Bible Commentaries
Colossians 1

Verses 1-17

II

ANALYSIS, PAUL’S THANKFULNESS AND CHRIST’S PERSON

Colossians 1:1-17.

We now begin to expound Colossians. There are new words in its vocabulary, and especially compound words, suggested by the occasion, which makes exposition in English alone very difficult. The temptation is strong to refer to the Greek text for nice shades of meaning. Remembering, however, that but few of the mass of readers have studied Greek, our endeavor shall be to give the sense of obscure passages as best we can without confusing the mind by references to a language of which so many are ignorant. Moreover, in all matters of importance we may thoroughly rely on getting the best sense by comparison of the several English translations.

First of all we need an analysis of the whole letter, that we may understand, as we progress in exposition, the development of the argument and the relation between its parts. While we find in the several commentaries analyses more or less simple, we will follow throughout the author’s analysis which is as follows:

1. Textual introduction: (Colossians 1:1-14).

(1) Greeting, (Colossians 1:1-2).

(2) Thanksgiving, (Colossians 1:3-8).

(3) Prayer (Colossians 1:9-14).

2. Doctrine of Christ’s Person, (Colossians 1:15-23).

(1) In relation to the Father (Colossians 1:15 a.)

(2) In relation to the material universe and all its intelligences, both human and angelic (Colossians 1:15-17).

3. Parenthetical explanation of the apostle’s mission to the Gentiles and consequent concern for them (Colossians 1:24-2:7).

4. Polemics against false teachers and teaching at Colosse (Colossians 2:8-3:17).

(1) As limiting by a false philosophy the sufficiency of Christ and their completeness in him (Colossians 2:8-15).

(2) Against the folly of this philosophy in accounting for creation, and in defining sin, and in the insufficiency of its means for the conquest of sin, such as, (a) A Pharisaic observance of an obsolete sabbatic ritual; (b) A self-imposed humility; (c) The worship of angels, supposed to be emanations from God, himself unknowable; (d) A bondage to impracticable ascetic precepts based on the idea that sin resided in matter, which precepts were but expressions of will worship and powerless to hedge against temptation or to subdue the passions, or to supply objects high enough to incite to love motives (Colossians 2:16-23).

(3) Against the substitution of a mystic knowledge (Gnosis) as a standard instead of the gospel (Colossians 2:16-23).

(4) But the gospel, on the other hand, raises us with Christ and makes us sharers of his life and exaltation, supplies us with heavenly objects of thought and desire, and pledges our manifestation in glory with Christ (Colossians 3:1-4).

(5) It shows sin to be an evil nature called "the old man," resident in mind, not matter, and expresses itself in fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, covetousness, anger, wrath, malice, railing, shameful speaking (Colossians 3:5-9).

(6) It provides for the real conquest of sin (a) by regeneration, putting off the old man and putting on the new man – a re-creation after the image of God – expressing itself in a heart of compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, forbearance, forgiveness, love; (b) by the process of sanctification through the instrumentality of God’s Word and through spiritual worship in teaching, prayer, and song, and (c) by supplying the dominant motive in all word, deed, or thought, the glory of our Lord (Colossians 3:10-17).

(7) It unifies in Christ all races, nations, and social castes (Colossians 3:11).

5. Exhortations, by way of application (Colossians 3:18-4:6).

(1) To family relations and duties (Colossians 3:18-4:1).

(2) To their spiritual devotions (Colossians 4:2-4).

(3) Their outward walk and speech (Colossians 4:5-6).

6. Personal matters, salutations, and directions (Colossians 4:7-17).

7. Attestation of the letter and benediction (Colossians 4:18).

This outline emphasizes the distinctions between doctrine, polemics, and practice. The Historical Introduction having been given in a previous chapter, we now take up in order the divisions of the text outline.

1. Textual introduction (Colossians 1:1-14). – This introduction consists of the greeting, thanksgiving, and prayer. It is a New Testament method, particularly a Pauline method of commencing a letter. Paul, declaring his apostleship and courteously associating Timothy with himself, addresses the letter, nor formally to the pastor nor indeed to the church, but "to all the saints and faithful brethren in Christ at Colosse." We may infer a reason for this address from the fact that there were at least two churches at Colosse (see Philemon 1:2). We reserve to the close of the exposition an important observation on the plurality of churches in one city, characteristic of Hierapolis also (Colossians 4:15), as we find it to be of Rome (Romans 16:5).

Paul always finds some reason for thanksgiving. Note carefully for what he expresses thanks in this case: "Having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, of the love which ye have toward all the saints, because of the hope which is laid up for you in the heavens." The proof is decisive that Paul himself had not planted the churches in the Lycus valley. He "hears" and "learns" of their faith and love through his disciple, Epaphras, the evangelist, who probably planted these churches (Colossians 4:13). Note that "hope" in Colossians 1:5 is used objectively, meaning the inheritance for which they hoped. It is common with Paul to use words objectively. See an example in Galatians 3:23, "But before faith came," i.e., before Christ, the object of faith, came.

With Paul thankfulness for great blessings glides into prayer for other blessings. Dissatisfied ever with his own attainments, he constantly reaches out to higher things (Philippians 3:10-14) and so would incite them to progress. Note therefore the precise things for which he prays in their behalf: (1) "That ye may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding," (2) "Strengthened with all power, according to the might of his glory;" (3) "Giving thanks." So he prays then for increase of their knowledge and power and thankfulness. They must not be content to stand still. His prayer calls for progress. But mark that each blessing sought is toward a practical end in service and character.

He asks for nothing to be hoarded, nothing for mere enjoyment. The "increased knowledge of his will" must, when received, lead them "to walk worthily of the Lord unto all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work." And so the increased power must be used "unto all patience and longsuffering with joy."

It is worthy of note that all New Testament teaching is on the same line. The constant cry is "forward," "higher," and "excelsior." Not only so, but there is a close and necessary connection between increase of knowledge and increase of growth. On this point Spurgeon’s great sermon on 2 Peter 3:18, "Grow in the grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ," deserves careful study, since he stresses the thought that we grow in the grace by growing in the knowledge. We must know more to be more and do more. The emphatic thought here is that a new convert is but a babe in Christ, able to be nourished only by the "sincere milk of the word," i.e., its simplest truths, and by continued indoctrination in higher truths he attains through fulness of knowledge to maturity of manhood in Christ. Compare Peter’s similar teaching by letter to the same people (1 Peter 2:2). In Ephesians, the companion letter to Colossians, we find the thought greatly amplified and elaborated. (Ephesians 3:11-16).

Later, Paul in the letter to the Hebrews rebukes them for remaining babies: "For when by reason of the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need again that someone teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of solid food. For everyone that partaketh of milk is without experience of the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But solid food is for full-grown men, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil. Wherefore leaving the doctrine of the first principles of Christ, let us press on unto full growth."

This prayer of Paul that the Colossians might have increase of knowledge and spiritual power was most pertinent to their condition as reported by Epaphras. If they had known more of the gospel, they would have been less at the mercy of the false teachers leading them astray with vain philosophy, and if they had attained greater spiritual power they would not have been in danger of falling through weakness. It is the ignorant and undeveloped Christians who support impostors, freaks, and cranks. On this point it might be profitable to read my sermon on "Lambs, Little Sheep, and Sheep."

We need now to consider carefully what things Paul regarded as worthy of thanks in the Colossians. When we study them we understand why Paul prayed that they might be thankful to the Father. Here are the items: (1) "Who made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light." (2) "Who delivered us out of the power of darkness." (3) "Who translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love." (4) "In whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins."

To make "meet" is to make fit or suitable. Adam had a help suitable to him. Heaven is not only a prepared place, but for a prepared people. An unprepared man would not enjoy heaven. It would be hell to him. A wolf hates the light. A sinner of the world, with a mind that is enmity against God and holiness, would hate heaven’s light. Even now we Christians are not fully prepared for heaven. While regeneration has given a holy disposition to our minds so that we love God and approve right things, yet we need the process of sanctification to complete our holiness of spirit, and we further need the resurrection and glorification of our bodies that the whole man may be prepared for the heavenly estate.

The delivery from the power of darkness deserves special thankfulness. As bearing on this, compare Paul’s commission (Acts 26:18), being sent to the Gentiles "to open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in me." Darkness is the realm of Satan and he is its power, as light is the realm of Christ and he is its power. We ought to cultivate thankfulness that we have been rescued from Satan.

In illustration I have sometimes cited this fact of border warfare. A settler’s camp had been surprised by savages. This was the scene when help came: the father was lying across the wagon tongue killed and scalped; a little boy mangled and scalped was hanging in a thorny bush. A painted Indian brute was standing over a helpless girl, his left hand twisted in her golden hair, his right hand brandishing the bloody scalp knife, with the mother kneeling before him pleading for her child. What must have been her thankfulness for the opportune rescue of her girl? But how shall this scene compare in horror with that of a sinner under the power of Satan, led captive at his will toward the pit of darkness where his fetters may be riveted on the victim forever. In the "Three Hours of Darkness," in that devil darkness, Christ on the cross triumphed over Satan and rescued us from his power.

The thankfulness increases on our transfer to the kingdom of the Son of his love. The phrase, "Son of his love," needs explanation. It does not mean the "well beloved Son," for that expresses the Father’s love for the Son. It means that the Son is the representative and depository of the Father’s love toward us. "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life."

The final ground of the thankful spirit which he invokes on the Colossians is "our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins." There can be no more disturbing thought than the exact record of our sins. Books are kept in heaven. Therein is written every evil desire, imagination, thought, word, or deed. This book of the transgressions of the finally impenitent will be opened at the judgment. But just now in the day of mercy our Lord stands with uplifted hands - the nail pierced hands - over that record, and promises to any penitent believing sinner to bring down that hand and blot out the record forever.

I would have the reader lay to heart the solemn fact that we all sin in not cultivating the spirit of thankfulness. We continually pray, "Give! Give! More! More!" and show not due appreciation of what we receive.

This binders the efficiency of our prayers. God more freely gives to the thankful. I recall an incident in my own life. Once I spent a half-hour impressing on my mind, item by item, the grounds of gratitude in this passage, and was surprised to realize its instant effect on my own state. I was blue when I commenced and happy when I finished. The fruit ripened at once in my own heart, and I was conscious of great unction and power in prayer. We come now to the second division of our outline:

2. The doctrine of Christ’s person (Colossians 1:15-23). – This doctrine is presented here in three relations – to the Father, to the material universe with all its intelligences, and to the church. This passage has been a battleground of controversy for ages. "What think ye of Christ?" has ever been a touchstone question. Let us consider Christ’s person in each relation.

(1) In relation to the Father. The words expressing this relation are few: "Who is the image of the invisible God." "Image" and "invisible" stand over against each other, "image" meaning that which may be seen, "invisible" that which may not be seen. So that, as it were, we might read, "Who is the visible of the invisible God." Compare Hebrews 1:3: "Who being the effulgence [shining forth] of his glory and the very image of his substance." Compare John’s expression, "God manifest." Compare his mission to "reveal the Father." Compare his reply to Philip: "Lord, show us the Father and it sufficeth us. Jesus said unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and dost thou not know me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father. How sayest thou, Show us the Father?" And particularly Philippians 2:6: "Existing in the form of God." This makes "image" equal to John’s declaration, "The Logos was God," i.e., essential deity in nature.

(2) In relation to the universe with all its created intelligences. Here we have six strong expressions: (a) First-born of all creation; (b) creation was in him; (c) creation was through him; (d) creation was unto him; (e) he was before all things; (f) by him all things consist.

The Arians in later days contended that "firstborn of all creation" meant that he was the first to be created, as "firstborn from the dead" in Colossians 1:18 means the first to be raised from the dead. This, of course, denies his essential deity and eternity of being, since it makes him a mere creature. To the Arian interpretation we must oppose (a) the fact that it is not consistent with the five other strong terms of the context. (b) In the original there is a difference of construction between "firstborn of creation" and "firstborn from the dead." (c) It is out of harmony with the corresponding passages in John and in the letter to the Hebrews. When creation is said to be "in him," "through him," and "unto him" and "consists by him," and "He was before all created things and beings," we cannot count him a creature. The reader must note the great force of the prepositions, "in," "through" and "unto." "In him" denotes source, potentiality, as in John, "In him was light, in him the life," denoting origin, source, fountain. "Through him" denotes the creative act, "Unto him" the creative end or purpose. "Consisting by him" denotes the standing, or continued preservation concerning all the powers of providence. As Lightfoot puts it, "He is the source of the life, the center of its development, the mainspring of all its motions." The reader will note the Arian false interpretation of Philippians 2:6-7, in the exposition of that letter.

In view of the Colossian heresy we should particularly note the sweeping statement, "In the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers," and should compare the teaching in Hebrews on the infinite distinction between Christ and the angels. "Firstborn" in Colossians 1:15 must refer back to its ancient meaning, expressing sovereignty, heirship, as primal head and Lord. It has been well said, "The idea of the Son of God being a part of creation was foreign to Paul’s mind and to the thought of his day." Words cannot be formed to express the idea of essential deity if the words of John and Paul do not express the deity of the Son of God who was manifested and became flesh in order to our redemption.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the difficulty of exposition in this letter?

2. Give the author’s analysis.

3. What distinction emphasized in the outline?

4. Of what does the textual introduction consist?

5. To whom is it addressed, and why?

6. What is the ground of Paul’s thanksgiving here?

7. What is the meaning of "hope" in Colossians 1:5?

8. Itemize Paul’s prayer for them.

9. What is the relation of knowledge and growth?

10. What is Paul’s rebuke to the Hebrews?

11. What is the application to the Colossians?

12. What things did Paul consider worthy of thanksgiving?

13. What is the meaning of "meet" in Colossians 1:12? Illustrate.

14. What is the meaning of "delivered us out of the power of dark- ness" in Colossians 1:13? Illustrate.

15. What is the meaning of "Son of His love?"

16. What is the greatest blessing for which we should be thankful to God?

17. What three relations of the person of Christ?

18. What expresses his relation to the Father?

19. With what scriptures should this be compared?

20. Sum up all these in one sentence.

21. On his relation to the universe, answer: (1) What the Arian contention relative to "firstborn of all creation," and upon what scripture is this interpretation based? (2) What the threefold reply to this contention? (3) What the meaning of "creation was in him"? (4) What the meaning of "creation was through him"? (5) What the meaning of "creation unto him?" (6) What the meaning of "He was before all things?" (7) What the meaning of "By him all things consist"?

22. On Colossians 1:16, "Thrones, dominions, principalities, powers," answer: (1) Are angels referred to? (2) Do the terms express a hierarchy, i.e., a graded order of angels? (3) Does the apostle express his belief in a hierarchy of angels?

23. Then what is the meaning of "firstborn of all creation"?

Verses 18-22

III

CHRIST’S RELATION TO THE CHURCH

Colossians 1:18-22.

Before taking up this chapter proper let us review briefly the doctrinal part of the previous chapter. We stopped at Colossians 1:17, and the special points made were that Christ in his relation to the Father was the image or visible of God invisible. The term "image" was further carefully explained in this context, being interpreted by the subsequent qualifications that creation was "in him," "through him" "unto him" and "consisting by him," and he was "before all things." All these expressions were in turn carefully explained in their own context and compared with the parallel passages in John’s Gospel and Revelation, in Hebrews and Philippians, and their bearing on the essential deity of Christ was pointed out, together with their pertinence to the prevalence of the heresy at Colosse. We should especially fix clearly and definitely in our minds the meaning of the words "image," "firstborn," "consist," and the force of the prepositions "in," "through," "unto" and "before."

This chapter, commencing at Colossians 1:18, considers Christ’s relation to the church expressed in the figure of a head and body. Whenever this figure (a common one with Paul) is employed, the church is conceived of as an organism, a much stronger term than organization, but by that very fact emphasizing the inherent, essential idea of organization in the word "church." The word "head" implies not only sovereignty but rule, the source of the body’s life and growth through vital connection with it. In every sense of the word "church," Christ is the head. He is the head of every particular church in which alone the institution expresses itself, and he is the head of the prospective church in glory, whose constituent elements, or component parts, will be the whole number of the elect saved by him.

The only sense in which the church in the third meaning above now exists, is in the gathering and preparing of material, which, when all is gathered and fully prepared, will be constructively fitted together as an everlasting habitation of the Holy Spirit. The time and circumstances of the constitution of the universal, or glory church, with every orderly step leading thereto, are as clearly set forth as in the case of any particular church here on earth: (1) Jesus will come in glory, (Matthew 25:31); (2) he will bring with him the spirits of the Just made perfect, (1 Thessalonians 4:14); (3) will raise and glorify their bodies, (1 Thessalonians 4:16) ; (4) will change, or transfigure, living Christians, (1 Thessalonians 4:17; and 1 Corinthians 15:51-54); (5) will separate Christians from sinners, (Matthew 25:32-33); (6) will present the church to himself as a glorified bride, (Ephesians 5:27; Revelation 21:2; Revelation 21:9; Revelation 19:7-9); (7) infilling of the finished temple by the Holy Spirit, (Revelation 21:3). This church when constituted, will be a local, visible, organized assembly. It is as yet only a concept to become an actuality, a plan of the architect according to which he continually works in order ultimately to a finished house, a purpose of the divine mind conceived of as fulfilled, because with him the end is present as well as the beginning.

It is every way important that the reader should have clear ideas of the several meanings of the word "church," set forth above, and be able to determine from the context which one of the meanings is employed in any particular passage. While this is essential to a right interpretation of the word where ever it is used in the New Testament, it is emphatically so in Colossians and Ephesians which, while employing the word in all its meanings, especially stress the third meaning. Full discussion of this matter will be reserved to the exposition of Ephesians whose usage is much more extended and elaborate. And I say in advance that whoever can expound the word "church" in Colossians and Ephesians is a past master in exegesis so far as that term is concerned.

We find next the expression: "Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead." There is here a relation between "the beginning" and the "firstborn from the dead." The two expressions seem to be in apposition, the second modifying or defining the first. That is, Christ is called the beginning from the dead in that he was the first-born from the dead. He had the preeminence in relation to the creation, as has been set forth, and the preeminence in relation to the church, just expressed, so must he now have pre-eminence in relation to the dead, being the beginning or first-born from the dead. Thus it pleased the Father that in him ail the fulness should dwell – fulness as to being God’s image, fulness as to creation, fulness as to the church, fulness as to the resurrection.

On the meaning of "firstborn from the dead" the question of fact has been raised: Was the resurrection of Christ absolutely the first one in history? We must say, "Yes, absolutely." Elsewhere he is called "the firstfruits of them that are asleep." It has been objected that Lazarus and others were raised from the dead. But all these were but restorations to life under the old conditions. The bodies were not glorified. They were yet subject to mortality, weakness, dishonor, and corruption. They all died again. In Christ’s case he rose to die no more. There was complete and final triumph over the grave. "I was dead, and behold, I am alive for evermore." Again, it has been objected that Moses, who certainly died and was buried, was seen alive on the Mount of Transfiguration. Yes, but was not alive in the body. The Jewish myth of the assumption of the body of Moses is as false as the later papal myth of the assumption of the body of the virgin Mary. The bodies of Moses and of Mary are yet "Mouldering in the ground." Elijah, indeed, was bodily visible on the Mount to Peter, James, and John, but Elijah, like Enoch, was translated that he should not see death. The disciples were illumined to see Moses in the spirit as well as Elijah in the body. The purpose of the transfiguration is defeated if we interpret that Moses was there bodily. The transfiguration scene was designed, at least in part, to give a miniature representation of the second coming of Christ, as follows: (1) When he comes he will come in glory (Christ was there seen glorified). (2) When he comes living Christians will be glorified without death. Elijah represented that class. (3) When he comes he will raise the dead. Moses represented the class to be raised. So that the transfiguration scene imaged in miniature the power and majesty of the second advent. John so understood it, for he testifies: "We beheld his glory, as the glory of the only begotten from the Father" (John 1:14). Peter so understood it, for he testifies: "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eye-witnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there was borne such a voice to him by the majestic glory, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased: and this voice we ourselves heard borne out of heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount" (2 Peter 1:16-18). He had said, "There are some of them that stand here who shall in no wise taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom" (Matthew 16:28). Or, as Mark puts it: "Till they see the kingdom of God come with power" (Mark 9:1). Or, as Luke puts it: "Till they see the kingdom of God."

Matthew prefaced his statement with the words: "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels," thus showing that the kingdom they would be enabled to see before death was not the kingdom in any of its earthly aspects, but the glory kingdom as his second advent. The promise finds no fulfilment except on the Mount of Transfiguration, and both Peter and John declare it to be a vision of Christ in glory as at his second advent. Hence to represent Moses as having already risen from the dead destroys the completeness of the Transfiguration imagery to represent all the power and majesty of the second advent.

Again it has been objected that some of the saints rose from the dead at the moment Christ died on the cross. This objection misreads the scripture, which says, "And the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised; and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many" (Matthew 27:52-53). Let us not balk at the doctrine. It is fundamental. Christ is the first-born from the dead. In that old English classic, The Spectator, is an article by Addison entitled, "The Vision of Mizra." In this vision Mizra sees a flowing river whose source and exit are hidden in clouds, but across the section visible is a bridge over which pours the tide of successive generations. The bridge is sadly out of repair, and so, sooner or later, each passing pilgrim drops through some crevice into the river below and is swept away into the impenetrable darkness which veils its exit. The vision was designed to teach that unaided human philosophy can neither discover the origin of life nor the destiny to which death bears us. Shakespeare also represents death as "that bourne from which no traveler has ever returned." Like the tracks of the animals which visited the sick lion in the cave, they could all be seen going in, but none could be seen coming out. So was death a dark realm until Jesus was raised and brought life and immortality to light. He is the one traveler who has returned from death and for us flashes light on its secrets. He tells of the state of disembodied spirits, good and bad, of his coming advent in glory, bringing with him the souls of the saints in heaven and dragging to him the souls of the wicked in hell, and the general resurrection of both the just and the unjust, the reunion of long severed souls and bodies, the general judgment of all, and the final state of the just and the unjust.

All this is pledged in his own resurrection. He is declared to be the Son of God with power by his resurrection. Or, as the psalmist puts it: "This day have I begotten thee," referring to the demonstrations of his sonship by the resurrection. Just here it is important to note that what we call the second advent will be really the third. When he suffered on the cross his spirit left this world and went to the Father. There, as high priest, he made the atonement behind the veil by sprinkling his own blood on the mercy seat in the true holy of holies. On the third day he returned to earth for his risen body, and this was his second advent. So "when he bringeth his only begotten again into the world, he said, Let all the angels of God worship him" (Hebrews 1:6). His first advent was to assume by incarnation the body of his humiliation. This was when he was born of Mary. His second advent was when he returned from heaven to assume his body of glory. This was when he was born by the resurrection. His third advent will be when he comes to assume his mystical body – the church – and to judge the world.

This is a great doctrine – a multiform doctrine – the resurrection of Christ. It is the one sign of his divinity and the one pledge of our glory. As a historical fact it is attested by witnesses. John says, "That which we have seen with our eyes, heard with our ears, and handled with our hands – that we declare unto you." He himself said, "A spirit hath not flesh and bones, such as ye see me have – handle me and see." Luke said, "He showed himself alive after his passion, by many infallible proofs."

The church, with all its officers and ordinances, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is the witness through the ages to his last advent that Jesus is alive – he was dead, but is alive forevermore. Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers are all witnesses to this one great pivotal fact – that Jesus is risen indeed. Baptism is a witness to the same fact whenever administered in font, pool, flowing stream, lake, gulf, sea, or ocean. It memorializes all spectators on earth, in hell, in heaven, that Christ is risen, is alive, is exalted to be the head of the church, and head over all things to the church. The Lord’s Supper testifies that he died for our sins, but is alive now, and points its finger of triumphant hope to his last advent, for "as oft as ye do this ye show forth the Lord’s death till he come."

Both all preeminence and all fulness are vested in Christ. So is the Father’s good pleasure. That there are heights and depths in this thought seldom realized by the profoundest Bible students will appear as we examine the next thought, the thought of reconciliation and its scope. Mark the text: "And through him to reconcile all things unto himself . . . whether things upon the earth or things in the heavens." Or, as the thought is more broadly expressed in Philippians 2:10, "That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of beings in heaven, beings on earth, and beings under the earth."

In some real sense the atonement made by Christ in the holy of holies in heaven, based upon his expiation on the cross, will touch either to save, confirm, or subdue every angel in heaven or hell, every man, saint, or sinner. The saints it saves, the good angels it confirms, bad men and demons it subdues, so that they ground arms of active rebellion, and in receipt of final punishment and chains show that the war against God is over forever, and the whole universe is pacified.

Throughout the universe the authority of God is forever established. The kingdoms of this evil world have become the kingdom of Christ; Satan’s kingdom is overturned; the earth itself is redeemed unto the liberty of the children of God; death and Hades are cast into the lake of fire, and even Gehenna itself shall float no flag of rebellion. There is no more conspiring or fighting against God. Gehenna’s inmates, men and demons, in everlasting punishment, endure, but resist no more. All things through Christ are in this way reconciled. As when a victorious army marches through a revolting province, disperses all armed companies, captures all strongholds, receives the surrender of all antagonists, rescues and rewards all the loyal, expels, confines, and punishes all the disloyal.

Angels and men finally lost are not merely conquered in the sense that they surrender and are by banishment and confinement debarred from future revolt, but they are forced to see and publicly acknowledge on bended knee that Christ is King and their punishment is just.

More than this: Because angels were appointed to be ministering spirits to man, who was made originally "lower than the angels," Satan, through pride, revolted. He was unwilling to be subordinate to the lower creature – man. This was the origin of sin in heaven, and led to Satan’s being cast out from heaven with his fellow apostates. Hence his hatred of man and his purpose through temptation to alienate him from God and thereby destroy him, and thus defeat the purpose of God in subordinating him to man. This led to sin on earth, and thus man passed under bondage to Satan with the earth, his home.

But Jesus, the Second man, was appointed to destroy the devil and his works. On the cross of expiation he triumphed over Satan, making a show of him openly, despoiling principalities and powers as we see further on in this letter. Through his consequent exaltation to the throne of the universe, he makes all things work together for good toward the consummation described above. Now the unfallen angels were yet on probation. They did not follow Satan, but it remained to be seen if they would actually become ministering spirits to the human heirs of salvation achieved by Christ’s expiation. If they did so become, then they would be confirmed and so lose all liability to fall, and thus things in heaven would be reconciled. When the saints at Christ’s advent sit with him on his glory throne they will "judge angels." Their testimony of help received vindicates and confirms the unfallen angels. The fallen angels who fell trough unwillingness to be under man are now brought before men to be judged. Think of it! Peter and Job judging Satan! When Satan and his angels thus bow the knee to redeemed and glorified humanity, confess their sovereignty, and receive sentence of punishment from them and go away into everlasting confinement, the war is over and all things are reconciled. What a pity that Milton in his great epic, Paradise Lost, so misconceived the reason of Satan’s rebellion! And what a greater pity that in his feebler epic, Paradise Regained, he stops at Christ’s resistance to Satan’s temptation, so very short of the cross. But Milton, in more points than one, was a very unsound theologian.

This letter to the Colossians transcends all other scriptures in its comprehensive grasp of the atonement. Very clearly it shows that the cross is the keystone of the arch, the hinge on which swings open every door of revelation. No wonder its author could say elsewhere: "I determined to know nothing among you but the cross. God forbid that I should glory save in the cross, and if an angel from heaven should preach any other gospel, let him be anathema."

We thus see that Christ’s first advent was to assume the body of his humiliation and in it to make expiation on the cross, followed by his making the atonement, or reconciliation in heaven, where, for this purpose, his spirit went immediately after his death, and this, in turn, followed by his second advent to earth for his risen or glorified body, and this followed by his ascension, soul and body, to the throne of the universe, and this followed by his sending of his vicar, the Holy Spirit, to accredit, endue, and abide with his church, and this followed by his reign in heaven and the Spirit’s reign on earth in the church, and this followed by his third advent to assume his mystical body, the glorified church, and this followed by the final judgment, and this followed by the Spirit-filled glorified church, descending to occupy the now purified and redeemed earth, not only completes the story of reconciliation, or purification of the universe, but shows how the reconciliation severally touches all beings and things, saving saints, confirming good angels, subduing and forever expelling evil angels and men, so that in all his holy mountain there is nothing left to offend, to make afraid, to awaken tears, or to incite to pain, sickness, or death.

But while all this presents reconciliation in its general aspects, we need to consider it, as does Paul, in its special relation to the Colossians. Reconciliation implies previous alienation. Sin alienated God from men and men from God. Christ is the mediator who brings the two together. The ground of his mediation is his sacrificial and vicarious death. This satisfies the punitive demands of the law, and so propitiates or placates toward God. The offering of the blood of the sacrifice by Christ as high priest, in the holy of holies in heaven, reconciles God. The reconciliation of men to God is effected by the ministry of the gospel, savingly applied by the Holy Spirit. Accordingly Paul says in our text: "And you, being in times past alienated and enemies in your mind and in your evil works, yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh, through death, to present you holy and without blemish and unreprovable before him."

The last clause shows not only the end of reconciliation, but indicates that their salvation involves more than justification. Not only must the penal sanctions of the law be satisfied, but they must be internally fitted for presentation to God. That is, not only saved from guilt and condemnation of sin, but also from its dominion in their hearts and lives. This makes the doctrine of reconciliation intensely practical. It involves regeneration, sanctification, and glorification. The presentation of the redeemed in the completeness of salvation is a definite and official transaction. Indeed, it is compared to a marriage. We are engaged or betrothed to Christ by faith here in time. Paul says: "I have espoused you to Christ as a chaste virgin." The marriage comes later. The bride must be made ready for the husband. This marriage takes place when our Lord comes again. In the accompanying letter to the Ephesians the thought is amplified, closing thus: "That he might present the church unto himself a glorious church, not having a spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."

The grandest scene of time or eternity will be this presentation of the redeemed considered as a unit, a bride, glorious in her apparel. So in the apocalypse John saw and heard: "And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunders, saying, Hallelujah: for the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigneth. Let us rejoice and be exceeding glad, and let us give the glory unto him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And it was given unto her that she should array herself in fine linen, bright and pure; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they that are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb" (Revelation 19:6-9).

Reconciliation is therefore a call to holiness. Let not Baptist preachers skip this "if" of Paul’s: "If so be that ye continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel." A transient faith is not the faith of the gospel. Any professed regeneration that does not move on toward sanctification is not true regeneration. It was not the purpose of God to imitate human rulers who, when exercising power, turn loose a criminal on society. "Whom God justifies, them he sanctifies and glorifies."

QUESTIONS

1. How is Christ’s relation to the church expressed?

2. What is the conception of the church in the use of this figure?

3. What does the word "head" imply?

4. In what senses of the word "church" is Christ the head?

5. In what sense only does the glory church now exist?

6. What the time and circumstances of the constitution of the glory church? (State this in seven orderly steps.)

7. When so constituted, what will be the nature of this glory church?

8. Which meanings of the word "church" are employed in Colossians and Ephesians?

9. What is the relation between "the beginning" & the "firstborn from the dead"?

10. What do they mean?

11. What question of fact raised here?

12. What its answer?

13. Explain, then, the cases of Lazarus, Moses, and Elijah, and their bearing on the transfiguration.

14. Give proof that the transfiguration gave a miniature representation of Christ’s second advent.

15. What a second objection and its answer?

16. What is the vision of Mizra?

17. What is it designed to teach?

18. Explain his several advents, and the purpose of each.

19. What is the one sign of Christ’s divinity & the one pledge of our glory?

20. What are the witnesses to the fact that Jesus is alive?

21. What is the scope of Christ’s reconciliation? Explain fully.

22. Give an account of the origin of sin: (1) By whom originated? (2) Where? (3) The cause? (4) The result?

23. Who was appointed to destroy the works of the devil, and when was it accomplished?

24. What is the position of the unfallen angels now?

25. What is the position, of the saints at the judgment?

26. What vital mistake in Milton’s Paradise Lost? In Paradise Regained?

27. In what does this letter transcend all other scriptures, and what the keystone of the arch of revelation?

28. On reconciliation in its special relation to the Colossians answer: (1) What does it imply? (2) Who the mediator? (3) What the ground of reconciliation? (4) How effected? (5) How applied?

29. Show that salvation involves more than justification, and that reconciliation is intensely practical.

30. Compare the redeemed to a bride.

31. Describe the scene when the bride shall be presented to her husband.

32. What is, therefore, the call of reconciliation?

33. Give the clause following Paul’s "if."

34. What are the evidences of real faith?

IV

CHRIST’S RELATION TO THE FATHER AND THE UNIVERSE

Colossians 1:23-2:7.

This chapter commences with a question based on the King James Version of Colossians 1:23: "Which was preached to every creature which is under heaven." In my younger days the Hard Shell Baptists used this passage to prove that the commission in Mark 16:15-18, commanding to "preach the gospel to every creature" was literally and finally fulfilled by the apostles to whom alone it was given. They supported their contention by citing the fact that the "signs" in Mark 16:17-18, which were to accompany and confirm missionary work had long since failed, and therefore missions were ended; that the "signs" were a part of the commission, and whoever now claimed authority to do mission work under that commission must show the signs or stand convicted of imposture. I used to press this point on Missionary Baptist preachers to see how they would answer it. Finally one of them passed the question back to me, "You are a Missionary Baptist yourself – how do you answer it?" My reply was this:

1. Mark 16:15-18 must be construed with Matthew 28:18-20. The perpetuity of the Matthew commission appears from "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world," and from the fact that the "make disciples of all nations" is co-extensive with "teaching them to observe all things, etc.," which Hard Shells themselves admit to be binding now.

2. Even after Paul had written, "which was preached to every creature which is under heaven," he himself went right on in the mission work and commanded others to do the same, which examples prove the continuity and perpetuity of the commission. So also does Peter, as appears from his letters written after Paul wrote Colossians. And so, also, does John. See particularly the letter to Gaius long after Colossians, in which John commends Gaius for helping the missionaries and condemns the Hard Shell – Diotrephes, (vv. 6-10).

3. We must look to the apostle in subsequent teaching to learn if the "signs" are always to accompany the mission work, or are to cease when their accrediting purpose is accomplished (1 Corinthians 13:8; 1 Corinthians 13:13).

4. The accuracy of the King James Version of Colossians 1:23 is questionable. The revision thus renders Mark 16:15, "Preach the gospel to the whole creation," and renders Colossians 1:23, "which was preached in all creation under heaven." Compare Romans 10:18.

5. Whatever the rendering, the Hard Shell interpretation is manifestly erroneous. The gospel must be preached to all the world, generation by generation, and not merely to one generation. The church, as the pillar and ground of the truth, must continue to instruct the angels in the manifold wisdom of God until Jesus comes (Ephesians 3:10) and must, by its mission work, exhibit the glory of God throughout all generations (Ephesians 3:21). Ephesians was written after Colossians.

6. Paul was operating under a direct commission given subsequently to the one in Matthew 28 and Mark 16, (see Acts 9:15; Acts 22:14-21; Acts 26:16-18), and transmitted to others the carrying on of the same mission work (2 Timothy 2:2).

The next item in the analysis is the parenthetical explanation of the apostle’s mission to the Gentiles, and his consequent concern for these Colossians. That item of the analysis extends from Colossians 1:24-2:7. He is expounding here the object of his mission to the Gentiles.

We recall that when Paul was so long a time at Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of Asia, in which were these Lycus valley cities, that representatives from this Lycus valley attended these meetings, among whom were Philemon and Epaphras, of Colosse, who were both converted. And while he himself at the time of this great meeting, did not personally visit these Lycus valley cities, those who were converted by him did visit them and plant the gospel there; so the establishment of the churches there was indirectly attributable to him, and so he would have an interest in them.

But apart from that fact, he was the Christ-appointed missionary to the Gentiles, and they were mostly Gentiles. In this valley there were some Jews. The population was blended. While ethnologically most of them were Phrygians, they were a mixed people; some were Jews, some Greeks, and some Romans. But he was concerned because the whole Gentile mission had been turned over to him, as to Peter and the other apostles was given the mission to the Jews. So we note when Peter writes a letter to these very people later, he confines himself to the Jewish inhabitants, thus: "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the elect who are sojourners of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." While Peter writes to the elect of the sojourners of the dispersion – to the dispersed Jews – Paul writes as an apostle to the Gentiles. What is the difference between the "to whom" that Paul wrote and the "to whom" that Peter wrote? Paul wrote as an apostle to the Gentiles, and the whole cast of his letter is Gentilic. Peter wrote to the Jews of the dispersion, and the whole cast of his letter is Jewish. So then, because Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, it is a matter of concern to him that they should take on false doctrine.

I call attention to some expressions in Colossians 1:24. He says, "I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and fill up on my part that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church." Did Dr. Gordon in his book on the Spirit rightly interpret that passage, "I fill up on my part that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ"? Or does Paul’s suffering have anything to do with Christ’s sacrificial suffering, in order to the salvation of man? Or does he mean that his sufferings supplement the nonsacrificial sufferings of Christ? Some of Christ’s sufferings were for our example and others were not. As proof I cite 1 Peter 2:20: "For what glory is it, if, when ye sin, and are buffeted for it, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye shall take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow in his steps." So we may now follow the example of Christ’s sufferings, except that expiatory part, and our sufferings may supplement his sufferings except that expiatory part. There we cannot come in. Those who deny the substitutionary or vicarious expiation of Christ are accustomed to quote this passage from Peter and this passage from Paul to show that the sufferings of Christ were merely martyr sufferings, not unlike Paul’s martyr sufferings and Peter’s, and serve merely as an example of patience, and that they had no expiatory nature. It is necessary to emphasize this point as to the distinction between what he did as a vicarious sacrifice for sinners and the ordinary sufferings of Christ, such as we and all of his people participate in. He himself refers to this when he says, "If the world hateth you, ye know that it hath hated me before it hated you. If ye were of this world, the world would love its own; but because ye are not of this world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, A servant is not greater than his lord. If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also.”

In Colossians 1:26 we have a word that needs explanation. What does Paul mean by "mystery"? He says, "I was made a minister according to the dispensation of God, which was given me to you-ward, to fulfil the word of God, even the mystery which hath been hid for ages and generations, but now hath been manifested to his saints." What is this mystery? He explains it in the next verse: "To whom God was pleased to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles." In the letter to the Ephesians he elaborates on that mystery this way: "Wherefore remember that once ye, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called Circumcision, in the flesh, made by hands; that ye were at that time separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus ye that once were afar off are made nigh in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who made both one, and brake down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; that he might create in himself of the two one new man, so making peace; and might reconcile them both in one body unto God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: and he came and preached peace to you that were far off, and peace to them that were nigh: for through him we both have access in one Spirit unto the Father. So then ye are no more strangers and sojourners, but ye are fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God" (Ephesians 2:11-19).

The mystery then was this – that in the beginning of the human race God had purposed not to make any discrimination between people, and salvation was to be as free to one nation as to another and that in electing the Jews and isolating them from all other people, it was not done because they were better than other people, nor was it done to confer special grace upon them, but simply to make them the depository of his truth for the time being, which in the fulness of time would include all the human race. This is the mystery. But the Jews supposed that God was partial to them – that they were not merely the custodians of revelation for all mankind, but that between them and the Gentiles there was a wall that could not be broken down. They would stand up on that wall, glorying in their sanctity, and saying to outsiders, "You dogs! Don’t touch me! I am holier than you!" They carried that so far that they would go home from the crowded streets, immerse themselves, and wash their clothes to remove possible defilement by contact with a Gentile. Paul does not use the word "mystery" in the sense that what he now reveals is mysterious, but that his revelation makes clear what was once a mystery – that the purpose of grace for the whole human race was veiled in the Old Testament times but unveiled in New Testament times.

So John, in Revelation, talking about the scarlet woman, says that she is "mystery," meaning that for the time being the truth was veiled under a symbol. The symbol was a woman dressed in scarlet, sitting upon a beast. All Bible critics confront the question, What is the meaning of "mystery" in the New Testament? It has several meanings. The context determines in each case. Paul in a letter to Timothy says, "Confessedly, great is the mystery of godliness," and then gives all the elements of that mystery of godliness, commencing, "God made manifest in the flesh."

In Colossians 2:2 he says, "That their hearts may be comforted, they being knit together in love and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, that they may know the mystery of God, even Christ." The idea is that God, out of Christ, is a mystery, unknowable, but in Christ he is declared and the mystery solved.

Consider also that word "assurance." We have three samples of its use: We have faith and the assurance of faith. We have hope and the assurance of hope. We have understanding and the assurance of understanding. There is a distinction between a man’s simple faith in Christ and the assurance of that faith. Faith, hope, and understanding are all objective, in that they go out of us and take hold of an external object. But assurance is subjective. It does not raise a question concerning the merits of the object of faith, but rather the question, Do I really believe? So with hope and understanding. Hope looks to certain things reserved in heaven; assurance of hope is a kind of certificate to a person that thoroughly satisfies him that his hopes are well grounded.

These Gentiles did not understand that the gate of salvation was to be just as wide open to them as to the Jews. When they took hold of it they took hold of it timidly. So Paul says, "I want you to get full assurance of understanding that you are entitled to this – that God meant you just as much as he meant a Jew." We see that if the Gentiles could reach full assurance of understanding that they were entitled to salvation under the same law and the same terms as the Jew, then Judaizing teachers could not subvert them, could not shake them by saying, "You must be circumcised in order to be saved." The reply would be, "I have an understanding of that matter, and I have full assurance of the understanding, and I know that I do not have to become a Jew in order to be saved."

So Paul continues in Colossians 2:4: "This I say that no one may delude you with persuasive speech." That is exactly what was taking place there. There was a false teacher in Colosse who was endeavoring to make proselytes to his philosophy, and one part of that philosophy was that they must observe all sabbatic rituals, whether the seventh-day sabbath, monthly sabbath, or annual sabbath. That is precisely the point that this false teacher was trying to make. Paul says to these Gentiles, "I have a deep concern for you, and I want to lead you into a clear practical understanding of this gospel, lest somebody come and delude you with persuasive speech."

In Colossians 2:6 we have another variation of the same thought: "As therefore ye received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him." In other words, "You received him by simple faith, without conformity to Jewish ritual; continue as you commenced." Compare Galatians 3:1-3, "O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set forth crucified? This only would I learn from you: Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are ye now perfected in the flesh?"

He continues the assurance thought: "Rooted and builded up in him and established in your faith, even as ye were taught." Those three words, "rooted," "builded up" and "established" contain the thought he was trying to impress: "I want you to be so well indoctrinated that you cannot be turned aside by specious error."

The same thought prevails in his letter to the Ephesians in his prayer, Colossians 3:4-19: "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, that he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, that ye may be strengthened with power through his Spirit in the inward man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; to the end that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may be strong to apprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which passeth knowledge, that ye may be filled unto all the fulness of God." That is one denomination and another – between justification and longer emphasize doctrine. We would be amazed if we were to call up our entire church membership, and as each one comes up begin to catechize to see if every member was thoroughly indoctrinated in the faith once for all delivered to the saints. Many of them cannot discriminate between one denomination and another – between justification and sanctification. Herein the Presbyterians excel the Baptists – in the use of the catechism.

Where a church has been faithfully ministered unto by a pastor who selects, not high sounding texts whose mere sound led him to the selection, but who has from his deliberate conviction preached from the themes that they needed for their rooting and grounding and establishment in faith, that man will have an indoctrinated church. But there is a class of wishy-washy, "milk and cider" preachers who would rather say it does not make any difference what one believes if the heart is all right; it does not make any difference how he is baptized; they do not care whether he is a member of the church or not. That class of preachers raise up congregations to become the prey of any evangelical tramp or crank. Such an ill-trained congregation does not make even good militia, much less veteran soldiers.

To illustrate: Recently a Boston Baptist preacher, moderator of an association, published in The Baptist Watchman a full four-page article that would degenerate a vertebrate into a jelly fish. He denies that baptism is a prerequisite to church membership, denies that a church has anything whatever to do with receiving members or judging of their qualifications, affirms that when a man believes it automatically makes him a member of the church, prefers to make baptism essential to salvation rather than essential to church membership. In a word, the whole article is made up of "airy nothings" without a stalwart thought in it. The wonder is how that man ever got into a Baptist church. It must have been automatically, for no true Baptist church, if it had been consulted, would have received him.

To illustrate again: One day a man called at my house who denied that a church was either an assembly or an organization at all, saying that it was merely a living community. God help us when such jellyfish views about the church are taught by those in authority!

Two parts of this letter are of transcendently great importance. One is the doctrine and the other is this part – the fourth item of the analysis. Let us look at what the analysis says:

Polemics against the false teacher and teachings at Colosse (Colossians 2:8-3:17).

(1) As limiting by a false philosophy the sufficiency of Christ and their completeness in him.

(2) Polemics against the folly of this philosophy in accounting for creation, and in defining sin, and in the insufficiency of its means for conquest of sin, such as (a) a Pharisaic observance of an obsolete sabbatic ritual, (b) a self-imposed humility, (c) the worship of angels, supposed to be emanations from God, himself unknowable, (d) a bondage to impracticable ascetic precepts based on the idea that sin resides in matter, which precepts were but expressions of will worship and powerless to hedge against temptation or to subdue the passions, or to supply objects high enough to incite to love motives.

(3) Against its substitution of a mystic knowledge ("gnosis") as a standard instead of the gospel (Colossians 2:16-23).

(4) But the gospel on the other hand raises us with Christ and makes us sharers of his life and exaltation, supplies us with heavenly objects of thought and desire, and pledges our manifestation in glory with Christ (Colossians 3:1-4).

(5) It shows sin to be an awful nature called the "old man," resident in mind, not matter, and expresses itself in fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, covetousness, anger, wrath, malice, railing, shameful speaking (Colossians 3:5-9).

(6) It provides for the real conquest of sin by regeneration puts off the old man and puts on the new man, a recreation after the image of God, expressing itself in a heart of compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, forbearance, forgiveness, love, and by the sanctifying instrumentality of God’s word, and by spiritual worship, in teaching, prayer, and song, and by supplying the dominant motives in all word, deed or thought, the glory of God (Colossians 3:10-17).

(7) It glorifies in Christ all races, nations, social castes (Colossians 3:11).

There was a false teacher, not teachers – it was one person. We do not know who, but there was one prominent man there in the Lycus valley who possessed and held this false philosophy. This philosophy was partly Pharisaic in its adherence to the sabbatic ritual, and partly of the Essenes in its ascetic teaching. This philosophy held that the world was not created by God, because God is unknowable and cannot touch man and things, but that it was created by emanations from God – eons – and therefore, instead of worshiping God, they worshiped eons, or angels. They said that they should not worship God because they could not know him. They worshiped intermediate beings that came in touch with them.

Then this philosophy taught that as sin resided in matter, the way to conquer it was by conformity to ascetic precepts – that one should retire from the world, live like the Essenes in a cave on the border of the Dead Sea, not marry, have just as few clothes as possible, all the time working on the destruction of the body, because there is where sin resides, since the soul is all right. That was one phase of the philosophy. Paul was combating that, as shown in his doctrines: Christ in his relation to the Father, the universe and its intelligences, and that by him, in him, and unto him was creation, and that he was before all things, and in his relation to the church.

With reference to sin, notice what things he enumerates as expressions of sin, and see whether it be of the body: "Evil desire, covetousness, anger, wrath, malice, railing, lying, shameful speaking out of your mouth." Some of these are overt acts, but sin, according to that teaching, resides in the soul and not in the body. The body is merely used as an instrument in a great many sins, but sin does not reside in the body. To show further how Paul was controverting this philosophy as to the nature of sin, he calls it the old man, the old Adam. How then is sin to be conquered? It is to be conquered by something that will change the nature – that will put off the old man and put on the new man. That is regeneration, and then follows a sanctifying power that will carry on the regenerating work, so that instead of the deeds of the old man like anger, wrath, malice, etc., we put on the deeds of the new man, like love, kindness, a heart of compassion, forbearance and forgiveness. Then he goes on to show what instrumentalities are necessary to bring this about: "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly." So we see the difference between the two philosophies in question.

QUESTIONS

1. State the Hard Shell contention based on the King James Version of Colossians 1:23, and reply to it.

2. What is the difference between the "to whom" Paul is writing and the "to whom" Peter later writes?

3. Expound Colossians 1:24, "I fill up on my part that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ," and show Dr. Gordon’s interpretation.

4. What the meaning of "mystery" in Colossians 1:25 and elsewhere by Paul, does it mean the same thing when used by the Synoptic Gospels and by John in Revelation, and does it mean the same thing when used in the classics and by modern secret societies?

5. Expound the word "assurance," in Colossians 2:2, distinguish between "knowledge" and the "assurance of knowledge," between "faith" and the "assurance of faith," between ’hope" and the "assurance of hope," and apply the context showing the value of the "assurance of knowledge."

6. Show the variation of the same thought in Colossians 2:6-7.

7. What similar expressions in Ephesians 3, and what the application there?

8. What defect in many Baptist churches, what the kind of preachers that promote it, and wherein do Presbyterians excel us at this point?

9. Illustrate by the article in The Baptist Watchman and by a modern definition of the word "church."

10. What the two very important parts of this letter, and what a brief summary of the second as indicated in the analysis and the brief discussion which follows?