Why is the Gospel referred to as an "APPEAL for reconciliation?"

[Skandelon]

The gospel, according to Paul, is an "APPEAL to reconciliation," not a mere tool to inform the already reconciled. The word APPEAL in and of itself clearly connotes the idea of a needed and expected response.

"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." 2 Cor. 5:20​

To make an Appeal: parakaleō

1) to call to one's side, call for, summon
2) to address, speak to, (call to, call upon), which may be done in the way of exhortation, entreaty, comfort, instruction, etc.
a) to admonish, exhort
b) to beg, entreat, beseech
1) to strive to appease by entreaty
c) to console, to encourage and strengthen by consolation, to comfort
1) to receive consolation, be comforted
d) to encourage, strengthen
e) exhorting and comforting and encouraging
f) to instruct, teach​

__________________

If the Gospel is sent with the intention to make an appeal for all enemies of God to be reconciled to God, doesn't it reason to believe that it is sufficient to accomplish that purpose?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Skan....You have not even TOUCHED upon how powerfully and NON-Calvinist this chapter in II Corinthians is!! Let us now put your OP in its WHOLE CONTEXT!!

2Cr 5:11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
1) persuade
a) to persuade, i.e. to induce one by words to believe
b) to make friends of, to win one's favour, gain one's good will, or to seek to win one, strive to please one
c) to tranquillise
d) to persuade unto i.e. move or induce one to persuasion to do something
2) be persuaded
a) to be persuaded, to suffer one's self to be persuaded; to be induced to believe: to have faith: in a thing
1) to believe
2) to be persuaded of a thing concerning a person
b) to listen to, obey, yield to, comply with
3) to trust, have confidence, be confident

2Cr 5:12 ¶ For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to [answer] them which glory in appearance, and not in heart.
2Cr 5:13 For whether we be beside ourselves, [it is] to God: or whether we be sober, [it is] for your cause.
2Cr 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
2Cr 5:15 And [that] he died for ALL, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.

1) individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2) collectively
a) some of all types

2Cr 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we [him] no more.
2Cr 5:17 Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, ALL things are become new.

"All" here, is same as the "All" above...
1) individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2) collectively
a) some of all types
[In other words.... It's really rather simple...Arminians believe the Bible..."All" means "All"...given Calvinism..."All" simply doesn't mean "All" and God is a liar.]
2Cr 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;
2Cr 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.
2Cr 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
This reads the same in my King James..."beseech"
This reads the same in any translation:
1) to call to one's side, call for, summon
2) to address, speak to, (call to, call upon), which may be done in the way of exhortation, entreaty, comfort, instruction, etc.
a) to admonish, exhort
b) to beg, entreat, beseech1) to strive to appease by entreaty
c) to console, to encourage and strengthen by consolation, to comfort
1) to receive consolation, be comforted
d) to encourage, strengthen
e) exhorting and comforting and encouraging
f) to instruct, teach

2Cr 5:21 For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

I have little or no problem with those who are Calvinists to submit their Theological places of disagreement and rejoinders and all that...but to think that their policy is so BLATANTLY obvious...and ours isn't is to simply IGNORE and lyingly DENY the passages in Scripture we present as obviously supportive of the Arminian point of view.

 

[Yeshua1]

Skan....You have not even TOUCHED upon how powerfully and NON-Calvinist this chapter in II Corinthians is!! Let us now put your OP in its WHOLE CONTEXT!!

2Cr 5:11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
1) persuade
a) to persuade, i.e. to induce one by words to believe
b) to make friends of, to win one's favour, gain one's good will, or to seek to win one, strive to please one
c) to tranquillise
d) to persuade unto i.e. move or induce one to persuasion to do something
2) be persuaded
a) to be persuaded, to suffer one's self to be persuaded; to be induced to believe: to have faith: in a thing
1) to believe
2) to be persuaded of a thing concerning a person
b) to listen to, obey, yield to, comply with
3) to trust, have confidence, be confident

2Cr 5:12 ¶ For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to [answer] them which glory in appearance, and not in heart.
2Cr 5:13 For whether we be beside ourselves, [it is] to God: or whether we be sober, [it is] for your cause.
2Cr 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
2Cr 5:15 And [that] he died for ALL, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.

1) individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2) collectively
a) some of all types

2Cr 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we [him] no more.
2Cr 5:17 Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, ALL things are become new.

"All" here, is same as the "All" above...
1) individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2) collectively
a) some of all types
[In other words.... It's really rather simple...Arminians believe the Bible..."All" means "All"...given Calvinism..."All" simply doesn't mean "All" and God is a liar.]
2Cr 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;
2Cr 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.
2Cr 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
This reads the same in my King James..."beseech"
This reads the same in any translation:
1) to call to one's side, call for, summon
2) to address, speak to, (call to, call upon), which may be done in the way of exhortation, entreaty, comfort, instruction, etc.
a) to admonish, exhort
b) to beg, entreat, beseech1) to strive to appease by entreaty
c) to console, to encourage and strengthen by consolation, to comfort
1) to receive consolation, be comforted
d) to encourage, strengthen
e) exhorting and comforting and encouraging
f) to instruct, teach

2Cr 5:21 For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

I have little or no problem with those who are Calvinists to submit their Theological places of disagreement and rejoinders and all that...but to think that their policy is so BLATANTLY obvious...and ours isn't is to simply IGNORE and lyingly DENY the passages in Scripture we present as obviously supportive of the Arminian point of view.

So you would hold to god desiring to have ALL sinners saved, jesus died for all, but the grace/will/desire of God cannot actually save those Christ died for?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

So you would hold to god desiring to have ALL sinners saved, jesus died for all, but the grace/will/desire of God cannot actually save those Christ died for?

I honestly don't think that was an honest question Yeshua....you should know way better than that by now. You have heard a million different statements from a million different posters on these topics by now. Are you being facetious? deliberately obtuse? Is this a rhetorical question intended to make a point? Do you still legitimately not know how an Arminian might answer that essentially non-question? If you don't then this is simply not a board for you, because you never seem to learn from the answers you get over and over. I think a ten-year-old (who has read this board for any length of time could answer this for you). If these are legitimate and honest questions, then I don't think it would be helpful to answer them because people have answered this for you numerous times. The OP and my post, are both along the same vein, and they state only what they state...no more, and no less.

 

[MorseOp]

Calvinism aside, as human beings we have finite knowledge. Spurgeon was on record as saying that he wanted to be known as preaching the Gospel like an Arminian even though there wasn't an Arminian bone in his body. As a Calvinist preacher I am not excused from pleading with people to be reconciled to God. God's sovereignty in salvation includes human response.

 

[quantumfaith]

So you would hold to god desiring to have ALL sinners saved, jesus died for all, but the grace/will/desire of God cannot actually save those Christ died for?

Yes I would essentially say YES. God does indeed desire to sell ALL saved, yes Christ died for ALL. God's grace/will/desire will save ALL those who come to God in contrition, repentance and acknowledgement of their Absolute dependence on His mercy, His grace, His redemption.

Although I am NOT a universalist in soteriology, I certainly would not be disappointed if I were to find out that was the case.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Yes I would essentially say YES. God does indeed desire to sell ALL saved, yes Christ died for ALL. God's grace/will/desire will save ALL those who come to God in contrition, repentance and acknowledgement of their Absolute dependence on His mercy, His grace, His redemption.

Although I am NOT a universalist in soteriology, I certainly would not be disappointed if I were to find out that was the case.

But the trap he set was to use the word "cannot"....

Originally Posted by Yeshua1
So you would hold to ......
God cannot actually save those Christ died for?

Which is what makes this a classically dishonest and mis-representative question.

 

[Iconoclast]

2Cr 5:21 For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

This verse shows that the elect are in view

 

[HeirofSalvation]

2Cr 5:21 For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

This verse shows that the elect are in view

This verse only "shows" that, as you say, if one ALREADY assumes limited atonement...if one doesn't, then, well, the verse shows no such thing. As an epistle to what are assumed to be a group of regenerate people, then, even if he is adressing the "elect" (so-called) it does nothing to deny that there are not ALSTHERS for whom he "became sin".

I tell each of my own 4 daughters (individually) every day that I love them...and I am only addressing them specifically....but by my saying to ONE of them that "I love you", is not to say that I don't love the others...and this is demonstrable by the fact that I almost always address each of them specifically, and tell them that, but as you might say it...I have only the one I am addressing AT THAT TIME "in view". The point of the OP stands, and I bolstered it...it seems that God is clearly "persuading", and "appealing" and "beseeching"...that is the immediate and obvious set of statements in the passage. It takes (IMO) some serious gymnastics for Calvinists to deny this. I think the Calvinist then has no option but to repeatedly claim that "appeal" "beseech" and "persuade" are all false renderings, and that the KJV "mistranslates" and that if one looks at the "original Greek", then the veritable dream-team of scholars that James collected were all smoking crack and didn't know that words have real meanings...Why not? "ALL" never means "All" either, so....not a challenge for the talented Calvinist apologist. And (of course) only the beloved ESV was truly representative of the originals and all that anyway no?

Cr 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
2Cr 5:15 And [that] he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.

Here...actually, Paul is arguing that "All" are dead, by claiming that since (he assumed) Christ died for "All"....then there were none who weren't "Dead". Paul is supporting the contention that All men are "depraved" (in Classic Cal. parlance) or "Dead" with a form of Modus Ponens argument, by assuming that since Christ DIED for "All", then, it follows that "All" must have been "Dead". God is not the author of confusion, and he didn't inspire the Apostle Paul to write something so obviously simple in order to confuse people into thinking that basically NONE of the key-words in the passage, are not to be understood simply, directly, and literally. God "beseeched", he "appealed" and he "persuades", and the Bible is God's word, and it means what it says, and it says what it means.

Tell you the truth, I think it is so clearly and blatantly obviously seen, that that is why the thread has not been seriously challenged (on it's own merits) by any Calvinists as of yet. You didn't claim that the OP was false, and I don't think you could...You shifted the discussion.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Calvinism aside, as human beings we have finite knowledge. Spurgeon was on record as saying that he wanted to be known as preaching the Gospel like an Arminian even though there wasn't an Arminian bone in his body. As a Calvinist preacher I am not excused from pleading with people to be reconciled to God. God's sovereignty in salvation includes human response.

I think that is because very few Calvinists are truly honest with the gospel (as they understand it) when they share it with people...It is entirely possible that the most powerful reason I am not a Calvinist, is that IMO, they are usually lying about what they believe when they give what they consider to be the "gospel" to people. I have heard entirely too many Calvinist preachers tell their congregants that: "God loves you, and wants you to repent"...That is, (given Calvinism) a lie. Some Calvinists are very honest about what they believe, and I respect that. Icon is one (sort-of, without understanding the sum-total of what he believes) Pink was one....They would tell a sinner to their face that (more likely than not ) God no more "loves" them, than he does rotten cheese...and that they are quite possibly pre-ordained to suffer eternally in Hell, and that is because God loves "glorifying himself" and his sense of "justice" by torturing beings that have no other option but to obey the Sovereign decrees of God by doing as they do, and then punishing them for his own decisions that HE, (and not they) made, but most Calvinists won't.

Some Calvinists are knowledgeable enough about their own Theology to understand that they worship a being who (in their minds) is incensed when the "reprobates" that he created obey, without fail, whatever decree he has set for them...the laughable thing... is that if the non-elect were to obey God's "commands" or "oracles" by attempting to the best of their ability (which God either gave them or didn't) to follow the law...then God would be angered and punish them for FOLLOWING his OWN LAWS!!! Because they would then be dis-obeying his own Sovereign decrees...What a load of hoakum... God would be enraged when the sinner obeys his commands...or he would be enraged when he disobeys...sux to be the "non-elect" huh...Either way...God Hates you, and will punish you for the fact that he chose to create you in the way that he chose to create you...and even the option of killing yourself...(as many hopeless inmates in the prison I work at do)...will never get you free from the wrath of a God who Demands of his own Soveregn decree, that you disobey him...(and he does), and then punishes you for disobeying him, or, alternatively, obeying his decree, which is also known as disobeying Him as he has DEMANDED you do...

It is signifigant to me that I have never heard an Arminian say that they want to "Preach the gospel.....like a Calvinist". Even the greatest of Calvinists (a la Spurgeon) have often made a similar statement when they are honest....no Arminian wishes they could emulate the Calvinist when it comes to that. That matters to me.

 

[Skandelon]

God's sovereignty in salvation includes human response.

So, in your system you have...

1. God pleading with Himself to respond to His own pleadings through you.

2. God expressing his patience with Himself to respond to Himself through you.

3. God commanding for Himself to refrain from sin through you and when He doesn't, punishing you for not refraining.

Interesting...

 

[quantumfaith]

But the trap he set was to use the word "cannot"....

Which is what makes this a classically dishonest and mis-representative question.

Thanks, I understand that. Semantic gymnastics don't really impress or bother me, it is something akin to "gotcha" politics.

 

[percho]

18 And all things of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
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.
20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

These people, the elect, are elect to the ministry of reconciliation.

That reconciliation was brought forth by the death of Christ see Verse 14,15 and is for all men. The world. Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

Romans 5:10 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.

When will those who were reconciled be saved by his life?

That is future tense, is it not?

Is one that is, "in Christ," presently conformed to the image of Christ, is he presently what he shall be or is it when shall appear that we shall be like him?

Some of you Greek Geeks can tell me in the Greek text of 2C5:17 is it not Jesus the Christ who is the new creation and we are in Christ and will be new creations at his appearing. It the new creation that we shall be in him not the same as he is spoken of in Col.1:18,15.

 

[Iconoclast]

I have heard entirely too many Calvinist preachers tell their congregants that: "God loves you, and wants you to repent"...That is, (given Calvinism) a lie. Some Calvinists are very honest about what they believe, and I respect that. Icon is one (sort-of, without understanding the sum-total of what he believes) Pink was one....They would tell a sinner to their face that (more likely than not ) God no more "loves" them, than he does rotten cheese.

Here is an interaction I had with our friend Benjamin..about a year ago.Benjamin looks back to it quite fondly!

Quote:
Do you explain to a lost and searching person that the promise of grace isn't "real" to them unless they are elect and they may not have any hope because they may not have been pre-selected?

Benjamin.....I take the conversation wherever it needs to go;

1] We are all sinners,having broken God's law in thought word and deed.

2] God is holy and has planned to punish all sin.....either in the sinner, or In His appointed substitute

3] Jesus came to save a multitude of sinners, by offering His sinless perfect life as a substitute for those sinners who believe in Him.

4] Anyone who understands they are guilty before a Holy God...needs to repent of all known sin,and seek God's mercy. As God has commanded all men everywhere to repent and believe the gospel.

5] Jesus is the only way..the only thing the Father is well pleased with.

6] If someone repents and believes the gospel,I explain that God would have them join with a bible believing fellowship,that is the local church.

Benjamin.. if the person has some religious backround,or brings up certain questions that require me to speak about God's electing purposes I am not shy about that. It has happened many times....it goes something like this;

I might offer some of what i offered above...then the person starts to question...what about the heathen, or what if someone never hears about Jesus etc.

1] I explain God has an eternal purpose that He has made known to the church,and establish that the scriptures are true and trust worthy.

2] God's holy law is perfectly just...and must be perfectly kept

3] Man having fallen in Adam ...is not able to keep the law perfectly

4] God seeing all mankind as fallen In Adam...has purposed to save a multitude of sinners In Christ.

5] The Father gives this multitude to the Son before the world was made.

6] The Son comes into the world in the form of a servant,to live and die for these chosen and elected persons.

7] The Son has promised that each and everyone of these persons...at a point in time....will repent and believe the gospel not one will be lost

8] I ask the person if Jesus said all that are given will come to Him...have you came to Jesus savingly yet? If not why not. I do my best to leave them with no hope...outside of Jesus....

9] I quote Jesus words to those in jn8
24I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
and Hebrews 7;
25Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them

As I say...if the conversation goes this way...I will go this way.

Quote:
and they may not have any hope because they may not have been pre-selected
Benjamin...this is a good question...
I never say it that way....

1] I do not know if he is elect or not

2] He does not know if he is elect or not

3] I make Clear that Jesus alone is the only Saviour of sinners

4] if election comes up.....I stress that it is certain to come to pass..I tell Him the truth...do not hide it under a bushel.
5] I stress that the issue he needs to concern himself with..is His sin against a Holy God that has to be paid for.....He is responsible to repent and believe the gospel command.

6] If he tries to mock and scoff like those in 2 pet3...I do mention that God has not planned to save everyone, and unless God allows a sinner to repent and believe,,,they will die in their sins.......

7] I do not give Him false hope, I do not give him no hope.....just point out that the only Hope is In Jesus...not remaining in Adam.

Benjamin....
Quote:
and you wouldn't want to preach that dogma in front on me

I would have no trouble preaching the bible truth in front of you...as you cannot change it. God's truth stands. The Apostles had no problem whatsoever writing this truth to all the new churches...we should not have trouble with it.
Let me know if you would like clarification on this.

 

[Iconoclast]

Hos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast
2Cr 5:21 For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

This verse shows that the elect are in view

This verse only "shows" that, as you say, if one ALREADY assumes limited atonement...if one doesn't, then, well, the verse shows no such thing.

Hos...do you believe that the unbeliever is made the righteousness of God in him?
You are looking at the wrong part of the verse.

The word might...is not contingent here.It speaks of the finished result.

 

[Benjamin]

Here is an interaction I had with our friend Benjamin..about a year ago.Benjamin looks back to it quite fondly!

I went digging for the bottom line to your “gospel” and hit pay dirt on:

6] If he tries to mock and scoff like those in 2 pet3...I do mention that God has not planned to save everyone, and unless God allows a sinner to repent and believe,,,they will die in their sins.......

As for:

Partial quote offered by Iconoclast:
Benjamin....
Quote:
and you wouldn't want to preach that dogma in front on me

And yes, make no mistake, if you injected that “Doctrine of Pre-selected Grace and Others have No Hope” dogma into the Gospel message as I was presenting it to someone, even if they were a mocking or scoffing, I would be VERY clear about whose work you were doing and what side you were on and I guarantee you wouldn't like my philosophy OR or my use of scriptures to back it up!

 

[Iconoclast]

Hello Benjamin,
I posted the whole interaction here. If you notice,,,point number 6 that you like....is actually point 21, out of 22. I showed you how there is a progression that gets to this point, and it follows the biblical pattern. IF you feel it does not...we can openly post in another thread...you offer what you have on it, and I will offer my biblical case for it...OPENLY.
Anytime my friend. HAHA...I remember one time where you said you would humiliate me...lol. Okay...here is your chance....I will try and help you however....I will risk the possible humiliation for the cause of God and truth!

if you injected that “Doctrine of Pre-selected Grace and Others have No Hope” dogma into the Gospel message as I was presenting it to someone

I would not interrupt your flawed gospel presentation, instead I would pray that you might use enough scripture so that the soul of the person would be drawn to the truth of scripture,despite any inconsistencies in your efforts.
God will do His work ,honoring the effort of the believer putting forth some gospel truth in His providence.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Hos


Hos...do you believe that the unbeliever is made the righteousness of God in him?
You are looking at the wrong part of the verse.

The word might...is not contingent here.It speaks of the finished result.

OK...I decidedly agree that the word might is definite...but so what? I still do not conclude what you are concluding. Or, rather, even if you are interpreting this verse correctly....it still doesn't prove what you think it proves. If you assume Calvinism....sure, I guess so, but it doesn't in the least speak to the topic whatsoever...Regarding the OP.....this, now, definite "might" occurrence, has still apparently been accomplished because of "persuasion" and "appeals" and "beseeching" no?

 

[Iconoclast]

Hos,
We are to use all legitimate means to remove obstacles for the unbeliever.Look at Paul teaching, preaching, reasoning, speaking the truth in love. The whole chapter is about believers, the new body, the new creation, and our new mission in spreading the gospel..

The all is defined by;

not imputing their trespasses unto them

this cannot be said for all at the white throne judgement.

Start reading at 2 cor 4:16...and read through the whole passage,,,,in reference to Paul addressing believers,and see it a bit more clearly...try not to fight it...just read it as a believer...with Paul speaking to you.

read about who Jesus died for...in a covenant death...as in hebrews 2

 

[Benjamin]

Anytime my friend. HAHA...I remember one time where you said you would humiliate me...lol.

I addressed your repeated requesting to meet in person so you could do what you say you would as well as the method in which you brought this up here again, but apparently the board thought my response was too insulting to you. This discussion is off topic and is disrupting the thread anyway…so sorry to the others that I felt the need to reply to your antagonism.

I would not interrupt...

In short, yes, I know you wouldn't...