“For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, how much more, now reconciled, will we be saved in His life!”
Rom 5:10

God reconciles enemies

If we read the previous verses carefully, this is a logical connection. Christ died for the unrighteous (Rom 5:6). God emphasizes His love toward us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Rom 5:8). And if this is so, how much more (!) will we, now justified in His blood, be saved from wrath through Him! (Rom 5:9).

This is followed by the sentence quoted earlier. For, if God has reconciled us (unilaterally, from Him. Cf. 2 Cor. 5:18-19), then that is a fact. This is not just an offer, but a fact. This is done and accomplished (John 19:30). For Paul’s contemporaries it is true that many were alive at that time, but probably had no idea about Jesus yet. For us, this happened at a time when we were not alive. It is directly not our fault that he died, nor is it our fault that he rose again. Paul emphasizes that this is all God’s work. It is absurd to think that we have to make up for that now with any effort. The Good News is that God did it.

And that’s just the beginning. As enemies, we were reconciled. How much more will we, Paul writes, now be saved in His life! This goes one step further. We were reconciled through His death, we are saved through His life:

• Christ’s death leads to reconciliation
• Christ’s life leads to salvation.

Paul referred to this in a similar way earlier (Romans 4:25) and he repeats it in slightly different words in Romans 5:10.

How words are connected

Often completely different words are used indiscriminately: Forgiveness, reconciliation, justification – don’t they all mean “roughly” the same thing? Well, in any language, different words have different shades of meaning. This is also the case for the Bible. But more important are the secret assumptions we take away when we read the Bible. For example, if we assume that the New Testament speaks of the same thing everywhere, different words naturally quickly mean the same thing. But does this correspond to biblical reporting?

In Romans, Paul describes the essence of the gospel as he proclaims it. Not everywhere, however, is about the same things. At the beginning, he refers to the “gospel of God” that was already promised by prophets in holy scriptures (Rom 1:1-2). At the end of the letter, however, he refers to “my gospel,” which was not known in previous times (Rom 16:25-26). The Epistle to the Romans thus unites the old and the new. Some things were already recorded in the Tenach (in the Old Testament), while others were still hidden. That is why Paul regularly mentions that he revealed mysteries, which we read about again and again in him. Now where do we find things of the gospel of God and where do we find things of Paul’s gospel?

We can see such developments in the words. If Paul uses a particular context, then it is also about the words that are used there. This is, of course, true throughout the Bible, but here in Romans there are striking turns of phrase in the usage.

In chapter 3 we are at an early place in the letter. Paul explains there first connections with the law. God’s righteousness, he says, has now been revealed apart from the law (Rom 3:21). Immediately afterwards, he describes the meaning of Christ in a comparison. He uses an image from the Mosaic Law for this purpose:

“Christ Jesus … whom God sets before Himself as the Atonement, through faith in His blood . ..”
Rom 3:25

It is a visual language. It refers to the Old Testament. Atonement in the Old Testament sense was through blood. A sacrifice was made and the sacrificial blood promised protection from the court. It “atones” for the deeds of men. More on the term “atonement lid” in this passage in the article “Christ Jesus as Atonement Lid”.

Here in Romans 3 is the connection between atonement and blood. In chapter 5 Paul uses a different term than “atonement” (gr. hilasterion) and speaks of “reconciliation” (gr. katalasso). This reconciliation was not through blood (!), but through death.

“For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son …”
Rom 5:10

Another choice of words is used to explain other contexts. We would do well to pay careful attention to this, otherwise parts of the apostle’s argument will remain hidden from us. When Paul talks about reconciliation in Romans 5, it is not the same as in Romans 3. In chapter five, he makes no reference to the sacrificial service of the Old Testament. Here he describes something new. It is the first time in the Bible in this way.

The sacrificial service was necessary every year. It was not a real solution. Paul has already explained this in Romans 3. The imagery there, however, referred to the situation in the Old Testament. Here now he speaks of the fact that we – justified by God through faith – now have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. The atonement of the Old Testament was merely a protection against an ever-present threat of judgment (cf. also Ex 12:13).

In Christ, however, this has changed fundamentally. This is expressed with the new word for “reconcile” (Gr. katalasso). Kata-lasso means etymologically as much as down-change. It is an apt description of God being at work and bringing about fundamental things through the sacrificial death of His Son. He has brought about His own righteousness and He can therefore meet us differently. God has changed down. He has reconciled the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19). He is reconciled with you and me. This does not depend on your consent, but was sealed on the cross and confirmed by resurrection. Therefore, we read Paul’s call “Be reconciled to God!” (2Cor 5,20-21). That works because the hurdles are gone.

Now this is the basis for the peace we may have with God. In summary, we can understand this in the Letter to the Romans:

• Romans 3: “atone” through blood
• Romans 5: “reconcile” through death.

Now you may ask, what did Paul do with the word “blood”? It has not disappeared. He just uses it differently:

“How much more, therefore, shall we be justified in His blood . ..”
Rom 5:9

Paul now links blood with justification. So the blood is not gone, but received another task within his gospel. So this is also a comprehensible change:

• Romans 3: Blood atones
• Romans 5: Blood justifies.

These are significant developments. So today, if someone speaks of being “covered with the blood of Jesus” so that we are “protected from God’s wrath,” they are doctrinally stuck in a different part of the Bible, even before the crucifixion. This is a mess and does not correspond to today’s grace.

Grace speaks quite differently:

• While we were still enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son
• how much more will we, now reconciled, be saved in His life!

Do you feel the security, the confidence? Here is the foundation that God laid. That is the reason we are standing on. For this can be thanked.