FOR IF (fulfilled condition = since) WHILE WE WERE ENEMIES WE WERE (have been = passive = God's initiates and empowers) RECONCILED TO GOD THROUGH THE DEATH OF HIS SON: ei gar ecthroi ontes (PAPMPN) katellagemen (1PAPI)  to theo dia tou thanatou tou huiou autou: (Ro 8:7; 2Cor 5:18,19,21; Col 1:20,21)  (Ro 5:11;  8:32; Lev 6:30; 2 Chr 29:24; Ezek 45:20; Da 9:24; Eph 2:16; Heb 2:17)

If you are ready for an edifying, challenging and encouraging word on Romans 5:9-11, I highly recommend listening to Dr John Piper's sermon Much More Shall We Be Saved By His Life. In this message (note that you will miss much of the impact of the message by only reading it...the transcription is not verbatim, nor can you sense the passion in Piper's presentation) Piper gives a wonderful illustration you can use to explain the truth of this passage to your children. Do you wrestle with the issue of eternal security? This sermon may be just what the doctor ordered!

Paul's point here is that if when were enemies of God, Christ's death made it possible for us to be reconciled to God, now that we are His children, Jesus can "save" us day by day and eternally (some favor this latter emphasis) through His power.

S Lewis Johnson asks...

What, then, is the resulting sense of the apostle's argument? Simply stated, it is this: If He has done the most for us, giving us a crucified Savior for our reconciliation when we were enemies, He surely will give us the least, save us through to the end, now that we have become friends, reconciled to Him. Or, surely if He has done the best for us, He will do the rest. As Sanday and Headlam put it, "If the first intervention cost the death of His Son, the second costs nothing, but follows naturally from the share which we have in His life." They in their comment refer to the Pauline use of en in the last phrase of the verse when they speak of "from the share which we have in His life." The reference of the en may be to Romans 8:34 (note) and the intercession of the Son for us now. It is surely not a reference to deliverance from the dominion of sin, as some Bible teachers have thought. The salvation is defined by the statement of verse nine; "saved from wrath." Paul is thinking of the deliverance of the believer from the wrath and condemnation of sin, not from its dominion in the believer's life, except insofar as the latter follows from the former. The argument, thus, is the ne plus ultra of the doctrine of the security of the believer. If, when we were enemies. He reconciled us to Himself by giving His Son as a penal, substitutionary sacrifice for sin, He will surely do that which is less, now that we are friends, reconciled, deliver us from the wrath to come, and especially since we now share in the life of our Representative through the union consummated with Him. It is the kind of argument that cannot be refuted. The logic is inescapable. The force of the argument for security is made even stronger by the fact that it is one of the implicit kinds, one not seen at first glance, such as the one drawn from John 10:28-29. It is not so obvious, but just as powerful....As the little Irish convert once said, "I often tremble on the Rock, but the Rock never trembles under me."

For (1063) (gar) is a subordinating conjunction expressing cause or Introduces an explanation. Gar serves as a marker of cause or reason between events. Learn to recognize terms of conclusion and ask why is it there "for" which will help you understand the flow of a given passage.

If (1487) (ei) is a first class conditional marker indicating that what follows is a fulfilled condition. There is no doubt this is what we were! In other words if really means "since we were enemies" (because before Christ came into our life we were enemies) or “in view of the fact that when we were enemies" or "if, enemies as we were".

Were (5607) (ontes = present tense participle masculine nominative singular of eimí - 1510 = to be)  means "being" and refers to one's existence but not the beginning of that existence. The point is that our "existence" was that we were continuously God's enemy. Some have used this verse to teach that, yes, sinful men are indeed enemies of God, but He Himself is not our enemy. Yes, we are opposing Him, but He is not opposing us. Yes, we have enmity toward Him, but He has no enmity toward us. The fallaciously reason that verse 10 flatly states that we were God's enemies, but does not state that God was our enemy. They say that after all God is a God of love not anger. How could a God of love be angry? But they reason incorrectly, for just looking at Romans we see that God clearly is a God of wrath Who continually reveals His wrath "from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (see note Romans 1:18) and has prepared "the day of wrath and revelation of (His) righteous judgment" (see note Romans 2:5) for "those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness" (see note Romans 2:8).

Paul gives a picture of this enemy mindset in Romans 8 writing that...

the mind set on (the tendency or inclination of the mind, its bent) the flesh (flesh -- the evil disposition opposed to God, unable to please Him) is hostile (echthra = enmity, hatred) toward God; for it does not (Greek =  ouch = absolutely does not) subject (hupotasso - present tense = as a way of life, as their habitual practice) itself to the law of God, for it is not (Greek =  ouch = absolutely does not) even able (unregenerate men, unbelievers, do not have either the inclination nor the power to submit their rebellious will to God - the flesh is dead toward God - note the tense again is present which pictures this as their continual state - they don't have the power because they don't have the Spirit Who alone can give the power to submit - cf note Philippians 2:13) to do so (see note Romans 8:7) (Comment: There are some commentators who teach this verse is referring to believers who are simply living according to the flesh but I think careful analysis of the tenses of the verbs and the Greek negative particles used [absolute, not relative] strongly favor that Paul is describing an unsaved person.)

Enemies (2190) (echthros from échthos = hatred, enmity; noun = echthra = enmity, hostility) is an adjective which pertains to manifesting hostility or being at enmity with another, where enmity is a deep seated animosity or hatred which may be open or concealed or a "deep-rooted hatred."

In the active sense echthros means to be hateful, hostile toward, at enmity with or adversary of someone. In the passive sense echthros pertains to being subjected to hostility, to be hated or to be regarded as an enemy.

Echthros is one who has the extreme negative attitude that is the opposite of love and friendship. An enemy is one that is antagonistic to another; especially seeking to injure, overthrow, or confound the opponent. Scripture often uses echthros as a noun  describing "the adversary",  Satan! Like father like son!

Leon Morris commenting on this verse notes that...

Enemies is a strong term; sin had put us completely in the wrong with God (in 11:28 this term is opposed to “beloved”). An enemy is not a person who comes a little bit short of being a friend; it means someone in the opposite camp. Some see the meaning here as man’s hostility to God, but the reference to wrath (v. 9) surely shows that God’s hostility to evil is in view. The wrath and the enmity go together. That sinners are God’s enemies is stated a number of times in the New Testament (Romans 11:28; Philippians 3:18; Colossians 1:21; Ja 4:4; cf. Ephesians 2:15; 2:16). (Morris, L. The Epistle to the Romans. W. B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press)

EBC asks the question...

Is "enemies" used in an active sense to mean those who have enmity toward God (cf. see note Romans 8:7) or in the passive sense, meaning those who are reckoned as enemies by God? Several reasons dictate that the latter is the intended force of the word.

First, that the word is capable of conveying this meaning is evident from 11:28, where the people of Israel are spoken of as enemies in the reckoning of God and yet loved by him, involving the same combination as in the passage we are considering. The enmity in 11:28 is not temperamental but judicial.

Second, the mention of "God's wrath" in v. 9 points to the conclusion that the echthroi are the objects of the wrath.

Third, the tenor of the argument leads one to the same conclusion. Paul reasons from the greater to the lesser. If God loved us when we were enemies, now that he has made provision for us at infinite cost, much more will he go on to see us through to the final goal of our salvation. But if the sense is that God loved us and saved us when we were enemies in our attitude toward him, the much more loses its point. "He is not arguing that if we have begun to love God we may reckon on His doing so and so for us, but because He has done so much, we may expect Him to do more" (Archibald McCaig in ISBE, 1930, vol. IV, p. 2537a).

Fourth, Paul not only states that we have been reconciled (v. 10) but that we have received the reconciliation (v. 11). He avoids saying that we have done anything to effect the reconciliation. God provided it through the death of his Son. The matter is made even clearer, if anything, in the companion statement that God has reconciled us "to Himself" (2Cor 5:18). The appropriate response of the saved community is exultation (cf. vv. 2, 3) (Gaebelein, F, Editor: Expositor's Bible Commentary 6-Volume New Testament. Zondervan Publishing)

James Denney explains that...

The the state of sin was that in which we were enemies (echthroi) and the whole connection of ideas in the passage requires us to give enemies (echthroi) the passive meaning which it undoubtedly has in Romans 11:28 (note), where it is opposed to beloved (agapetoi). We were in a real sense objects of the Divine hostility. As sinners, we lay under the condemnation of God, and His wrath hung over us. This was the situation which had to be faced: Was there love in God equal to it? Yes, when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son. (Nicoll, W Robertson, Editor: Expositors Greek Testament: 5 Volumes. Out of print. Search Google)

TDNT writes that...

While mísos denotes the disposition of hostility and pólemos war, echthros means “hostility” itself... For the rabbis opponents include idolaters, apostate proselytes, renegades, and wicked Israelites. Unjustifiable hatred is forbidden but there is a legitimate hatred of foes in the OT sense as those who disrupt the covenant relationship.

The term (echthros) is used in the NT for personal enemies (Gal 4:16), but as in the OT and LXX, it is used for the foes of Israel (Lk. 1:71), of Jerusalem (Lk 19:43), of the NT witnesses (Rev 11:5), and of believers within their own families (Mt. 10:36). echthrós refers, too, to hostility to God and Christ (Lk. 19:27; Phil. 3:18; Acts 13:10, and cf. the quoting of Ps 110:1 in Mk 12:36; Acts 2:34-35; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb. 1:13; Paul in 1 Cor 15:25 refers to all the forces that are hostile to God, including death). The reference of Mt. 5:43-44 is to love for the enemies of God and his people (in contradistinction to the older hatred), and the same view may be reflected in 2 Th. 3:15.

By nature we are all God’s enemies (Ro 5:10; 11:28; Col. 1:21; Ja 4:4). The point is that we hate God (active), although in Ro 11:28 Jews are both hated (passive) because of the gospel and loved on account of the fathers. The echthrós is the devil in the parable of Mt. 13:24ff. and Lk. 10:19; the devil is the absolute enemy both of us and of God and his kingdom.  (Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W.  Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans)

Echthros is used 32 times in the NASB (Study the NT passages - What are the outcomes for God's enemies - one good, the other bad? Who is the ultimate enemy of God? How are believers to respond to enemies?)

Matthew 5:43 (note) "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.' 5:44 "But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you (How is this possible? Naturally? Supernaturally? What is the clear implication of Jesus' command [see Galatians 5:22]?)

Matthew 10:36 and a man's (who believes in Messiah) enemies will be the members of his household.

Matthew 13:25 (Parable) "But while men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares also among the wheat, and went away...28 "And he said to them, 'An enemy has done this!' And the slaves said to him, 'Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?'...39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels.

Matthew 22:44 'The Lord said to my LORD, "Sit at My right hand, Until I put Thine enemies beneath Thy feet "'?

Mark 12:36 "David himself said in the Holy Spirit, 'The Lord said to my LORD, "Sit at My right hand, Until I put Thine enemies beneath Thy feet.'"

Luke 1:71 Salvation from our (Israel's) enemies (cp, "Anti-Semitism"), and from the hand of all who hate us...74 To grant us that we (Jews who repent and believe in Messiah), being delivered (rescued by the Messiah) from the hand of our enemies, might serve Him without fear

Luke 6:27 "But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you...35 "But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil men.

Luke 10:19 "Behold, I (Jesus) have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall injure you.

Luke 19:27 "(Jesus speaking) But these enemies of Mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence."...

Luke 19:43 "For the days shall come upon you when your (Israel's) enemies will throw up a bank before you, and surround you, and hem you in on every side (This prophecy was fulfilled by the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman General Titus in 70AD)

Luke 20:43 Until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet."'

Acts 2:35 Until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet."'

Acts 13:10 and said, "You who are full of all deceit and fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy (like father, like son) of all righteousness, will you not cease to make crooked the straight ways of the Lord?

Romans 5:10 (note) For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Romans 11:28 (note) From the standpoint of the gospel they (unbelieving Israel) are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers;

Romans 12:20 (note) "But if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head."

1 Corinthians 15:25 For He (Messiah) must reign until (at the end of the Millennium) He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.

Galatians 4:16 Have I therefore become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Philippians 3:18 (note) For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ,

Colossians 1:21 (note) And although you were formerly alienated and hostile (echthros) in mind, engaged in evil deeds,

2 Thessalonians 3:15 And yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.

Hebrews 1:13 (note) But to which of the angels has He ever said, "Sit at My right hand, Until I make Thine enemies A footstool for Thy feet "?

Hebrews 10:13 (note) waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet.

James 4:4 You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility (echthra = noun = hatred, inner disposition and external opposition)  toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy (echthros = adjective) of God.

Revelation 11:5 (note) And if anyone desires to harm them (God's two witnesses during the first half of Daniel's Seventieth Week), fire proceeds out of their mouth and devours their enemies; and if anyone would desire to harm them, in this manner he must be killed.

Revelation 11:12 (note) And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here." And they (the two witnesses killed in Jerusalem at the end of the first 3.5 years of the 7 year "Tribulation") went up into heaven in the cloud, and their enemies beheld them.

Echthros is used 329 times in the Septuagint (LXX) where it describes personal enemies, as well as national enemies (Josh. 7:8). Basic to the usage is that Gentiles do not alternate between hostility and friendship but are in constant opposition to both Israel and God (Ex 23:22, 2 Sa 12:14). Here is a representative use...

Genesis 14:20 And blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand." And he gave him a tenth of all.

Ps 110:1 (A Psalm of David.) The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand, Until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet." (Quoted in Mt , Mk 12:36, Lu 20:42, Acts 2:34 - see verses above)

Reduced to the final analysis, sin is rebellion against God. It is not only a failure, but a refusal, to do God's will. Only when understood thus can the serious consequences of sin be properly appreciated. We were all enemies of God, we toward Him in rebellion, and He toward us in wrath, and therefore we all needed to be reconciled to God. There would be no hope without the removal of His wrath and our rebellion. Man is the enemy of God, not the reverse. Thus the hostility must be removed from man if reconciliation is to be accomplished. God took the initiative in bringing this about through the death of his Son.

In Colossians Paul uses echthros to explain that...

although you were formerly alienated (estranged - and hostile in mind, the antonym of reconciled) , engaged in evil deeds (echthros), yet He has now reconciled (apokatallasso = reconcile fully, thoroughly, completely, change thoroughly, of bringing together friends who have been estranged) you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before (Literally = down in the eye of God ~ Coram Deo = before the face of God) Him  holy and blameless (amomos) and beyond reproach (anegkletos) (see note Colossians 1:21-22)

We lived with a constant attitude of hostility toward God, openly resisting His love and perfect law, continuously expressing hatred toward Him, whether directly or indirectly. An ENEMY of God is one who is antagonistic toward Him, especially seeking to injure His character and overthrow His rule over men. An enemy of God actively (or passively) contends with Him, opposing Him and resisting His rules only meant to bring life (Dt 32:47). In war an enemy seeks to kill his opponent. Ponder that even in this antagonistic state God still loved us and brought us back into relationship and fellowship thru the death of His only beloved Son. This is indeed a "much more" salvation or as Hebrews would say "so great a salvation" (see notes Hebrews 2:3). And as if this wasn't incredible enough, even "much more" He shall save us by His life.

Since reconciliation was accomplished by Jesus’ death, certainly His life is able to insure the complete and final salvation of believers. “His life” is His present life (not His life on earth) in which He intercedes (see note Hebrews 7:25) for believers. He died for His enemies; surely He will save those, His former enemies, who are now fellowshipping in Him.

Spurgeon remarks...

No more love to God is there in an unrenewed heart than there is life within a piece of granite. No more love to God is there within the soul that is unsaved than there is fire within the depths of the ocean's waves. And here is the wonder, that when we had no love for God, he should have loved us!

Vine calls our attention to...

the three expressions “ungodly” (v. 6), “sinners” (v. 8), “enemies” (v. 10). The last word anticipates the mention of reconciliation.

We were reconciled (2644) (katallasso from katá = an intensifier + allásso = change) means to exchange one thing for another and was used for example to describe the exchange of coins for others of equal value. This Its original meaning of to change, exchange, etc. transferred to mean to reconcile. The Greeks spoke of people in opposition to each other being “reconciled” or being made friends again. When people change from being at enmity with each other to being at peace, they are said to be reconciled. Katallasso meant to legally reconcile two disputing parties in court and in the New Testament is used of a believer’s reconciliation with God through Jesus Christ.

Katallasso here in Romans 5:10 is in the aorist tense indicating a completed event in the past (a historical event) and the passive voice indicates that it occurred as the result of a force (God) outside of and independent of the subject (man). In other words, "we" are the the objects, not the subjects of this reconciliation: the subject is God (cf 2 Cor 5:19-21, see Romans 5:11 where received is also the "Divine" passive indicating it was effected by God.)

TDNT writes of katallasso that

With the thought of “change” predominating, this word can mean “to change,” “to exchange,” and “to reconcile” or “reconcile oneself.” (Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W.  Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans)

Katallasso refers to the exchange of hostility or enmity to a friendly relationship. It means to change a person for the purpose of being able to have fellowship together. Scripture always portrays God as the Reconciler and sinners as the ones reconciled, since it was human sin that ruptured the relationship between God and man Isaiah, for example, recording...

But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, And your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He does not hear. (Isaiah 59:2)

In the NT, katallasso speaks of the change that God makes in man through regeneration, so that he may be reconciled to God. The idea is to set up a relationship of peace not existing before. Note that man is reconciled to God, but God is not said to be reconciled to man.

Katallasso is used 6 times in the NT, twice in Ro 5:10, and the following verses...

(Paul is giving instructions to the married here addressing a believing wife) "(but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not send his wife away." (1Cor 7:11)

18 Now all these things (pointing back to the  total transformation taking place at conversion) are from God, Who reconciled (katallasso) us (God initiates the reconciliation - unregenerate people cannot) to Himself through Christ (the good news of the gospel), and gave us the ministry of reconciliation (katallage), 19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling (katallasso) the world to Himself (Paul is not teaching universalism!), not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation (katallage). 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were entreating through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled (katallasso) to God. (2Cor 5:18-20) (Comment: To overcome our separation from God, we needed someone to provide reconciliation and thereby bring us back into fellowship with God.)

Reconciliation produces restoration of a relationship of peace which has been disturbed between God and man in the garden of Eden. Sinful man is reconciled in that his attitude of enmity toward God is changed to one of friendship.

John MacArthur explains that...

reconciliation is not something man does but what he receives; it is not what he accomplishes but what he embraces. Reconciliation does not happen when man decides to stop rejecting God but when God decides to stop rejecting man. It is a divine provision by which God’s holy displeasure against alienated sinners is appeased, His hostility against them removed, and a harmonious relationship between Him and them established. Reconciliation occurs because God was graciously willing to design a way to have all the sins of those who are His removed from them “as far as the east is from the west” (Psalms 103:12 - Spurgeon's note), “cast all their sins into the depths of the sea” (Micah 7:19), and “cast all [their] sins behind [His] back” (Isaiah 38:17). (MacArthur, J. 2 Corinthians. 2003 Moody Publishers)

James Denney writes that...

To represent reconciliation (katellagemen) by an active form, e.g., "we were won to lay aside our hostility," is to miss the point of the whole passage. Paul is demonstrating the love of God, and he can only do it by pointing to what God has done. That we on our part are hostile to God before the reconciliation, and that we afterwards lay aside our enmity, is no doubt true; but here it is entirely irr