First we must acquaint ourselves with the root meaning of the term, then with the

import of the added prefix apo. Katallasso, is one of the many words derived from allos

which has already come before us in the word apallotrioo `to be alienated' (Eph. 2: 12;

4: 18 and Col. 1: 21). Alienation is the state which is exchanged for reconciliation, the

change being the removal of the enmity that existed. If, therefore, we can discover the

nature of the enmity in any particular case, we shall at the same time discover the nature

both of the alienation and the subsequent reconciliation. We shall be prevented from

starting with a moral alienation and ending with a dispensational reconciliation, we shall

also be prevented from starting with a dispensational alienation and ending with a moral

reconciliation. The enmity echthra which caused the alienation of Eph. 2: 12 was, as

we have seen, not the enmity of sin as such, but the enmity arising out of the different

dispensational positions occupied by Jewish and Gentile believer. The enmity echthra

which caused the alienation of Rom. 8: 7 was the nature of the carnal mind and this

was rectified by the reconciliation already noted in Romans and I & II Corinthians.

Alienation in the prison epistles arises either out of the dispensational disability of

being born a Gentile, without specific reference to sin, to the alienation that arises out of

a darkened understanding (Eph. 4: 18), or through the enmity consequent upon wicked

works (Col. 1: 21). In the latter case, the reconciliation effected presents such alienated

ones `holy and unblameable and unreproveable in His sight' (Col. 1: 22); in the former

case the reconciliation cancels the original alienation that belonged to the Gentile, and

reconciles the two conflicting parties in one Body to God by the cross. The reconciliation

of Eph. 2: therefore is dispensational in character.

We next inquire what is the import of the added prefix apo in the word `reconcile'

found in Ephesians and Colossians. One attempt suggests that the lesser word used in

Romans and Corinthians should be rendered `conciliation' leaving the fuller word for

`reconciliation'. Unfortunately this creates a bias in the mind, for accepting this, we

naturally assume that the further reconciliation of the later epistles is but the perfecting of

the lesser reconciliation of the earlier ones. Strictly speaking there is not this difference

in the two English words that their adoption as above indicated would justify.

Conciliation is the term generally used of men in public stations of live, while

reconciliation is indifferently employed for those in public or private.

Apo means away from, and the condition from which the Gentile is brought in Eph. 2:

is from the alienation of being a Gentile to the reconciled position of being a fellow

member, on equal terms with every other fellow member of a newly created New Man, or

of a newly formed `one Body'. The prefix apo belongs to both words, as can be seen:

APallotrioo aliens, APOkatallasso reconciled;

the alienation was `from' the

commonwealth of Israel, the reconciliation was `from' the state of enmity thus induced.

Here in the church of the One Body we have no mere evolution from an existing but

lower order; rather we have an entirely newly created thing. When God says that there is

a `new creation', old things pass away, new things come into being, and it is a disaster

for any one to attempt to bring over the hope, the promises, the constitution, the gifts and

the ordinances of the earlier calling which were all related to a specific covenant and

people, into this new creation where there are no promises that were made to the Fathers,