Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
The KJV have wrongly translated the Greek noun, καταλλαγή, which has no meaning of "atonement", which also should have been rendered as "reconciled".
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Jesus Christ: The Atonement For The Human Race
- Thread starter Saved-By-Grace
- Start date
- Status
The KJV have wrongly translated the Greek noun, καταλλαγή, which has no meaning of "atonement", which also should have been rendered as "reconciled".
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
Yes. But in the OT people offered an atonement (an atoning sacrifice). I think in the same way we can say that Christ is the atonement or propitiation for our sins without meaning that Christ has reconciled sin or even all men to God.
Another way of saying this would be that Christ is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.
I just think it mixes up the meanings...OT = animal Blood Covered; NT = Christ's Blood Purged
This should not be this hard.
ἱλασμός (G 2434) is translated propitiation at 1 John 2:2 and 1 John 4:10. I cited Romans 5:11 and Hebrews 2:17!!!
I am making the case to translate two very different actions using two different words.
Pick a side and stick on it! If you use atonement to mean sacrifice (what Christ did on the cross providing the means of salvation for the whole world) then do not turn around and use the very same word to refer to reconciliation (what occurs when God transfers us into Christ.)
Here is the concept in three easy steps:"
Propitiation refers to Christ's sacrifice providing the means of salvation for the whole world.
Redemption refers to God's action to transfer us into Christ, the act of salvation.
Reconciliation refers to being united with God, at one with God, the result of salvation.
ἱλασμός (G 2434) is translated propitiation at 1 John 2:2 and 1 John 4:10. I cited Romans 5:11 and Hebrews 2:17!!!
I am making the case to translate two very different actions using two different words.
Pick a side and stick on it! If you use atonement to mean sacrifice (what Christ did on the cross providing the means of salvation for the whole world) then do not turn around and use the very same word to refer to reconciliation (what occurs when God transfers us into Christ.)
Here is the concept in three easy steps:"
Propitiation refers to Christ's sacrifice providing the means of salvation for the whole world.
Redemption refers to God's action to transfer us into Christ, the act of salvation.
Reconciliation refers to being united with God, at one with God, the result of salvation.
Here...
Romans 5:10-11
King James Version (KJV)
10 For if, 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.
11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.
...the concepts combined and essentially made identical. I don't think we can separate Reconciliation and Atonement.
Secondly, we cannot compare the atonement of the Old Testament (obtained through animal sacrifice) with The Atonement, because men were not reconciled to God through those sacrifices.
The word katallagē ("the atonement", reconciled is katallassō)in v.11 is also translated reconciliation in the KJV:
Romans 11:15
King James Version (KJV)
15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
2 Corinthians 5:18
King James Version (KJV)
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;
Here, "hath reconciled" is again katallassō. "Of reconciliation" is katallagē.
2 Corinthians 5:19
King James Version (KJV)
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.
"Reconciling" is katallassō, "of reconciliation" is katallagē.
Men do not receive Atonement until they are reconciled, which is what I think you are trying to say, if I am not mistaken. They are one and the same event. It happens at the time of salvation for each believer, the only exception being the Old Testament Saints who had died, who were reconciled to God, receiving Atonement that was not provided by animal sacrifice.
I would suggest it does, because we are dealing with the sum total of Christ's Work. Reconciliation was made possible through the Atonement.
Only in an Old Testament context. They did receive atonement and remission of sins...
Leviticus 4:20
King James Version (KJV)
20 And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them.
...but again that was a temporal and temporary atonement, pertaining to the flesh, or, physical in nature, like all Old Testament parables/shadows/figures/types.
The Writer of Hebrews makes it clear that the blood of bulls and goats could never take away sins, but the offering of Christ does, making one complete in regards to remission of sins forever.
A person cannot, in this Age, "be atoned for" by anything other than the Sacrifice of Christ.
Reconciliation is God's Work through Christ of bringing men into eternal union with Himself. This did not happpen in the Old Testament, for it was not until Christ appeared, died for our sin, returned to Heaven and sent the Comforter that He began to eternally indwell men. John 14 makes it clear that the Eternal Indwelling was yet a future event in the lives of men.
"At-One-ment" is precisely what Christ taught the disciples would happen:
John 14:15-18
King James Version (KJV)
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
Remission of sins was the entire point of making atonement, both in the Old Testament and the New. What is different, though, is that when Atonement for sins is applied to us through salvation, it does not ever have to be repeated, because it is not temporal or temporary, but everlasting:
Hebrews 10:1-4
King James Version (KJV)
1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Hebrews 10:14
King James Version (KJV)
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
God bless.
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
Jesus' death was also a "covering" for sins, and this is found in the use of the word in the OT in many places
I do not believe Jesus' Death was a covering for sins. But i could be mistaken. Please help me understand what you mean. Thanks!
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
My understanding is, Jesus died on the cross for the sins of the whole world (atonement/death/redemption). However, no sinners sins are "covered /pardoned" for actually, until they were to repent and turn to the Lord in faith, and receive the new life in Jesus Christ.
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
I do not think that "atonement" and "reconciliation" is one and the same thing. The world has been "atoned" for by the death of Jesus Christ, Who has died for their sins, once and for all. However, it is only after the sinner has been "born again", that they are "reconciled" to God.
Well, you just equated "covered" with "pardoned" and i do not see that as being correct.
I understand how it could confuse the meaning. "Atonement" itself is not a very precise word.
Still, John uses a word that carries at least an aspect of atonement in 1 John 2:2 when he states Christ is the atonement, propitiation, or expiation for the sins of the whole world. I am not sure how we can avoid such the confusion you rightly caution against.
Brother, "Atonement" is only used Once in the English...and the Greek word is used as "Reconciliation" as the other English Words.
2 Cor. 5:18;19
Romans 11:15
Propitiation carries a meaning of "Appeasement". Context would say that Christ the Righteous one Is our Advocate, Intercessor--He did something to appease God? the Law? Penalty for Sin? and Thus a right standing is Available to those who "know" God--Intimately Restored to Him--Being "In Christ".
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
If the sins of a sinner have been "covered" by the blood of the Lord Jesus, them they must have been "forgiven". Is it possible for an unrepentant sinner to have their sins "covered", and yet "unsaved"? I do not take the "covering" of the sins of a sinner as the same as Jesus dying for them.
I am open to correction if can be shown to be wrong, as this a very deep subject.
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
I think that the notion of "appeasement" is not what the Bible in either testament means. Though the root meaning of the word in Greek can include "to appease", but the LXX uses the word ἱλασμός as an equivalent to the Hebrew כִּפֻּר, which has not meaning of "appeasement", as far as I can see. Brown, Driver and Briggs in their Hebrew lexicon define the Hebrew כִּפֻּר as, "sin-offering, atonement"
Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
do you understand both "atonement" and "reconciliation" as the same thing?
I believe the context suggests that Christ Himself is the appeasement that turns aside the wrath to come. I think this because of the verses prior to 2:2.
That said, when we speak of "the Atonement" we are not normally as specific (I am thinking of a few authors like Piper and Carson). It seems we often deal with "atonement" to represent many aspects beyond atonement itself.
Atonement in the Old Testament "covered" the Sins of God's People--already reconciled People. They were awaiting the Day for Christ to "Purge" them with His Blood...
Romans 3:25
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
NASB
whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed;
You see, the sins that were "Covered" were those of the Israelites who were already in Covenant relationship with God. They were completely "done away with" when Christ Shed His blood.
Hebrews 9
13For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that their bodies are clean, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself unblemished to God, purify our consciences from works of death, so that we may serve the living God! 15Therefore Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, now that He has died to redeem them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant
- Status