

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

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

Matthew Poole's Commentary

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

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

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself,.... This expresses and explains the subject matter of the ministration of the Gospel, especially that part of it which concerns our reconciliation with God; and declares the scheme, the author, the subjects, the way, and means, and consequence of it. The phrase, "in Christ", may be either joined with the word "God", as in our version, "God was in Christ reconciling"; that is, he was in Christ drawing the scheme, fixing the method of reconciliation; his thoughts were employed about it, which were thoughts of peace; he called a council of peace, and entered into a covenant of peace with Christ, who was appointed and agreed to, to be the peacemaker. Or with the word "reconciling", thus, God "was reconciling in Christ"; that is, by Christ; and so it denotes, as before, actual reconciliation by Christ. God, in pursuance of his purposes, council, and covenant, sent his Son to make peace; and laid our sins, and the chastisement of our peace upon him; this is the punishment of sin, whereby satisfaction was made for it, and so peace with God: or with the word "world", thus, "God was reconciling the world in Christ"; by whom are meant, not all the individuals of mankind, for these are not all in Christ, nor all reconciled to God, multitudes dying in enmity to him, nor all interested in the blessing of non-imputation of sin; whereas each of these is said of the world: but the elect of God, who are chosen in Christ, whose peace Christ is, whose sins are not imputed to them, and against whom no charge of any avail can be laid; and particularly the people of God among the Gentiles are here designed, who are frequently called "the world" in Scripture; being the world which God loved, for whose sins Christ is the propitiation, and of the reconciling of which mention is particularly made, John 3:16. And this sense well agrees with the context, which signifies, that no man is regarded for his natural descent; it is no matter whether he is a Jew or a Gentile, provided he is but a new creature: for Gospel reconciliation, and the ministry of it, concern one as well as another. Moreover, this reconciliation must be considered, either as intentional, or actual, or as a publication of it in the ministry of the word; and taken either way it cannot be thought to extend to every individual person in the world: if it is to be understood intentionally, that God intended the reconciliation of the world to himself by Christ, and drew the scheme of it in him, his intentions cannot be frustrated; his counsel shall stand, and he will do all his pleasure; a scheme so wisely laid by him in his Son, cannot come to nothing, or only in part be executed; and yet this must be the case, if it was his design to reconcile every individual of mankind to himself, since a large number of them are not reconciled to him: and if the words are to be understood of an actual reconciliation of the world unto God by Christ, which sense agrees with the preceding verse, then it is out of all question, that the word "world" cannot be taken in so large a sense as to take in every man and woman in the world; since it is certain that there are many who are not reconciled to God, who die in their sins, whose peace is not made with him, nor are they reconciled to the way of salvation by Christ: and should it be admitted that the ministry of reconciliation is here designed, which is not an offer of reconciliation to the world, but a proclamation or declaration of peace and reconciliation made by the death of Christ; this is not sent to all men; multitudes were dead before the word of reconciliation was committed to the apostles; and since, there have been great numbers who have never so much as heard of it; and even in the times of the apostles it did not reach to everyone then living: besides, the text does not speak of what God did by the ministry of his apostles, but of what he himself had been doing in his Son, and which was antecedent, and gave rise unto and was the foundation of their ministry. There was a scheme of reconciliation drawn in the counsels of God before the world began, and an actual reconciliation by the death of Christ, which is published in the Gospel, which these words contain the sum and substance of: and this reconciliation, as before, is said to be "unto himself"; to his offended justice, and for the glory of his perfections, and the reconciling of them together in the affair of salvation:

not imputing their trespasses. This was what he resolved upon from all eternity, that inasmuch as Christ was become the surety and substitute of his people, he would not impute their sins to them, or look for satisfaction for them from them; but would reckon and place them to the account of their surety, and expect satisfaction from him; and accordingly he did, and accordingly he had it. And this will, not to impute sin to his people, or not to punish for it, which existed in God from everlasting, is no other than a justification of them; for to whom the Lord does not impute sin, he imputes righteousness, and such are properly justified.

And hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation; or put it in us, as a rich and valuable treasure; for such the doctrine of peace and reconciliation, by the blood of Christ, is; a sacred deposition, committed to the trust of faithful men, to be dispensed and disposed of for the use and purpose for which it is given them.

Geneva Study Bible

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

(p) Used our labour and travail.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

2 Corinthians 5:19. Confirmatory elucidation of the previous ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, τοῦ καταλλάξαντος … καταλλαγῆς. “I have reason for saying, from God, who has reconciled us, etc., because, indeed, God in Christ reconciled the world with Himself,” etc. The recurrence of the same leading expressions, which were used in 2 Corinthians 5:18, gives to this elucidation a solemn emphasis. The θεός emphatically prefixed, however, looking back to ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ in 2 Corinthians 5:18, shows that the point is not a description of the καταλλαγή (Camerarius, Wolf, Estius, Billroth, and others), or of the διακονία τῆς καταλλαγῆς (Grotius, Rückert), but the divine self-activity in Christ’s reconciling work and in the bestowal of the office of reconciliation. The two participial clauses, μὴ λογιζόμενος κ.τ.λ. and καὶ θέμενος κ.τ.λ., stand related to θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χ. κόσμ. καταλλ. ἑαυτ. argumentatively, so that the words καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν κ.τ.λ., which serve to elucidate καὶ δόντος ἡμῖν κ.τ.λ., 2 Corinthians 5:18, are not co-ordinated to the καταλλάσσων (as one might expect from 2 Corinthians 5:18), but are subordinated to it,—a change in the form of connecting the conceptions, which cannot surprise us in the case of Paul when we consider his free and lively variety in the mode of linking together his thought.

ὡς ὅτι θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χ. κόσμ. καταλλ. ἑαυτῷ] because, indeed, God in Christ was reconciling the world with Himself. On ὡς ὅτι,[238] utpote quod (to be analyzed: as it is the case, because), see Winer, p. 574 [E. T. 771]. The ἦν καταλλάσσων should go together (see already Chrysostom), and is more emphatic than the simple imperfect. Paul wishes, namely, to affirm of God, not simply what He did (κατήλλασσε), but in what activity He was; in the person and work of Christ (ἐν Χριστῷ) God was in world-reconciling activity. The imperfect receives from the context the definite temporal reference: when Christ died the death of reconciliation, with which took place that very καταλλάξαντος, 2 Corinthians 5:18. See, especially, Romans 3:24 f., 2 Corinthians 5:10. Ambrosiaster, Pelagius, Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Beza, Calovius, Bengel, and many others, including Rückert, Osiander, Neander, connect ἮΝ ἘΝ ΧΡΙΣΤῷ together: God was in Christ, while reconciling the world with Himself. This would only be possible in the event of the two following participial clauses expressing the mode of reconciliation, which, however, on account of the second clause (καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν κ.τ.λ.), cannot be the case; they must, on the contrary, contain the confirmation of θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χ. κόσμ. καταλλ. ἑαυτῷ. According to their contents, however, they do not at all confirm the fact that God was in Christ, but the fact that God was in Christ reconciling the world; hence it is at variance with the context to make the connection ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ. Theodoret was right in denying expressly this connection. Hofmann, after abandoning his earlier (in the Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 326) misinterpretation (see in opposition to it my fourth edition, p. 147), now explains it by referring ὡς ὅτι κ.τ.λ. merely to Κ. ΔΌΝΤΟς ἩΜῖΝ Κ.Τ.Λ.: because He was a God, who in Christ was reconciling to Himself a world in its sinful condition without imputation of its sins, and who had laid the word of reconciliation on him the apostle.” A new misinterpretation. For, first, the qualitative expression “a God,” which is held to be predicative, would not only have been quite superfluous (Paul would have had to write merely ὡς ὅτι ἦν κ.τ.λ.), but also quite unsuitable, since there is no contrast with other gods; secondly, the relative tense ἮΝ must apply to the time in which what is said in ΔΌΝΤΟς ἩΜῖΝ Κ.Τ.Λ. took place (in the sense, therefore: because he was at that time a God, who was reconciling), which would furnish an absurd thought, because, when Paul became an apostle, the reconciliation of the world had been long accomplished; thirdly, θέμενος would be a participle logically incorrect, because what it affirms followed on the καταλλάσσων; lastly, ΜῊ ΛΟΓΙΖΌΜ. cannot be taken in the sense of “without imputation,” since a reconciliation with imputation of sins is unthinkable.

κόσμον] not a world, but the world, even without the article (Winer, p. 117 [E. T. 153]), as Galatians 6:14; Romans 4:13. It applies to the whole human race, not possibly (in opposition to Augustine, Lyra, Beza, Cajetanus, Estius) merely to those predestinated. The reconciliation of all men took place objectively through Christ’s death, although the subjective appropriation of it is conditioned by the faith of the individual.[239]

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

ἐν ἡμῖν] The doctrine of reconciliation (comp. on the genitive, 1 Corinthians 1:18; Acts 20:32) which is to be preached, is regarded as something deposited in the souls of the preachers for further communication: “sicut interpreti committitur quid loqui debeat,” Bengel. Comp. on ἐν ἡμῖν, which is not to be taken as among us, the θεῖναι ἐν φρεσί, ἐν θυμῷ, ἐν στήθεσσι.

[238] In 2 Corinthians 11:21, the ὅτι in ὡς ὅτι does not specify a reason, but introduces the contents of λέγω. In 2 Thessalonians 2:2, also, ὡς ὅτι is like that. At our passage it is: in measure of the fact, that God was, etc.,—a more circumstantial and consequently more emphatic introduction of the ground than a simple ὅτι or γάρ would have been. It makes us linger more over the confirmatory ground assigned.

[239] The question whether and how Paul regarded the reconciliation of those who died before the ἱλαστήριον of Christ, and were not justified like Abraham, remains unanswered, since he nowhere explains himself on the point, and since the dead are not included in the notion of κόσμος. Still, Romans 10:7, Php 2:10 presuppose the descent of Christ into Hades, which is the necessary correlative of the resurrection ἐκ νεκρῶν, and it is expressly taught by Paul in Ephesians 4:9.

Expositor's Greek Testament

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

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

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

God was in Christ reconciling] Or ‘that God in Christ was reconciling.’ Either translation is grammatically and theologically admissible. The former translation, preferred by the Latin expositors, lays most stress upon the indwelling of God in Christ (cf. John 14:10; John 14:17). The latter, which has found most favour among the Greek commentators, indicates the fact, not merely that God reconciled the world, but that the process of reconciliation was carried on “in the Person and work of Christ.” Meyer.

the world unto himself] It is frequently declared in Scripture that God’s purpose embraces all mankind (“the whole world,” Alford). Cf. John 1:29; John 3:16; John 4:42; John 6:33; 1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Timothy 4:10; 1 John 2:2, &c.

not imputing their trespasses unto them] παραπτώματα, trespasses, literally, fallings aside from the path. The English word is derived from an old French word trespasser, which, like transgress, has a similar meaning to the Greek, namely, to pass over the boundary. This passage explains the nature of the process of reconciliation. It is a very simple one. It consists in the fact that in consequence of Christ’s mediatorial work, God no longer imputes sin to man, i.e. regards his sin as though it had not been committed. Cf. Romans 3:25; Romans 3:4; Romans 8:1. Why this is so, and how it comes to pass that God is both ‘just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus,’ the Apostle does not explain, nor is any complete explanation given in Holy Scripture, which has concerned itself on this point less with theory than with fact. See however 2 Corinthians 5:15-18; also Romans 5:8-11; Hebrews 9:12-14; Hebrews 9:28; Hebrews 10:10-14, &c. The word here translated imputed is translated indifferently by that word, and by reckoned and accounted in the A. V. It signifies (1) to consider (as in Romans 8:18), and hence (2) to consider a thing as having been done, to reckon or impute.

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

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

Bengel's Gnomen

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

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

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 19. - God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. This and the many other passages of Scripture which always represent the atonement as the work of the blessed Trinity, and as being the result of the love, not of the wrath, of God, ought to have been a sufficient warning against the hideous extravagance of those forensic statements of the atonement which have disgraced almost a thousand years of theology (Romans 5:10; 1 John 4:10). That God's purpose of mercy embraced all mankind, and not an elect few, is again and again stated in Scripture (see Colossians 1:20). Not imputing their trespasses unto them. See this developed in Romans 15:5-8. Hath entrusted unto us; literally, who also deposited in us, as though it were some sacred treasure. 2 Corinthians 5:19

Vincent's Word Studies

God

Emphatic. It was God, as in 2 Corinthians 5:18.

Was - reconciling (ἦν καταλλάσσων)

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

Hath given to us (θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν)

Lit., lodged in us.