Abstract
The debate between proponents of the ecumenical movement on the one hand and the evangelical movements on the other, often led to different models of reconciliation. On the one hand, social upliftment was regarded as essential in any view on reconciliation. Without a deeply entrenched “social gospel” no reconciliation was deemed possible. Evangelicals, on the other hand, were of the opinion that no reconciliation is possible without conversion and acceptance of the atonement in Christ. This debate has since waned, because both groups have in some instances accepted views from the other side, as stated by David Bosch. However, differences remain in the models for reconciliation, even in the South African church communities. Emphases on social justice and restitution viewed from a specific theological point are often contrary to the view that true reconciliation is only possible if the church proclaims conversion to God and the acceptance of the atonement in Jesus, who is the only Saviour. Evaluating the essence of reconciliation, as put forward by Paul in the Letter to the Romans, might give an acceptable view for future reconciliation.
Highlights
A lively debate between the proponents of the ecumenical and evangelical movements on the essence of reconciliation had been present in the previous century
Emphases on social justice and restitution viewed from a specific theological point are often contrary to the view that true reconciliation is only possible if the church proclaims conversion to God and the acceptance of the atonement in Jesus, who is the only Saviour
The debate between the proponents of the models of the ecumenical movement and the evangelical movement led to radical different views
Summary
A lively debate between the proponents of the ecumenical and evangelical movements on the essence of reconciliation had been present in the previous century. Literature presents the discussion of the essential aspects of the sola scriptura, especially regarding the atonement and reconciliation (Bailyes 1996:485ff, Bosch 1988:458ff, Berkhof 1976:23-26, Hunt 2011:8184, George 2006:15-23, Stott and Wright 2015:16-22). This debate has waned, many different models still exist and in church communities this often leads to radical discussions (Bosch 1988:458 ff., Stott and Wright 2015:16-22). Is it possible to find an acceptable view on reconciliation? Is there a way out of this impasse? Is it possible to find an acceptable view on reconciliation? Can an analysis of Paul’s letter to the Romans help in this regard?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
