Colossians 1:21-2:5

Literary Context:

Let’s review the literary context. 1:1-14. Paul writes to those that he states are living in two locations. What are those two locations? In Colossae and in Christ. Paul puts three big ideas together as he expresses thanks to God for the Colossians. These were faith, ___________, and ___________. Remember, as Paul addresses these it indicates something of the health of the church. Their faith was springing forth from their hope, and their faith was being lived out in love. What do we mean by hope? Looking at verses 9-11 Paul prays that they would be filled with knowledge of God’s fill, this would then lead to what? Proper living and being filled with the knowledge of God. Is that a circular argument? How does one live it out? (The empowering of God, v. 11).

1:15-20. What were these verses addressing? The supremacy of Christ. Remember he is the πρωτότοκος of all creation. Does this mean that he was the first created being? What does it mean? (He is preeminent). Remember also we have those three preposition throughout this section that point to how God operated in, by, and for Christ. Looking at verse 18 we talked about how Paul labels Christ as not just the πρωτότοκος of all creation but the πρωτότοκος of what else also? The new creation. What was the means by which God accomplished this through Christ? He made peace “through his blood, shed on the cross.” What did the culture think about the cross?

Verse 21:

Verses 21-23 are now the application portion from that poetic section concerning the preeminence of Christ and the means by which he has accomplished peace. The argumentation of these three verses is very similar to what we saw in Eph 2:1-11 in which Paul described the Ephesians former state and the transformation through Christ on account of God’s initiative. The argument was “from what you were to what you are now in Christ.” The same is true here. In Eph 2:1 it was “You were dead through trespasses and sins…” Here it is “You were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior.”

The EDNT points out that the term ἀπαλλοτριόω “is used always in reference to (Gentile) existence prior to salvation” (114). The Gentile’s were separate from God’s people, not under the covenant, and without hope. Here Paul also describes them as being “enemies” (or hostile) in their minds. Melick notes that the term translated “mind” here, as used in the LXX “is usually translated ‘heart,’ and the terms in the NT speak of a person’s disposition. Actions naturally arise from the disposition, which is a matter of the mind/heart” (230). The prevailing tendency, or inclination of the Gentile’s towards God was one of hostility, and this was evidenced in their doing evil deeds. These deeds were both in a sense the means and the evidence of this separation, but we probably should hesitate placing all of the emphasis on their being the means. Wright’s comments here are helpful in that he notes the interplay between the disposition and the actions: “Wrong thinking leads to vice, vice to further mental corruption, so that the mind, still not totally ignorant of God’s standards, finds itself applauding evil” (85).

Verse 22:

This was their former state. A hostile disposition that evidenced itself in evil conduct. They were separated from the life of God, but now… Here is another wonderful conjunction that points to the wonderful change that God has wrought in those who are located in Christ. “You were alienated…but now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death…” We continue to see a focus on the historical reality of the death of Christ and the sacrificial nature of this death. It is by means of the blood of the cross that all things are reconciled back to God, and this includes the Colossians that have accepted this redemption (those who are located in Christ).

Melick points out something very much worthwhile: “The present condition is one of reconciliation: they were reconciled. In 1:12 God the Father initiated their salvation; here God the Son does. The Colossians owed their salvation to the initiative of God in their lives” (231). This is quickly followed by a purpose statement (a infinitive construction) “to present you holy and blameless and without reproach before him.” The sacrificial death of Christ is done to transform those who accept the initiative of God in salvation from being “hostile in their disposition and evil-doers” into those who are set apart (dedicated to God, including proper conduct and moral living) blameless, and above reproach (this would include not just in the court room, but also the “casual gossip” that “will not even be able to find a word to say against the person in question” Wright 87).

This purpose is effectuated both in the present (as a people living in the presence of God), and on the final day in which the work of the Spirit will be brought to total completion.

Verse 23:

But verse three puts a condition on it. As Wright notes: “This promise, like most, has a condition. The hope holds good, if Christians hold on to it” (87). The term ἐπιμένω refers to “staying in” a specific location (it carries the fig. sense of persisting in something). Here the Colossians are called to “remain located in the faith.” The following verbs are frequently used concerning building projects, as your textbook points out, which present the image of a solid structure that is firmly rooted on its foundation. The structure built on the foundation is established and remains so even in adversity, thus the one who remains in the faith and builds his/her life on this foundation will not be moved from the hope of the gospel.

Again, we have hope here repeated, and what your textbook notes is helpful. “‘Hope’ prepares us for 1:27, and implies that movement to a heretical position could destroy that hope” (Col 1:23). We’ve talked about this before, but it’s worth asking again, why are Christians tempted to add to the one thing that provides genuine hope from those things that are hopeless?

To counter the false teachings that are spreading in Colossae, Paul reminds them that this Gospel that provides genuine hope, this Gospel concerning the Christ who is the πρωτότοκος of both the created order and the new creation, is the same Gospel that is growing and increasing throughout the world and that has been proclaimed everywhere Christianity has gone. Melick writes: “Wherever the gospel has been preached, it is this gospel which has been proclaimed; there is no other. This, no doubt, stands in contrast to the sectarian views being propagated among the Colossians, which were both of recent development and specific to the geographic territory around Colossae” (235).

Verse 24:

I like how N.T. Wright breaks down 1:24-2:5. He labels it as Paul’s introducing himself to the Colossians. Wright notes: “By introducing himself in this way Paul shows where his true credentials lie. He explains in the first paragraph (1:24–29) the nature of his own ministry in Christ; in the second (2:1–5), how this ministry relates to the church in Colosse” (91).

Just what is meant by verse 24 is incredibly difficult to deduce with any sort of exactitude and the interpretations regarding it abound. One thing, however, is abundantly clear: Paul understands his suffering through the lens of his location in Christ. Christian suffering is expected (this was the teaching of all the apostles), and was not seen as an aberration or evidence of God’s absence, but rather one’s close association with Christ. The apostles could rejoice when beaten because they were considered worthy to suffer for Christ. After all, if the master suffered, should his servants expect comfort and ease?

Wright points out that: “Paul understands the vocation of the church as being to suffer; he does not arrogate this privilege to himself, as though he were independent of Christ, but rightly sees that it is his precisely because it is Christ’s, and so is he” (93).

As concerns the phrase “what is lacking” it is completely unsatisfactory within the Pauline corpus to suggest that here, in spite of all his writings, he is now confessing a deficiency in the sacrifice of Christ. There are going theories, and none seem to have won the general consensus, but Carson writes: “What is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions. Perhaps a measure of afflictions that had to be completed before Christ would return in glory (Rev 6:9-11). Or ‘what is still lacking’ may refer to Christ’s physical absence (cf. 1 Cor 16:17; Phil 2:30)” (ZSB 2429). You can read through the commentaries and decide which reading you think is best.

As regards Paul’s mentality concerning the Christian’s suffering, is this a common expectation of the church today? Why or why not?

Verse 25:

In verse 25 there are two things that I would like to highlight, and by now we are becoming quite familiar with them from Paul’s writings. First, Paul here again points to the initiative of God. Paul viewed his apostleship as God’s gift to him initiated by God. Paul did not earn the position, nor was he voted in by some legislative body, he was giving the servanthood and stewardship by God.

Second, this gift was given to him “for you.” The prepositional phrase is εἰς ὑμᾶς “towards/for you.” It’s a preposition of purpose. The reason why this gift was given was “for you” and “to make the word of God full(y known).

Verse 26:

Moving to verse 26, tell me, what does Paul mean by “mystery.” Is it something that like a riddle that must be solved? When Paul talks about a “mystery” he is not talking about a case that needs to be solved or riddle, but something that is hidden by God that could only be known if it was revealed by God. This is also the OT and Jewish understanding of the term. In Paul’s writings the mystery is revealed and has its focus in God’s work in Christ. It’s not a secretive thing. It’s revealed and proclaimed. God has taken the initiative in revealing this mystery that only he could reveal.

Verse 27:

The mystery is clearly defined in verse 27. “To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.” The mystery here is Christ “in you.” The “you” here are the Gentile believers in Colossae, and it seems that the essence of the mystery is the presence of Christ among the Gentiles. While the OT clearly taught that the Abrahamic covenant would result in the blessing of all peoples, as your textbook notes: “the manner and time of it were not in the way it was anticipated by the Jews. Thus we witness the early struggles in the church regarding Gentiles becoming Jews before they could become Christians” (Col 1:27).

We saw this same idea evidenced in Eph 3, when Paul said in verse 3 “This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.”

Verse 28:

The message that Paul proclaimed was Christ. This is the focal point, the end all be all, and the foundation of all of the teaching. It was not a “proper system,” a “ten steps to health and wealth,” or anything of the sort. It was the person and work of Christ and the ramification of being located in him.

We should also note the purpose statement that Paul adds to his “warning and teaching.” “In order to present everyone perfect in Christ.” This is right in line with the purpose and design of God’s working in, by, and for Christ. Wright states: “Christ’s design (v. 22) is to ‘present’ his people to God, holy and without reproach. Paul’s aim, derived from this, is that he may present everyone perfect in Christ. The parallel reveals again how closely Paul related God’s purpose and his own vocation. It is because God is at work that Paul is at work” (96).

Then verse 29 makes it very clear that Paul does not take this work lightly. Rather he “labors, agonizing.” The two terms stress the toil with which he discharges the commission given to him, but the rest of the sentence states the means by which he can “agonizingly labor.” He uses the Gk term ἐνέργεια (from which we get the term “energy”), then the verbal form of the same term, and finishes the sentence with the phrase ἐν δυνάμει (by means of power). He labors with the empowering of him who is empowering in him by means of power. We get the idea that he is not resting on his own strength, right? He fulfills the commission only by means of the one who strengthens him (God).

With these two thoughts in mind (working because God is at work, and doing so by means of God’s empowering) how does that change your outlook on ministry?

Verse 1:

Turning to 2:1-5 we are getting to the second half of the “introduction” of Paul to the Colossians. Looking again at how Wright broke this down, vv. 24-29 explained “the nature of his own ministry in Christ; in the second (2:1–5), how this ministry relates to the church in Colossae” (91).

Paul here uses the noun form of the term he already used in verse 29 (I translated it agonizing before). The term derives from the athletic world and refers to a contest in which one struggles (in the sense of fighting and competing). The repetition of the idea is there to enforce in the Colossians minds that, as Wright puts it, “this has been no light task” (98). He makes this clear, not only to them, but also to the Laodiceans and probably all those in the Lycus Valley (which would presumably include Hierapolis, as your textbook pointed out). He struggles for them in the Gospel.

Verse 2:

His purpose for doing so is expressed in verse two. “That their hearts may be encouraged, united together in love, and so that they may have all the riches of full assurance of understanding, for knowledge of the mystery of God, Christ.” The initial purpose is encouragement and unity in love. This second point (unity in love) appears to be something that the Colossians were already progressing towards (as we saw in Paul’s thanksgiving and prayer for them). It also demonstrates Paul’s understanding of the necessity of the body being joined together. As Melick points out: “Christian growth is a group task! The individuals of the church needed each other. The parallels in Eph 3:17 make this clear by employing another metaphor, ‘being rooted and established in love’” (245).

The next purpose of his struggling (competing) for them was that they may have the full riches of complete understanding. This fullness, as your textbook indicates, is further explained in 2:9-15, and it has its focus in the “mystery of God” which is Christ. Christ is the end all be all. If there is anything that adds or subtracts from this message, if there is anything that denies the sufficiency of Christ, then this is devoid of the “full riches of complete understanding.” Thus, as your textbook points out: “When this had been grasped the emptiness of the heresy would be evident” (Col 2:2).

Verse 3:

We ought to read verse 3 in this historical context as well. With some of them apparently being eager to add to genuine hope from that which is hopeless, they were apparently seeking a “wisdom” that was other than that which comes from God, Christ. Christ, however, is the “treasure store of real wisdom and knowledge.” That description in itself invites further exploration on the part of the believers (as N.T. Wright points out 99), so that we would be eager to explore all the more the depths of this storehouse. Why add anything to it, when the depths of this wisdom (Christ) are such to the extent that your entire lifetime could be spent exploring it without exhausting it?

Melick writes: “The people of Colossae were seeking knowledge. However, the heresy threatened to substitute a pseudo-knowledge for the riches of the treasures of wisdom found in Christ. If they were to find real knowledge and, as some taught, salvation through it, they had to find it in a commitment to Christ” 246.

Verse 4:

Paul makes it very clear that the issue here is their temptation to follow these heresies. He states explicitly: “I say this in order that…” “Why am I talking about this, so that you are not deceived by fast talkers.” The idea expressed by the Gk term πιθανολογία is “persuasive speech” or “fine-sounding arguments.” As your textbook notes, this term was used in philosophic “discussions for arguments that lacked certainty…It had to do with persuasive speech, directed the wrong way. But it did sound good, which made it dangerous” (2:4).

Can you think of any examples of this today? Why do these arguments sound good?

Verse 5:

Verse 5 reveals the heart of Paul, that though he is not physically present with them, his location in Christ (as they are located in Christ), gave them a spiritual connection that he took seriously.

The manner in which he describes their Christian conduct suggests that the heresy (if it had actually entered into the church) had not yet had a destructive effect. Some even suggest that the false teachings had not had much effect at all (it was a lurking danger that had thus far been defended against). Melick points out: “(The church) was orderly and firm. Some point out that these are military terms. If so, they suggest the camp was in order, the defenses in place. They had begun well. The combination of terms reveals that the false teaching had not had good success to this point. Now Paul wanted to see their faith develop equally” (246).