Colossians 1:15-20

Verse 10:

I love how your textbook outlines these verses. Ash rights: “‘Knowledge,’ ‘wisdom’ and ‘understanding’ would lead to proper living (v. 10). The process would be empowered by God (v. 11)” (Col 1:9).

Paul prays so that “you may walk” (περιπατέω) worthy of the Lord. The next clause will describe the manner in which they can do this “bearing fruit in every good work and growing in the knowledge of God.” Their Christian conduct parallels the growth of the Gospel. The Christian life, like the Gospel itself, is about continued advancement towards the goal. Notice also that we have a repeated idea “growing in knowledge of God.” So in verse 9 Paul prayed so that they may be filled with the knowledge of God’s will, and this will result in them being filled with the knowledge of God’s will. It’s important to recognize that this argument is not circular, as it may seem at first. Rather, as Wright points out: “The argument is not circular (as might at first appear), but spiral. Paul prays that they may increase in knowledge of God’s will, with the result that the Colossians will live as God wants them to and so increase in the knowledge of God! Understanding will fuel holiness; holiness will deepen understanding” (62).

Verse 11:

Verse 11 then indicates the power that makes this “walk of life” possible for the Colossians. The power to endure, be patient, and be joyful is the focus of verse 11. Melick notes that: “The Greek text stresses the idea of power by employing two different terms in a complementary sense. The first is dynamis which may be defined as “the potentiality to exert force in performing some function.” The second is kratos which indicates “the power to rule or control” (204). Paul uses the verbal form of that first noun as well in the sentence, and so the focus is truly the empowering power of God available to the Christian.

This is available for the Christian to endure, which is the ability to “remain under” difficult circumstances. It is also available for them to be patient, which deals primarily with interactions between people. As Melick notes: “ ‘patience’ is ‘a state of emotional calm in the face of provocation or misfortune and without complaining or irritation” (204). Taken together, this describes the one whose “walk of life” is entirely dependent upon God’s will and not dictated by either man or circumstances. Again, Melick writes: “The two ideas complement each other. Neither circumstances nor people are to upset the person who walks in the will of God. Divine power is available to those who know Christ” (204).

Verses 12-14:

This empowerment is also available that Christians may “give thanks with joy to the Father” for the spiritual blessings that we have as the result of being located in Christ. Like we discovered in Philippians, so is the case here: if you want to be a happy person, you must be a grateful person (and both must be rooted “in the Lord”). The spiritual blessings so described are those things in which the outside world cannot remove our standing (unless we permit it to). We have an inheritance, we have been rescued, we have been delivered from bondage to sin (redemption), and we have been forgiven. Which of these can trying circumstances or ill-tempered people take from us? Then we can thank God with great joy with a “defiant nevertheless!” as we stand firm on the truth of the Word of God. The focus of Colossians will be on the “truth of the Gospel” over against the false teachings with particular attention given to the supremacy of Christ.

Verse 15:

Entering into verse 15 we ought to be immediately struck by the poetic language of the passage (we will not delve into whether it was a hymn or not, though I am inclined to be skeptical of that view, cf. Wright). It is spoken in such a way to be both memorable and somehow attain to the lofty goal of expressing the incarnation in a satisfactory manner. The mystery of the incarnation is incredibly difficult to grasp, but what is made clear from the outset of this “poem” is that Christ was God incarnate and God operated both his creative power and salvific power through him.

For starters, Christ made visible the invisible God. Him who no eye has seen can be seen by looking upon the face of Christ. John writes similarly in John 1:18 “No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.” The language of the “image” evokes two OT concepts. First, Israel was expressly commanded not to make an “image” (eikon) of God. Second, in the beginning God created man in “his own image.” Mankind was to be the visible manifestation (representative in our case) of God to the created order.

N.T. Wright states: “Humanity was designed to be the perfect vehicle for God’s self-expression within his world, so that he could himself live appropriately among his people as one of themselves, could rule in love over creation as himself a creature” (74). Whereas mankind failed to live up to this divine mandate, Christ has fulfilled it in perfection. So, he has both made the invisible visible and what mankind was intended to be. Melick writes: “Jesus bore the image of the earthly, Adam, and the image of the heavenly, God. He was the unique manifestation of both God and man, always embodying the best of both wherever he was. In choosing the word “image,” Paul stressed that God was present wherever Jesus was. He was the personal manifestation of deity” (215).

He is also described as the πρωτότοκος of all creation. There are some that take the phrase “firstborn of all creation” to infer that Christ himself was created and thus in some sense less than God; however, your textbook rightly points out that this is immediately dispelled in verse 16 with the repetition of the notion that all things were created through him.

It is also rebutted by the dual meaning of the term itself. While πρωτότοκος can refer to the one who is born first temporally, it carries with it the notion also of preeminence or superiority. The authors of the EDNT note: “Gen. πάσης κτίσεως is dependent on πρωτότοκος and makes it clear that the firstborn stands in a relationship to creation as its mediator. Hence this is not a matter of a purely temporal priority of the preexistent Christ, but rather of a superiority in essence… In any case, Christ, as the mediator of creation, is not a part of creation himself, but stands rather in a unique relationship to God, the ‘invisible’” (190).

Christ is the image of the invisible God and the preeminent one over all creation.

Verse 16:

There is quite a bit going on with the preposition of this verse within which three express the work of Christ in regards to all of creation. One thing is abundantly clear within it, however, Christ had an instrumental role in the creation process, and there is an implied working in cooperation with the Father within this. Both times the term translated “created” is used in this verse it is in the passive, which as Wright notes: “indicates in a typically Jewish fashion, the activity of God the Father, working in the Son” (75). That’s the first preposition, ἐν, that seems to imply sphere in which this work was done. “In the sphere of Christ all things were created.”

All things is expounded upon with resounding clarity in the rest of the verse and it becomes readily apparent that “all things” means “all things” (for not always does “all” mean literally “all”). While we do not have time to delve into the specifics of each, the statement from Wright perhaps summarizes Paul’s intent here aptly: “Wherever you look, or whatever realities you think of, you discover entities which, even if they do not acknowledge the fact, owe their very existence to Christ. They are his handiwork” (76).

The next preposition is διά that expresses instrumentality. Thus, if it was not already implied in the first preposition, it is clear here. Creation took place “by means of” Christ. He was God’s agent in creation. The final preposition is εἰς that denotes direction and goal. This is a huge concept stated in such a small term, but here is the reality, all of creation has Christ as its goal. It was created in the sphere of Christ, by means of Christ, and with the goal of displaying the glory of Christ. Melick writes: “This means that Jesus is the goal of all creation. Everything exists to display his glory, and ultimately he will be glorified in his creation” (218).

Verse 17:

Truth be told, this passage has revivified my love for the importance of preposition (or just reminded me of their importance). Like we talked about in Ephesians, the little words make a world of difference, so don’t miss them. In verse 17 the little word (another preposition) is πρό that has the semantic range “before; in front of, at.” As it is used here it has a temporal element, which expresses Jesus’s preexistence before all of creation. Here is the plain meaning of the phrase: “Before all things were created, Jesus was.” Again, Melick notes: “Clearly this comment has a time orientation, and it teaches that before creation Jesus existed” (220).

Coupled together with this is the statement that he “sustains” all things. The verb here is in the perfect, which means it is a past action with a continuing effect. All things have been created in, by, and for Christ, and he continues to hold all things together. I like Wright’s comments here: “Through him the world is sustained, prevented from falling into chaos. No creature is autonomous. All are God’s servants and dependents” (77-78). Without Christ’s sustaining, there would be only “chaos, dissolution, and disintegration” (Ash).

As your textbook encourages, let’s place this in the context of the Colossians situation: “How would this concept impact any teaching which minimized the significance and role of Christ?”

Verse 18:

Turning to verse 18 we go from, as Wright puts it, “creation to new creation.” Christ is not only the πρωτότοκος of all creation, but of the new creation (those who will rise from the dead as he has) as well.

But prior to this Paul notes the church itself in relation to Christ. The metaphor of the church as an organic body is certainly not new to Paul here. He uses it in Romans, Ephesians, 1 Corinthians, and elsewhere. Here it is an apt image of the dependence that the body has on the head (the body whose head has been separated ceases to do much, right?). So too here, as Wright again notes: “If God’s people are the new humanity, the metaphor of a human body is utterly appropriate to express not only mutual interdependence (as is the point in Rom 12:5; 1 Cor 12:12) but also, as here, an organic and dependent relation to Christ himself” (78).

This, however, is only aspect of the metaphor. The other is the authoritative nature of the head over the body. The head has authority, as is seen even in our own usage of the metaphor (it is not always the case that the metaphors line up, but here there is some overlap). Melick notes that in this verse Paul expresses: “the hierarchy of the parts of the body, the head being superior to the rest” (221).

As Christ was present prior to the beginning of creation, so too he is the beginning of the new creation, being the πρωτότοκος from among the dead. Here Paul is not at pains to have to explain whether he intends the temporal element or not (as he did concerning the created things, from which he makes it clear that Christ is not a part of but what preeminent over). It is perfectly reasonable to argue that the meaning of the term (both in the sense of first born temporally which would have taken place at his own resurrection, and having the status of the firstborn, being preeminent) are fully intended by Paul here. Anthony Ash writes: “‘Firstborn’ may mean he was the first victor over death, but it may indicate his authority (as it did in v. 15) over death as it was over all creation. He produced and ruled both the old and the new creation” (Col 1:18).

The result (and perhaps the purpose) of the preeminence of Christ in both the creation and the new creation (as accomplished by God working in, by, and for Christ in creation and vindicating Christ by raising him from the dead in the bodily resurrection) was that he may be preeminent in everything. The TDNTA translates the verb used at the end of this verse as “To be first in rank.” This makes it very clear that the notion that Paul is driving home concerning the person and work of Christ is his preeminence (his being first in rank) over ALL THINGS. If it is any created thing, Christ is above it. If it is part of the new creation, Christ is above it.

Knowing this, how would you evaluate your reverence for Christ?

Verse 19:

Verses 19-20 explain why this is the case, and why it is appropriate as well (Wright’s verbiage). If we take these two verses together we can see how Paul uses the same preposition of verse 16 in the same order. As Wright notes: “The sequence ‘in him…through him…to him…’ echoes the same sequence in verse 16” (80). God operates in the sphere of Christ, by means of Christ, and towards the goal of Christ.

The phrase: “all the fullness was pleased to take up residence in him” is not an easy one to unpack, and many complicate it more than is necessary. First, the word for “God” is not supplied here, though in 2:9 it will be made readily apparent that Paul implies it. Thus, it was appropriate for Christ to be preeminent in all things because the fullness of God was pleased to take up residence in him. I am translating the Gk verb like that very intentionally. Wright does something similar when he writes: “It is appropriate that Christ should take up permanent residence (this is the best way of taking the Greek verb) in him. The full divinity of the man Jesus is stated without any implication that there are two Gods. It is the one God, in all his fullness, who dwells in him” (80).

Fullness bears the meaning of “totality” here. Melick writes: “it expresses that Jesus was completely God. Everything that God is, Jesus is” (224).

Verse 20:

Verse 20 then emphasizes how God was pleased to effectuate salvation through Christ towards the goal of reconciling “all things” to himself (God). First, we should recognize that the scope of God’s reconciling purposes actually extend beyond humanity and towards the created order as well. As Paul writes in Romans 8, creation itself was impacted by the Sin unleashed by Adam into the world and it groans “as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.” Paul continues in 8:23 “Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.” Thus Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was efficacious in bringing about the restoration of all things (during the present time we await the fulfillment of that for which we have already received the down payment, as we discussed in Ephesians).

Second, we should note that as concerns the human realm in this equation reconciliation requires two parties, right? If I were to have offended one of you (actually sinning against you), and I approached you looking for forgiveness, can we be reconciled based solely on my asking for forgiveness? What else is necessary?

So it is with our reconciliation to God, except the one who has been sinned against is the one extending out forgiveness, it is simply incumbent upon the guilty party to receive it. I love what Wright notes here: “‘reconciliation’, the re-establishing of a mutual relationship, cannot occur ‘automatically’ in the world of human relations from which the metaphor is drawn. In theological terms, reconciliation occurs ‘when someone is in Christ’ (2 Cor. 5:17), which elsewhere (e.g. Rom. 3:21–31; 6:1–11; Gal. 3:26–29) is correlated clearly with faith and baptism” (81–82).

What stands in stark contrast to the grand language of the entire poem is the means by which “all things” were reconciled through the “preeminent one.” It was “by means of the blood of his cross.” Tell me what you know about the cross in the culture.

He who is exalted above all things, first in rank over the creation and the new creation, humbled himself in obedience to death, even death on a cross.

How does this influence your thinking concerning the person of Christ? (Bear in mind the application seems to come in vv. 21-23 which we will address next week).