We're continuing our series this morning in Colossians. The hope— the hope of glory. We are closing in on the end of chapter 1. It seems like we've been in chapter 1 for a while, but we've been moving at a slow pace because there's just so much truth to absorb. So this morning, we're going to look at verses 21-23. So turn with me to Colossians 1. I'm going to start at verse 18, give us some context. And read through to the end of verse 23.
Hear God's holy and authoritative Word. "And He, Christ, is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything He might be preeminent. For in Him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of His cross. And you who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, He has now reconciled in His body of flesh by His death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before Him, if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister." God's Holy Word, may He write its truth upon our hearts.
Would you bow your heads with me in prayer? Lord, we come to Your Word this morning in a place where Your text Your inspired words, full of truth, bring the gospel near to us. That is our hope this morning, Lord, that you would help us to see and tangibly experience your nearness as we sit under your word. So send your Spirit and all of his power to do that right now. Allow us to experience the goodness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, that we who once were far off have been brought near, reconciled to God, knowing you as our heavenly Father. We pray this in the name of Jesus and for his glory. Amen.
Well, at the conclusion of the Civil War, A few short weeks before its end, Lincoln gave one of his most famous speeches. He thought of it as his best speech, even better than the Gettysburg Address. It's his second inaugural address. In the context of history, the war's end was in sight. It was all but inevitable. Sherman was marching through the South towards Atlanta. Grant was coming down. Lee was in a precarious situation, and they knew eventually the war was going to end. The rebellion of the Confederacy was being brought to heel. So on a national level, on a macro scale, peace was just around the corner. Peace was finally about to be achieved.
When they set out with the war, both sides, North and South, were assuming it was going to be a brief war. If you're familiar with the history of it, the First Battle of Bull Run, if you're a Northerner, the First Battle of Manassas, If you're a Southerner, they thought it was going to be something to take in as entertainment. And so people came with their carriages and their horses and set up picnics on the top of a hillside to watch the battle. And as the horror played out, they realized just what they were in for. The civilians fled and the nation began to come to grips with the fact this wouldn't be a war of a few weeks or a few months. It would be a war of years that would claim tens of thousands of lives. It was devastating.
So now finally here, fast-forwarding 4 years, Lincoln gives the Second Inaugural Address knowing peace is finally about to be achieved on a national level, but also recognizing while peace would be achieved, the Confederacy was about to lose the war, At a personal level, reconciliation was still needed. Senators and congressmen from states that had seceded would soon be returning to Washington. If the government was going to function, they would have to have representatives from those states, representatives from the states who had been sending men on the battlefield to kill men coming from the North. They were going to be sitting in the same Capitol building trying to conduct business together. Before the war, one of those Southern congressmen had beaten a Northern congressman almost to death with a cane in the chamber of the Capitol. Personal reconciliation would be needed. Families had been torn apart. Brothers and cousins had fought on different sides. Some people in states where one county decided to stay, another county decided to leave the Union. And so those men were gonna have to go home, and a few miles down the road, there were gonna be neighbors, fellow farmers, fellow shopkeepers who they'd have to conduct business with. They were gonna lay down their arms, but they'd still have to grapple with how do you live with each other knowing you'd stood opposite from one another firing shells and cannon and artillery and bullets and taking swords and hacking at each other? How do you live with each other not just as countrymen, but as members of the same county, the same city, the same family? Well, that's what Lincoln envisioned leading the nation towards. Not just national peace, but personal reconciliation. And so you hear it in the words of his second inaugural address. The final paragraph, Lincoln concludes by saying this. You'll recognize them. With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in to bind up the nation's wounds. To care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan. To do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.
6 · Lincoln's assassination and the subsequent failure of Reconstruction illustrate how even when national peace is achieved, the absence of personal reconciliation produces ongoing bitterness and strife—setting up the contrast with Christ's successful reconciliation work
Lincoln knew the challenge that was in front of them, and he longed for reconciliation. But Lincoln wouldn't live to see that national reconciliation take place. He would see peace restored. He would see the surrender of Lee, but he would be assassinated before he could witness brothers being reunited in peace. And because of Lincoln's death, instead of this vision of restoration and reconciliation that he thought of and hoped for and planned to lead the nation towards, Andrew Johnson became president and it ushered in the era of Reconstruction. Reconstruction was not an era of peaceful reconciliation. It was difficult. It was filled with carpetbaggers and manipulation. And so it led into decades of difficulty and strife and simmering tensions. Peace. No more war, yes, but on a personal level, hardship and difficulty.
7 · Oswald pivots from the illustration to the text, connecting Lincoln's failure to achieve both national and personal reconciliation with Paul's movement from cosmic reconciliation (v
So it's a living picture for us of why the cosmic reconciliation— remember last week we talked about verse 20, this idea of reconciliation that in Christ, God is reconciling all things whether on earth or in heaven making peace by the blood of His cross. This vision that in Christ, God reconciles the entire universe. He's going to bring peace. Everyone will recognize Christ's Lordship either by willingly confessing or being forced to bend the knee. Well, we see in Reconstruction why that sort of reconciliation on the macrocosmic or national level isn't enough. We need personal reconciliation. We need what we see in verse 21.
8 · Oswald announces the first major movement of the sermon: understanding the depth of our pre-conversion alienation from God, which Paul deliberately foregrounds to magnify the glory of reconciliation
First, to understand that, we have to understand the extent of the estrangement. Paul begins in verse 21, he's now going to draw our attention to the personal ways that Jesus brings us near to God But he starts by showing us how difficult it's already been. He shows us the extent of the estrangement.
9 · Oswald unpacks the Greek word order to show how Paul deliberately foregrounds the second-person pronoun, forcing the reader to reckon with their own personal alienation rather than deflecting to others' sin
In verse 21, he says, "And you who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds." He makes it personal. In the Greek, it just jumps out at you the awkward way those words are pulled to the front of the sentence. And you personally. Don't think of your neighbor. Don't think of that group that it's easy to pigeonhole as evil. Don't think of the Nazis, right? No, you personally who were alienated and hostile in mind.
10 · Oswald names the emotional experience of the text's shift—from the soaring Christological hymn to the blunt confrontation with personal sin—and validates the congregation's potential discomfort before explaining Paul's rhetorical strategy
Now if we're being honest, it's kind of a downer the way Paul transitions here. If you're tracking along in the last part of Colossians 1, we've just come out of this ancient hymn, right? Verses 15-20. This beautiful hymn celebrating the glory of Christ. So you're sitting here and Paul is on a roll. He's highlighting the unmatched glory of Christ. And we're nodding along the last several weeks. It's inspiring. It moves us. At some points, some of you are shouting out, "Amen!" Some of you were timidly thinking, "Amen!" Not actually verbalizing it. But it's one of the most glorious passages in all of Scripture. Christ is fully God. Christ is sovereign. Christ is resurrected. Christ is reigning. Christ is conquering evil. Christ is reconciling the entire world. He's preeminent in all things. In short, Christ is unmatched. And you, you were once alienated, hostile in mind, doing evil deeds. Christ is enthroned in all His glory. And you, hated that glory. Gee, thanks, Paul. It was really nice. I was really kind of feeling the momentum, and then you kind of sucker punched me there. Nothing like bringing the party to a screeching halt.
11 · Oswald defends Paul's rhetorical strategy of foregrounding sin, arguing that minimizing sin diminishes rather than magnifies God's glory—it is precisely the depth of our depravity that makes the mercy of reconciliation so stunning
Paul transitions from our former infamy not because he has a morbid fascination with our sinfulness, He reminds us how bad we used to be because it actually serves to continue highlighting how stunningly glorious Christ is. There's a reason why he does it. There are pastors and churches and people who never talk about sin, who want to minimize the context of sin, the nature of sin, the personal reality of people being sinful. And I think they do that because they think it makes God look better. It makes the message more palatable. But minimizing sin does not make God look better. They're not doing God any favors by downplaying how bad the situation was that Christ had to redeem. In reality, it's only against the black backdrop of the world's chaotic fallenness and our depravity that the majesty of mercy and the grace of God shine in their true brilliance.
12 · Oswald restates the hermeneutical principle—remembering our former condition is the prerequisite for marveling at reconciliation—and begins unpacking the first of three elements of estrangement: alienation
It's only in realizing, in remembering again, as Paul wants us to do here, how bad and hopeless our situation was without Christ that we can appropriately marvel at the great blessing of now being united to Him. So what was the extent of our estrangement? How bad was it? Well, Paul starts out and he says we were alienated.
13 · Oswald defines 'alienation' by unpacking its relational connotations: a total breakdown characterized by bitterness, a permanent barrier, an insurmountable gulf—and applies this to the human-divine relationship ruptured by sin
Alienated is a nasty word. It's not a friendly word. It's describing a total breakdown of relationship. When you have a relationship that gets to the point where you describe it as alienation, It means there's no more discourse going back and forth. There's no more pleasant interactions. That relationship has hit rock bottom. There's usually bitterness and hurt. To reach the point of alienation means there's this sense that there is a permanent barrier between you and another person, an insurmountable gulf. Our sin, Paul shows us, our rebellion, our lawlessness, have left that sort of barrier between us and God.
14 · Oswald expounds the second element of estrangement—hostility in mind—showing how Paul traces sin back not merely to wrong actions or a sinful nature but to active mental antagonism against God, the root from which sinful deeds flow
But Paul's not done with the gloomy report. We're not just alienated, he says, we're hostile in mind. Not just that there's a break in the relationship, our minds are hostile. We often think of sin just as what people do, right? That person's doing bad things, and so we would say that's sinful what they're doing. If we're theologically correct, we would say they're doing bad things because they are sinful. Paul takes it a step further here. That sin that's happening comes from them because they're sinful, and they're sinful because their minds are hostile.
15 · Oswald expounds the third element of estrangement—evil deeds—and refutes both the cultural denial of moral evil and the congregation's temptation to self-righteousness by invoking Ephesians 4:18-19, showing that evil actions flow from willful ignorance and a greedy, hardened heart
Paul's point is We're not morally neutral in our thoughts. You're not a tabula rasa, a blank slate just waiting to be filled with good things. We're not just indifferent to God. We're not just apathetic. We weren't just undecided. When it comes to checking political parties, there's like the for-God camp and the against-God camp. I'm an independent. No. No one's undecided. No one's independent. We were hostile. Whether we admit it or not, we'd set our minds against God. Our hearts rejected Him in the strongest terms. And that mental antagonism produces fruit. You don't think that way without it spilling over into how you live. What we thought and felt about God produces evil deeds, Paul says. We were alienated, we were hostile in mind, and then we started to live out evil deeds. We didn't wander aimlessly into bad behavior. Pistorius, the Blade Runner, shot and murdered his girlfriend. He didn't just wander into that situation. There were evil things going on in his heart. We wander into sin because our hearts are set on it. Now, we have a hard time today in our culture— you probably feel this personally, we certainly feel it as we observe just people broadly— we have a hard time calling people or actions evil. That's not terminology that is popular to use today. When Nidal Hasan, several years back, the Army officer at Fort Hood, went on the shooting rampage and killed 13 people, the media and the U.S. government refrained from calling it terrorism. It was mental illness. It wasn't evil. Perpetuated against innocent victims. They hesitated because that language just, it seemed too strong, too absolute, too black and white. Paul shows us there is black and white language to describe it. It was an evil deed. It was committed because of a hostile mind, because of an evil heart. And don't sit there self-righteously and think of that army officer. And you who were once alienated, listen to the edge Paul puts on it in Ephesians 4:18. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them. Excused because of the ignorance, the ignorance that is in them due to their hardness of heart. Due to that hardness of heart, verse 19 says they've become callous. They've given themselves up to sensuality. They're greedy to practice every kind of impurity. You know why you do evil? Because your heart is greedy to do it.
16 · Oswald synthesizes the three elements of estrangement into a devastating portrait of pre-conversion humanity: we weren't merely broken or misguided but actively enjoyed our rebellion, willfully constructing lies that freed us from God, and were utterly without hope
Before Christ, People aren't morally neutral. There's an intentional ignorance, a willful hardness. We're immoral, we celebrate perverse lifestyles, we embrace and live a lie, we gladly commit ourselves to a fabricated version of reality that frees us from loving and worshiping and obeying God. We're filled with religious apathy, we go through the motions, or we're We're totally unconcerned about spiritual things. Or we totally commit ourselves to false spiritual systems. If we're honest, before Christ, we enjoyed living in darkness, enjoyed the rebellion and the unbelief, even as it produced enmity with God and led us to death. To call that situation bleak is really to kind of miss the point. We were separated from Christ, alienated from God, and without hope in this world, Paul says in another place.
17 · Oswald pivots from the extent of the estrangement to the glory of reconciliation, setting up the sermon's second major movement by declaring that the very depth of the bad news is what makes the good news so stunning
And that horrible news, understanding how bad the situation was, is what makes the good news so gloriously full of hope. What a transfer of circumstances! We were once evil and estranged and malicious and immoral, but we're capable of being changed, of having our hearts softened, of having our eyes opened. As bad as we were, the glory of reconciliation is that Christ brings us near.
18 · Oswald reads the pivotal transition from verse 21 to verse 22, emphasizing the 'but now' that signals the dramatic reversal from estrangement to reconciliation accomplished by Christ's death
Colossians 1:21: And you who were once alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, leads to verse 22, "But now He has reconciled us in His body of flesh by His death."
19 · Oswald announces the second major movement of the sermon: unpacking the meaning and implications of reconciliation, ensuring the sermon doesn't dwell on sin without celebrating the remedy
Now, we'd be out of balance this morning if we spent all that time looking at the extent of the estrangement, just how bad the relationship had gotten, if we didn't at the same time flip to the other side and say, if that's how bad it was, how good is it now? What does it mean to be reconciled? What does that look like? What does it entail?
20 · Oswald returns to the Lincoln illustration to set up a contrast: Lincoln had the power to win the war and the will to desire reconciliation, but he proved insufficient to accomplish both national peace and personal healing
Think back to the introduction. Remember how the assassination of Lincoln ushers in the tragedy of Reconstruction? It's hard times. It's not good things going on. It carries through. You have the Civil Rights Movement a century later to show how much people are still struggling with how to reconcile. President Lincoln was powerful enough to win victory and to enact peace, He had the willpower and the foresight to desire reconciliation. He wanted to reunite the nation but also to heal it. In the end, though, Lincoln proved insufficient. He couldn't accomplish it. He couldn't bring in both national and personal healing.
21 · Oswald contrasts Lincoln's failure with Christ's success: Christ accomplishes not partial but full reconciliation—both cosmic and personal—because He possesses the power, authority, desire, and wisdom that Lincoln lacked
Christ, on the other hand, ushers in no partial reconciliation. It's not just verse 20 that He's reconciled all things in all the world, whether in heaven or on earth. No, He brings in full reconciliation. He reveals great power in the most profound sense. The one who's the very image of God is the only one able to summon the omnipotence and the omniscience required to reconcile all things. The incarnate firstborn of creation has the prerogative and the authority to overcome the cosmic disaster of sin, to rein in the ensuing chaos, but also the desire, the willingness, and the wisdom to ensure the reconciliation of relationships.
22 · Oswald identifies the paradoxical means of reconciliation: whereas Lincoln's death thwarted reconciliation, Christ's death is the very instrument that accomplishes it—His broken body heals the relational gulf
And the means by which he brings full reconciliation, cosmic and personal, is accomplished in breathtaking fashion. Lincoln's leadership ensures the end of the war, but with his death, there's decades of enmity that go Christ, in dying, didn't merely bring all the rebellious powers and principalities to their knees. Paul says the breaking of His body of flesh in His death by crucifixion would prove to be the very means of healing the relational gulf.
23 · Oswald unpacks how Paul's language of reconciliation makes all the facets of salvation tangible and personal—it's not abstract theology but a transformed relationship with God that you can feel and experience
You know how you're brought near? Christ is broken. And you— Paul makes it personal— and you were once alienated, but now you have been reconciled. Paul is bringing salvation as close to us as possible. All aspects of it—regeneration, justification, forgiveness of sins, the hope of eternal life, the list goes on and on—all the facets of redemption get brought personally and tangibly near in the concept of reconciliation. That's what verses 21 and 22 are showing us. You can feel it. It's in front of you. It changes the most important relationship that there is, your relationship to God.
24 · Oswald distinguishes between subjective psychological peace (merely tolerable coexistence) and objective reconciliation (complete removal of all tension and full relational restoration)—the latter is what Paul describes, where God is fully inclined to embrace us
And the idea isn't just that we feel peace. That's not what he's talking about. You can have that sense, right, where you have somebody that's angry with you You can think of that like you get into a fight with somebody, it's a big fight, it's a bad fight. It's not like, "I got ticked off, we were playing basketball, it was a hard foul, why'd you foul me like that?" And then 20 minutes later the game's over, you're fine, you're joking around again. No, this is a bad one. A significant disagreement. You cannot stand that person. But as time goes on, the tension begins to simmer. As time passes, you know, the anger sort of subsides. So it feels peaceful again. I don't want to punch that guy in the face anymore. I still don't like him, but like, we can be in the same room. Feels peaceful. Not awkward for everybody around us. It's not that you've been reconciled and settled your differences, you've just decided not to discuss them anymore. That's a pseudo-peace. It's a psychological peace. You're sort of ignoring the bigger issues. That's not what Paul describes here. This is an objective state of peace. Every iota of tension is gone between you and God. It's not just that the strife and the tension is gone and now you're neutral to each other. We can be in the same room together. No, God is fully inclined with all that He is, without a single doubt, without hesitation, without any reserve, to draw you in. You were His enemy, now He's your Father.
25 · The parable of the prodigal son illustrates the nature of true reconciliation: not a begrudging toleration but a father anticipating his son's return, rushing to embrace him, and fully restoring the relationship despite the son's rebellion
That's the very image Jesus gives us in the parable of the prodigal son. Remember, the son asked for the inheritance, which in that day and age was like basically saying, "Hey, Dad, wish you were dead. If you want to die like in the next minute, that'd be great. It would solve me having the rest of this conversation. But I wish you were dead, so can you just give me all your stuff now?" Horrible thing to say. Son goes, lives wastefully, spends it all, and then he returns. He comes home. Father has the door locked. Stands at the peephole. "Who are you? What do you want? Why should I open the door? You spent all the inheritance. You wanted me dead. Explain to me why you're sorry now." No. Jesus says the father stands and looks out, anticipating the son's return. Rembrandt's painting of it is beautiful. The son is just ragged and torn and emaciated and thin. He's just sitting on his knees, gripping the father's legs, and the father is just full of warmth with his hands around his son's shoulders. Tenderness. And grace. Full restoration of relationship.
26 · Oswald returns from the illustration to the mechanism of reconciliation: it is not spontaneous or sentimental but accomplished by the sufficiency of Christ's atoning work on the cross
That didn't just happen. It occurs because Christ has done a work, because His atonement is sufficient to set aside everything that caused the estrangement. His death— specifically Paul says His death on the cross, the breaking of His body, the blood of His cross in verse 20— is the means, the instrument of our reconciliation. How are you reconciled? Because of the cross.
27 · Oswald unpacks Romans 5:10 to show that God is the active agent of reconciliation—He initiates the plan, sends the Son, and desires our return; the Father is not a reluctant party to the atonement but its architect
Romans 5:10, Paul says, while we were still sinners, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son. While we were still sinners, we were reconciled to God. In Romans and Colossians and all the places it talks about it, you know who is the agent behind reconciliation? We think of it as I will get reconciled with them. They did me wrong when they come to me. Not the Gospel. God is the agent of reconciliation. He's the one who sets the plan of redemption in motion. He's the one who's the power behind it. Jesus is willingly going to the cross to die for us so we can be brought near to the Father. The Father is not begrudgingly, "Okay, fine, Jesus. This is your plan." No, it's the Father's idea. He sends the Son to accomplish that very purpose. He wants to embrace you. He wants to have you return. He wants that massive gulf crossed and covered and bridged.
28 · Oswald refutes contemporary theological error that minimizes the cross, arguing that some theologians are embarrassed by the cross's testimony to God's wrath and human depravity and so treat it as incidental rather than essential
The crucifixion isn't incidental to what's happening in the story. To bring reconciliation, you can have— there's theologians out there today who actually make that argument. The cross just sort of happens because that's what happens in Rome. That's not actually part of God's plan. It's not essential to what's going on. Multiple theologians, books being written today making those arguments. They're embarrassed by the cross. They're embarrassed by what it says about God and His anger towards sin. They're embarrassed by what it says about us and our depravity. And so they make the cross just sort of this like, it's sort of a side note. It doesn't really have to happen.
29 · Oswald satirizes the minimalist view of atonement (mere apology and moral conversion) by contrasting it with Colossians 1:20-22, showing that God doesn't simply set aside sin but nails it to Christ—the cross is not negotiable but necessary
To bring reconciliation, all that really has to happen is we ask God for it, they say. You just gotta come and you just need a moral conversion. You just need to realize You need help. You just need to realize the relationship's broken. If you just say you're sorry, God will be happy. Jesus is just sort of like an intermediary. He's carrying the message back and forth. It's like middle school. I'm sorry, please forgive me. Hey Jesus, can you take that over to God? God sends back, oh, it's okay now. It imagines a conversation like this. Jesus saying, hey, Father, Johnny's sorry. Can you be all good? Father, well, why should I accept him? Well, he's really sorry. He said he was sorry and he'll save you a seat at lunch. Oh, well, if he's really sorry, if it's not a big deal, if I can be on his team at recess, then I guess we're good. Colossians 1:22 makes it clear. The scandal of the cross is necessary. He makes peace, verse 20 says, by the blood of His cross. The issue of our sin isn't just set aside. All these horrible things you've thought and you've done, the hostility you have towards me, God doesn't just set it aside. Colossians 1:21-23 says he nails it to Christ.
30 · Oswald identifies the mechanism of reconciliation: Christ's blood, broken body, death, and separation from the Father is what brings us back and secures peace—reconciliation is personal for us because it was personal for Jesus
The work of Christ as a sacrifice upon the cross is the instrument of reconciliation. It's His blood. It's His broken body. It's the resulting death, His separation from the Father, that brings us back, that secures our peace. Reconciliation becomes personal for us because of the cross. It brings us back into relationship with God because reconciliation was personal for Jesus.
31 · Oswald meditates on the greatest estrangement in history: the breaking of Triune fellowship at Calvary, where the Son experienced separation from the Father for the first time in all eternity—for us
There is no more difficult estrangement than what the Father and the Son felt at Calvary. Triune, eternal, perfect love. All they have ever known is the perfect peace and love of the Trinity. Father for the Son, Son for the Father. The Spirit in the midst of it. All they've known is that. Never a hint of anger. Never a hint of disagreement. Never a hint of one wanting something different. Kind of squabbling. No. Perfect unity. Perfect love for all eternity. And for you, for me, for us. The Son feels a break in that relationship. Father turns his face away.
32 · Oswald unpacks verse 22 with a vivid courtroom image: Christ as advocate presenting us to the Father, pointing to His wounds and His obedience as the grounds for acceptance, and the Father embracing us as a result
Paul shows us that Christ assumes the function of reconciler. He presents us to the Father. He presents us as objects of reconciliation. Verse 22 shows us this beautiful picture of how personally Christ takes up the cause of our reconciliation. He carries our cause before the Father. Not just flippantly setting aside our sin. He comes into God's presence and He pleads our case. He takes each of us personally, you could say, before the Father. "Why should I accept this one?" "Look at my hands." 'Look at my side, because I lived a perfect life, because I died, because you crushed me for sin, because I became a curse for this one, that all my perfection, all my righteousness, all my obedience might be theirs. That's why you should accept them, Father.' He looks into the Father's gaze and says, Accept them because you're satisfied with my sacrifice. And the Father gets up and steps down and draws near, and like Rembrandt's painting, pulls us into his embrace.
33 · Oswald signals the sermon's third and final movement by reading the purpose clause of verse 22 and the conditional statement of verse 23, setting up the discussion of reconciliation's goal
And then Paul says, this is the goal of reconciliation. Verse 22, "To present you holy and blameless and above reproach before Him, the Father, if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the Gospel that you heard."
34 · Oswald announces the sermon's final movement: reconciliation has a goal—it's not merely a moment of emotional warmth but a transformative reality that changes how we live going forward
The final point, the final thing Paul draws our attention to, what we're going to conclude on this morning, is to grasp that reconciliation, while it's beautiful and glorious, also has a goal to it. There's something God wants to accomplish by it. He's doing something in it. There's a goal to that work. The purpose of overcoming the strife isn't just so that you get a big hug and now you get to go back to life as usual. Well, that was wonderful and I feel so nice. He's a really good hugger, you know? It wasn't like the awkward "Eh" hug. It wasn't like a pat on the back. It was like a nice embrace. He really seemed to mean it. But now I'm just going to go live life as usual. No, that embrace, that reconciling of relationship would change how we live.
35 · Oswald unpacks the eschatological goal of reconciliation: that on the day we stand before God, Christ can present us as holy and blameless—a goal accomplished through ongoing growth in the gospel and perseverance in faith
Paul's envisioning a day when we will actually stand before the Father. Reconciliation has happened spiritually for us. There is peace with us and God. But he's envisioning a day when we're actually physically going to stand before God. The goal of reconciliation is that on that day, Jesus can present us as pure and blameless, above reproach. That happens because the goal of reconciliation continues, namely that we grow in the gospel. The gospel continues to have an effect upon us. Specifically, Paul says, if— it's conditional— if we continue, if you continue One day you're going to get presented. If you continue steadfast, stable, not shifting from the hope of the Gospel.
36 · Oswald clarifies the relationship between glorification and sanctification: the promise of being presented holy is for those who persevere, living out the fruit of reconciliation in ongoing sanctification
He's anticipating there's going to be a day when you stand before God and you are glorified. All sin is stripped away. You are made holy in His presence and it's going to be incredible. But he anticipates that as the culmination of your ongoing sanctification. That as those who've been reconciled, we continue to live out an active pursuit of the fruit of reconciliation. In other words, the promise is for those who persevere. That's the goal. He wants you to persevere. He wants you to live in light of it.
37 · Oswald connects the first point (hostile minds produce evil deeds) with the final point (renewed minds produce good fruit): just as pre-conversion hostility produced evil, post-conversion regeneration produces holiness and perseverance
Now you think about that before, right? First point. Verse 21, there's alienation. Paul says we're hostile in mind and what happens? It produces bad fruit. It produces evil deeds. Now, Paul expects that the goal of reconciliation, our renewed mind, our liberated will, our regenerated hearts, will produce the good fruit of holiness and perseverance. We will continue on in the hope of the gospel.
38 · Oswald cites Romans 6:17-18 to show Paul's expectation that those who have been freed from sin will produce obedience from the heart and become slaves of righteousness—the fruit of reconciliation
Listen to how he imagines that goal of our forgiveness in Romans 6:17. He says, But thanks be to God that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you have become slaves of righteousness.
39 · Oswald identifies the goal of perseverance as love: reconciliation should produce not merely the absence of hostility but positive relational love toward God that overflows into love for others
Because we've been brought near, Paul wants us to be motivated to stay near, to persevere. And so we're called and we're motivated to love God, to love others, to love his commands. Love is the goal, not just an end of bitterness and strife, but relational love towards God that overflows in relational love towards others.
40 · Oswald cites Matthew 5:23-24 to show that Jesus expects reconciliation with God to produce reconciliation with others—broken human relationships interrupt worship and must be addressed before we can offer acceptable gifts to God
Matthew 5, Jesus is envisioning the kingdom. He's teaching, right? It's the famous Sermon on the Mount, right? He's envisioning the kingdom. He's describing what the kingdom is like. He's describing those who are citizens in the kingdom, and he's describing this image of them bringing their gifts to the altar. They're coming to worship. They can come before God, they can come before the Father, they can enter his presence, and they can worship. Listen to the connection he makes in 5:23. If you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar. First, be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
41 · Oswald applies Jesus's teaching to the congregation: if you're coming to worship as a reconciled child but harboring hatred, bitterness, or unresolved grievances, go and be reconciled before offering worship
If you're coming into the household of God as one who's reconciled child, coming to worship, coming to express love, coming to enjoy relationship and fellowship with your Father. And you realize, I got hatred towards a brother. I got issues with a coworker. I got a neighbor who's not mowing his lawn frequently enough, bringing down the property values. Neighbor's got a purple house. What was he thinking painting it purple? Go and be reconciled.
42 · Oswald refutes the secular myth of inevitable progress, arguing that human history—ancient and modern—demonstrates persistent need for reconciliation despite technological and social advancement
If history teaches us anything, ancient history, recent history, it's that mankind is still in desperate need of reconciliation. Modern people love to delude themselves into thinking that there's this notion of progress. Things are just getting better and better and better. Science is solving all the problems. People just keep living longer. Soon there's going to be peace. It's just a little bit away. It's just another 20 years of of Miss America pageants and those ladies desiring world peace and we're going to have it. It's simply not the case.
43 · A rapid survey of American history (Civil War through 21st century) illustrates the persistent failure of human efforts to achieve lasting peace, refuting the myth of progress and demonstrating ongoing need for reconciliation
The Civil War happened after the Great Awakenings, after massive revival spread out over the whole country. And then that country, believers on both sides going to war with each other. After Reconstruction, you have the horror of World War I. It's so bad they describe it as This is the war to end all wars. Except it wasn't. Treaty of Versailles was harsh. It stirred up animosity in Germany, and so you have World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. Surely now, but no, it gave birth to the Cold War, the Korean War, Vietnam, Desert Storm, 9/11, the list goes on, and that's just the conflicts our country has been involved in. That's just the ones you learn about because you go to school as an American. The 21st century will know the same social breakdown, the same discord, the same war and persecution that has tarnished every century before it. It's happening right now in Crimea, right?
44 · Oswald calls Christians to bear witness to the kingdom by working out the implications of reconciliation in a world still divided by tribalism, ethnicity, and social strife—to show concrete acts of human forgiveness
And so God's people are called upon, called upon in this text to walk out the implications, to work towards the goal of reconciliation, to image forth the kingdom of God to a world trapped in estrangement. Our world is still tribally, ethnically, and socially divided as ever. It is. Just look around. People might polish stuff up on the outside to look good in the Twitter age, but then a girlfriend records a conversation in private and sends it out to the media, and all of a sudden, "Oh, that's a racist." Christians are called to bear witness to the kingdom. To show the world reconciliation, to show the world concrete acts of human forgiveness.
45 · Oswald makes the call to reconciliation concrete and personal by naming specific types of relationships that require forgiveness—estranged family members, former employers, those who have genuinely wronged us—and framing forgiveness as witness to Christ
Not towards your buddy because you got in a fight on the basketball court, but towards that family member you haven't talked to in 5 years, the uncle you won't invite over for Christmas, the parent that you can't stand. Because how they ruined your life when you were a child and they got a divorce. The former employer who destroyed your reputation and fired you without cause. You're called to extend reconciliation to your worst enemies and in doing so to show them Christ.
46 · Oswald acknowledges the congregation's potential resistance to the call to reconciliation by naming the difficulty—it sounds nice in theory but becomes hard when you think of the actual relationships where you harbor malice—and sets up the final illustration
Now admittedly, That can sound nice on paper. That can kind of sound easy in sort of an anesthetized environment. You're sitting in the pews, "Oh yes." But when you actually think about those relationships, it gets a little more difficult, doesn't it? When you think about relationships where there's real alienation, Or if you're honest, you really, you really have malice in your heart towards them. Those relationships where you think there is no way reconciliation is possible. We can know the power of the gospel, having experienced it in Christ, and still disbelieve its ability to heal relationships in our lives. Right?
47 · Oswald introduces the Rwandan genocide as the climactic illustration, establishing the depth of the horror—800,000 murdered by neighbors, unspeakable evil—to set up the most extreme test case for whether gospel reconciliation is possible
Conclude with a different civil war. The Rwandan Civil War, you guys are familiar with the story, happened in the '90s. Hotel Rwanda is a movie that commemorates it. It is a story of horror. The worst examples of human alienation. You want to talk about alienation, you want to talk about, "Well, I've got this relationship you don't understand. If you knew what this relationship was like, you wouldn't talk about reconciliation." I will go so far as to say there is no one in this room who's experienced alienation to the degree the people of Rwanda experienced it. Of weeks, 800,000 Rwandans are murdered, chopped apart with machetes by their neighbors because they belong to the wrong tribe. It's a horrible genocide. It's unspeakable. Unspeakable evil. It was so evil the rest of the world almost kind of denied it was happening. They couldn't even come to grips with the fact that this was actually happening in our modern world. It wasn't like the horrors of the Civil War where it's just Gettysburg and Antietam, Shiloh, these bloody battles where soldiers are getting torn limb from limb. No, these are innocent men. Women and children. Grandmas hacked limb from limb. After the violence ended, you would rightly wonder how on earth does that country go on? How do you move forward from that? How do you recover from that kind of devastation? You would think, you look at that and you think, that's a script for a new part of the world where there's going to be centuries of ongoing hatred and violence. It's a new Caucasus. It's a new Middle East. You are going to have generation after generation after generation after generation of people that hate each other. And honestly, when you look at it, they kind of have reason to hate each other.
48 · Oswald introduces Claude, a 13-year-old genocide survivor whose entire family was murdered by neighbors, and establishes his understandable hatred and desire for revenge—setting up the trajectory the world would expect him to follow
Claude was 13 years old when the genocide broke out. If you're 13, you're old enough to remember. He remembered because he saw it. His entire extended family, with the exception of one sister, were murdered. 13 years old. It's finally to the point where, like, you don't have to fear leaving your home. You don't have to fear people coming into your home and dragging you out and and hacking you limb from limb, but now you're 13 years old and you are all alone in the world. You live in this broken, shattered country where it's like, who do you trust? We can excuse him for carrying those scars. Claude was just filled with hatred. He burned for revenge. He dreamed of exacting it. Upon the members of his neighborhood, of his neighborhood, his neighbors who came in and killed his family. He would fantasize about it. He would long for it. He wanted to get to come and put him on the firing line and pull the trigger. He was ripe to be part of the generation that carried forward the hatred in their heart.
49 · Claude's participation in survivor support groups only intensified his hatred, as hearing the scope of the atrocities across the nation compounded his anger rather than bringing healing—showing human methods of reconciliation failing
Initially Claude went to support groups they put up for survivors. You would go and you would just sort of vent the anger and the pain and the grief. It was supposed to be like this cathartic thing. For Claude it wasn't. Like he went to these rooms and then he'd hear the stories and it just made him more angry. He'd just sit there and he's now 15, 16 and he'd listen to people talk about, "It wasn't just me. It wasn't just my family. It wasn't just my friends." my 20 relatives, it was 20,000 relatives. It was an entire city. It was this entire nation. And it just stirred up anger and hatred in his heart.
50 · Through Solace, a Christ-centered ministry, Claude was taught to bring his anger to God in prayer and was shown how Christ overcame estrangement—and over time, the gospel took root and his heart began to soften
Finally, Claude was brought to a group called Solace. Solace is a Christ-centered ministry reaching out to the widows and the orphans who survived the genocide. They didn't simply share grief and vent their anger. Carefully, slowly, patiently, the workers of solace applied the grace of Christ. They taught Claude how to pray, how to bring his anger before God, to speak to God. They explained to him the incredible way that Christ had overcome our estrangement. The people at Solace became a family to him, and slowly over time, the gospel took root in Claude's heart. His heart that was once full of vengeance and hatred began to soften.
51 · The gospel transformed Claude's identity—from orphan to son of God, from abandoned to member of God's household, from enemy to reconciled child—and this new identity in Christ healed the loneliness and despair he'd carried since age 13
He came home one day. Claude realized that in Christ there was a way for him to be a part of a family, to be a part of God's family. So he was no longer God's enemy because of Christ's work. Now he was no longer an orphan. He was a son of the living God. He was a member of God's household. And so the loneliness and the emptiness and the despair he'd felt since the age of 13, seeing his whole family murdered, melted away as he came to grips with Christ's reconciling him the Father. His identity changed. He's no longer a broken orphan, abandoned and without hope in the world. He was a child of the King. He'd been brought near because of Jesus.
52 · The climax of the illustration: Claude, empowered by the gospel, forgave the man who murdered his grandmother—not just psychological peace but true reconciliation, setting aside hatred and extending forgiveness because he did not shift from the hope of the gospel
And this is where we see the amazing gospel power in Claude's story. It's not just that he's no longer crippled by anger. It's not just that He longs to murder those who murdered his family. In Christ, he's found strength to forgive. He actually met one of the former neighbors, a man who lived in his neighborhood who he had seen kill his grandmother. The man was broken by what he'd done and contacted SOLACE, the organization, said, "I want to repent and ask for forgiveness." forgiveness of Claude. By the grace and power of the gospel, Claude was able to face the man, and as the man wept and repented, Claude, only because he did not shift from the hope of the gospel, was able to forgive him. Not just forgive him, Claude would describe it as they were reconciled. They set aside their hatred.
53 · Oswald unpacks the theological irony embedded in the names: Innocent (the guilty murderer) and Jean-Claude (Yahweh is gracious to the weak)—showing God's providence in the very names as a microcosm of the gospel message
Now hear how God's providence was at work in this. The man who killed Claude's grandmother, the neighbor, his name of all things was Innocent. It's his given name. Innocent. He was a murderer named Innocent. Because the gospel was at work in Claude's life, because he understood the implications of his own reconciliation to God through Christ, Claude was able to extend forgiveness to the guilty man he saw murder his grandmother who was ironically called Innocent. How is that possible? Well, you see a little image of it when you realize Claude's full name. His name is Jean-Claude, not the martial arts actor. Don't go there. Jean-Claude is actually a combination of names meaning Yahweh is gracious and weak. God is gracious to the weak.
54 · Oswald draws the theological point from the illustration: God's power to make the guilty truly innocent through Christ's blood enables Claude to see his enemy through God's eyes and extend reconciliation—and if it's possible for Claude, it's possible for anyone
Think of how powerful God is to make a man who's a former murderer truly innocent in his eyes because he looks at him through the blood of Christ, the only one who truly was innocent. Claude was able to see his former enemy through God's eyes, washed with the blood of Christ. And so at the conclusion of their meeting, Claude asked Innocent, "Can I pray for you?" He put his arms around him and he prayed for the man who murdered his grandmother. That's only possible because of the gospel. And if it's possible for Claude, it's possible for you.
55 · Oswald applies the illustration to the congregation: only by fully embracing Christ's death for sin can divine reconciliation wash away human hate—the gospel alone enables us to forgive our enemies because God has forgiven us in Christ
In that relationship with all that brokenness. Only where Christ's death for sin is fully embraced can the grace of divine reconciliation wash away human hate and sow the seeds of forgiveness. There is a manner of life, a manner of not just loving neighbor but loving enemies that's informed by and shaped by the gospel. In light of our reconciliation, us to God, Paul calls us to live and to walk and to carry ourselves in a manner in keeping with that gospel. How can you possibly forgive that person? Because in Christ Jesus, God has forgiven you.
56 · Oswald closes the sermon and prepares the congregation for dismissal in prayer
Would you bow your heads?