Thursday, November 28, 2024

A defense of the truth of the reconciliation of all in Colossians 1:20 (part one)

In Colossians 1:19-22 (CLNT) we read the following:


“…for in Him the entire complement delights to dwell, and through Him to reconcile all to Him (making peace through the blood of His cross), through Him, whether those on the earth or those in the heavens.


“And you, being once estranged and enemies in comprehension, by wicked acts, yet now He reconciles by His body of flesh, through His death, to present you holy and flawless and unimpeachable in His sight…”


The words translated as “to reconcile” (ἀποκαταλλάξαι) and “he reconciles” (ἀποκατήλλαξεν) in these verses are forms of the verb ἀποκαταλλάσσω (apokatallassó). The elements from which this verb is formed are the preposition apo (“away”), the preposition katá (“down”) and the verb allássō (“to change”). To better understand what this word means, let’s consider what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7:10-12. Here’s how these verses read in the CLNT:


Now to the married I am charging, not I, but the Lord: A wife is not to be separated from her husband. Yet if she should be separated also, let her remain unmarried or be conciliated to her husband. And a husband is not to leave his wife. Now to the rest am I speaking, not the Lord. If any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she approves of making a home with him, let him not leave her.


The word translated “be conciliated to” in this passage is a form of the verb καταλλάσσω (katallassó). In the context, this word denotes the change that occurs when a wife who has separated from her husband returns to live with him again (and is thus no longer separated from him, but “making a home with” him again). From its use in this passage we can conclude that Paul used the word katallassó to denote a separation-ending change – i.e., the change that occurs when two or more individuals in a relationship cease to be separated (in some sense) from each other.


That this is how the term katallassó should be understood in Scripture is further evident from what Paul wrote in Romans 11:15:


“For if their casting away is the conciliation of the world, what will the taking back be if not life from among the dead?”


Just as the “casting away” of the majority of Israelites is a state of affairs that involves a separation of some sort between God and Israel (for this state will end with what Paul called “the taking back”), so the implication is that “the conciliation of the world” is a present state of affairs that was preceded by some sort of separation between God and “the world.” As I’ve argued elsewhere (https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-conciliation-of-world.html), the separation that preceded the “world-conciliation” of which Paul wrote in this verse involved the nations, collectively, being without God’s favor and kindness (not in an absolute sense, but relative to the favor and kindness that had previously been on God’s covenant people, Israel). This state of separation between God and the nations ended when God gave to Paul (and his apostolic co-laborers) “the dispensation of the conciliation,” and placed in them “the word of the conciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18-19). However, the conciliation of the world is not a permanent state of affairs; it will end when the body of Christ – which consists primarily of gentiles – is removed from the earth (1 Thess. 4:15-17), and the faith through which the nations are presently “persisting in [God’s] kindness” will no longer be found on the earth. Then, God’s kindness toward the nations will be replaced with “severity” (Rom. 11:19-22).


Keeping in mind the fact that katallassó denotes a separation-ending change, we’re now in a better position to understand the meaning of the related word, apokatallassó. For this latter word is simply a stronger/intensified form of katallassó. According to the entry for this word found in Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (as well as the Abbott-Smith Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament), the primary particle “apo” (when prefixed to katallassó to form apokatallassó) can be understood to signify completely.” Since, therefore, katallassó denotes a separation-ending change (i.e., reconciliation), apokatallassó expresses the idea of a complete (or total) separation-ending change – i.e., the change of being “reconciled completely” (https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/eng/greek/604.html).


But what is the nature of the separation-ending change (or “reconciliation”) of which we read in Colossians 1:19-22? That is, what kind of separation does the reconciliation of which Paul wrote bring to an end? Well, in Col. 1:21, it’s evident that the separation that ended when those to whom Paul wrote were reconciled to God involved being “once estranged and enemies in comprehension, by wicked acts.” The nature of this “estrangement” is referred to by Paul in Eph. 4:17-18 as follows:


“This, then, I am saying and attesting in the Lord: By no means are you still to be walking according as those of the nations also are walking, in the vanity of their mind, their comprehension being darkened, being estranged from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the callousness of their hearts…”


It should be noted that the use of the word translated “estranged” in Col. 1:21 and Eph. 4:18 (apallotrioó) need not imply that the “estrangement” in view was preceded by a non-estranged state. This is, I believe, evident from how Paul used the word in Eph. 2:11-12:


Therefore, remember that once you, the nations in flesh -- who are termed 'Uncircumcision' by those termed 'Circumcision,' in flesh, made by hands -- that you were, in that era, apart from Christ, being alienated from the citizenship of Israel, and guests of the promise covenants, having no expectation, and without God in the world.


The word translated “alienated” in v. 12 is the same word translated “estranged” in Col. 1:21 and Eph. 4:18. It should be noted that Paul wasn’t implying that the nations were, at some prior time, not “alienated from the citizenship of Israel.” He was simply saying that those among the nations (i.e., those who are “termed ‘Uncircumcision’”) were not – and could not be – citizens of Israel (at least, as long as they remained uncircumcised). And being thus “alienated from the citizenship of Israel,” the “promise covenants” that God made with Israel (and which pertain to the promised blessings that Israel will enjoy during the eons to come) were not made with them, and did not directly pertain to them. Thus, the “separated state” with which reconciliation is being implicitly contrasted in Col. 1:20 need not be understood as being preceded by the same state that reconciliation brings about.


But what, exactly, did Paul have in mind when he referred to unbelievers as being “estranged from the life of God” in Eph. 4:18? Answer: The source of God’s life is God’s own spirit (i.e., the holy spirit). We can therefore conclude that to be “estranged from the life of God” is to be someone in whom God’s holy spirit is not dwelling. That is, to be “estranged from the life of God” is to be without (and thus to be separated from) God’s holy spirit. This was true of those among the nations to whom Paul was referring in Eph. 4:17-18, since they were in unbelief (hence the words, “because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the callousness of their hearts”). In contrast, all who have been given the faith to believe the evangel of the grace of God have been given God’s spirit to dwell within them. For example, in 1 Cor. 3:16 and 6:19 we read the following:


“Are you not aware that you are a temple of God and the spirit of God is making its home in you?


“Or are you not aware that your body is a temple of the holy spirit in you, which you have from God, and you are not your own?”


It is those in whom God’s spirit is “making its home” who have been reconciled to God. And since – as I’ve argued in more depth elsewhere (https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2023/11/justified-by-spirit-of-our-god.html) – being indwelled by (and thus “sealed with”) the holy spirit of God coincides with justification, it follows that being reconciled to God and being justified by God are inseparable events/conditions.


In support of the understanding that justification is inseparable from the separation-ending change to which the words “conciliation” and “reconciliation” refer (i.e., when our relationship with God is in view) are Paul’s words in Romans 5:5-11:


Now expectation is not mortifying, seeing that the love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the holy spirit which is being given to us.


For Christ, while we are still infirm, still in accord with the era, for the sake of the irreverent, died. For hardly for the sake of a just man will anyone be dying: for, for the sake of a good man, perhaps someone may even be daring to die, yet God is commending this love of His to us, seeing that, while we are still sinners, Christ died for our sakes. Much rather, then, being now justified in His blood, we shall be saved from indignation, through Him. For if, being enemies, we were conciliated to God through the death of His Son, much rather, being conciliated, we shall be saved in His life. Yet not only so, but we are glorying also in God, through our Lord, Jesus Christ, through Whom we now obtained the conciliation.


The holy spirit of God is given to all who believe the evangel of the grace of God, and it’s by means of this spirit-giving act of God that we’re justified (and through which the love of God is thus “poured out in our hearts”). And as is evident from the parallel structure of what Paul went on to write in verses 9-11, our “being now justified in [Christ’s] blood” is inseparable from (and is, in fact, based on) our “being conciliated to God through the death of His Son” (similarly, the words “saved from indignation, through him” are basically equivalent in meaning to the words “saved in his life”).


We can thus conclude that the implied separation that comes to an end when God reconciles believers to himself is a state in which God’s holy spirit is not dwelling within them (or “making its home in” them). It is, in other words, a spiritual separation from God that’s brought to an end by being conciliated/reconciled to God. And this means that the reconciliation to God of which Paul wrote in Col. 1:20-21 (and elsewhere) is an event that takes place whenever God’s spirit begins to indwell, or make its home in, someone. But who did Paul have in mind in Col. 1:20 when he used the word “all?”


Here, again, is how Col. 1:19-20 reads in the CLNT:


“…for in Him the entire complement delights to dwell, and through Him to reconcile all to Him (making peace through the blood of His cross), through Him, whether those on the earth or those in the heavens.


As noted in my article on 1 Corinthians 15:28 (https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2024/10/that-god-may-be-all-in-all.html), the scope of the word “all” must be determined by the context in which the word is used by the writer or speaker. For example, the “all” whom Christ said shall be taught of God (John 6:45) is limited to everyone who will comprise Israel during the eons to come (Isa. 54:13; cf. Rom. 11:26), while the “all” of 1 Timothy 2:6 includes all mankind (1 Tim. 2:4-5). Even broader in scope is the “all” of 1 Cor. 8:6, Eph. 3:9 and Rev. 4:11 (which includes every created being, whether terrestrial or celestial). So what is the scope of the “all” of Colossians 1:20? Based on the immediate context in which Paul used the word “all” in this verse, it’s evident that he had in mind every created being in the heavens and on the earth. In Col. 1:15-17 we read the following:


[Christ] is the Image of the invisible God, Firstborn of every creature, for in Him is all created, that in the heavens and that on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or sovereignties, or authorities, all is created through Him and for Him, and He is before all, and all has its cohesion in Him.


In these verses, we find the word “all” used four times. And in each instance, the word includes every created being on the earth and in the heavens – i.e., every created being of whom Christ is the “Firstborn” (as we read in v. 15).[i] Thus, given the scope of the word “all” in these verses, we can conclude that, when Paul again used the word “all” in v. 20, he had in mind every created being on earth or in heaven. In other words, it is every being belonging to the “all” of Col. 1:15-18 (and of whom Christ is the “Firstborn”) whom God is pleased to reconcile to himself through Christ.


It should be noted that the truth Paul was communicating in Col. 1:20 concerning the ultimate destiny of all mankind (“those on the earth”) can be inferred from the truth of the evangel (or “gospel”) that Paul was heralding among the nations – i.e., the truth that Christ died for our sins (i.e., that Christ died so that the sins of all mankind would be forgiven) and was roused the third day (thus proving God’s delight in his Son, and his acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf). Since, according to the evangel of the grace of God, all mankind are going to be justified, it follows that all mankind are going to be reconciled to God. For we know that those who have been justified by God are indwelled by the holy spirit (for out justification is “by the spirit of our God”). And since those to whom Paul wrote were believers in the evangel of the grace of God (and thus already believed that the future justification of all mankind was secured by Christ when he died), they would’ve understood – or could’ve inferred – that the reconciliation of all mankind was a future certainty. That which they perhaps weren’t as certain about was that humans wouldn’t be the only beings to ultimately benefit from what Christ accomplished. However, as is evident from what we read in Col. 1:20, the reconciliation that was secured by Christ’s death includes not only all humans (i.e., those who are “on the earth”), but all celestial beings as well (i.e., those who are “in the heavens”).


Despite this remarkable revelation having been made by Paul, many Christians reject the idea that Satan and his messengers (or “angels”) are among those who are “in the heavens.” According to what seems to be a commonly-held view among Christians today (and throughout “church history”), Satan and his angels were cast out of heaven before (or shortly after) God created mankind on the earth. However, Scripture is clear that Satan and his messengers – at least, many of them – are currently among those who are “in the heavens” (see, for example, Job 1-2, Eph. 6:11-12 and Rev. 12:7-12).


Some have appealed to Christ’s words in Luke 10:18 in support of the view that Satan’s banishment from heaven occurred in the distant past (i.e., before, or shortly after, God created mankind on the earth). However, when Christ declared ”I beheld Satan, as lightning, falling out of heaven,” he was likely referring to a prophetic vision that God gave him of the future event described by John in Revelation 12:7-12. That Christ was referring to what he saw in a vision from God is supported by the fact that the same verb form that’s translated “I beheld” in Luke 10:18 is found in the Greek translation of Daniel 7:2-13 and v. 21 (where Daniel was referring to what he saw in a vision pertaining to future events).


In addition to the fact that Job 1-2 and Eph. 6:11-12 reveal that Satan’s “place” is still in heaven (in contrast with the state of affairs referred to in Rev. 12:8), it’s evident that the casting out of Satan from heaven will be an expression of Christ’s authority (which he acquired through his obedience unto death), and will manifest the coming of the kingdom of God in heaven (and thus mark the commencement of Christ’s reign in this realm). It’s further evident from Rev. 12:10 that the battle in heaven follows a period of time during which Satan is “the accuser of our brethren” (i.e., the one accusing Jewish believers) – the implication being that, after he’s cast out of heaven, Satan will no longer be able to do what he has been doing (i.e., accusing the brethren before God). Finally, we know that the events and time period that follow the casting out of Satan from heaven (and which will be occurring during the “brief season” referred to in v. 12) are future, and will include the time of “great affliction” of which Christ prophesied in his Olivet discourse (i.e., in Matthew 24:15-29 and Luke 21:20-26), and which will continue for 1,260 days (Rev. 12:6) or 3 ½ years (v. 14; cf. Rev. 13:5).


In light of these (and other) considerations, it’s impossible for the banishment of Satan from heaven that’s referred to in Rev. 12:7-12 and Luke 10:18 (assuming that Christ was referring to this event here) to have been a past event.


We can thus conclude that those “in the heavens” who are in need of being reconciled to God include Satan and his messengers. Even the popular “Reformed” Christian pastor and author, John Piper – who rejects the understanding of Col. 1:20 being defended in this study (and whose arguments I’ll be debunking in part two) – would agree that, in Col. 1:16, the word “all” includes Satan and other wicked celestial beings. For example, in his online article “All Things Were Created Through Him and for Him” (https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/all-things-were-created-through-him-and-for-him), Piper wrote the following:


“But of all the things — the millions of things Paul could have mentioned that Christ made and that exist for his glory — he chose to mention these: “thrones, dominions, rulers and authorities.” Verse 16: “For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — [even these] were created through him and for him.”


Now Paul knows that these “rulers and authorities” include evil supernatural powers. Look at Colossians 2:15 where Paul celebrates Jesus’ triumph on the cross: He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.


So here are the “rulers and authorities” that he referred to in Colossians 1:16. They turn up again in Ephesians 6:12: We do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities.


They are, Paul says, “the cosmic powers over this present darkness . . . the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.” They are evil supernatural powers that aim to deceive and destroy the human race.”


Since these wicked celestial beings (i.e., the “rulers and authorities” referred to in Col. 2:15) belong to the “all” of Col. 1:16, we can conclude – on the basis of what Paul revealed in Col. 1:20 – that they’re ultimately going to be reconciled to God on the basis of Christ’s death. Their reconciliation to God is just as certain to occur as that of all mankind.


With regard to the “peace” of which Paul wrote in Col 1:20, this is likely a state of affairs that will be the direct result of all being reconciled to God (such that the reconciliation of all to God through Christ is how the peace referred to in this verse is made). The grammatical parallel between the morphology of the words translated “to reconcile” and “making peace” indicates that the peace-making and the reconciliation of all to God coincide. In other words, the “peace” of which Paul wrote will be made when (and not sometime before) the “all” whom God is pleased to reconcile to himself through Christ are actually reconciled. In any case, it’s clear that Paul understood the peace of which he wrote to be a state of affairs that’s inseparably connected with the reconciliation of all to God. This is in accord with the fact that all who have been justified by faith (and who have thus been conciliated to God) can be “having peace with God” (Romans 5:1-11).


But what does it mean for this peace to be made “through the blood of [Christ’s] cross”? Answer: In a previous article (see What did Christ accomplish by his death?), I defended the view that Christ’s sacrificial death (i.e., his obedience “unto death, even the death of the cross”is exceedingly more pleasing to God than the combined sins of all people of all time are displeasing to him. It’s because of this fact (and this fact alone) that God can – and therefore shall – justify all mankind. And when we apply this insight to what we read in Colossians 1:20, we can conclude the following: God is exceedingly more pleased by Christ’s obedient death on the cross than he is displeased by the sins of all sinful beings (whether they’re on the earth or in the heavens). Thus, just as all mankind shall be justified by God on the basis of Christ’s sacrificial death, so all sinful, estranged beings – including those in the heavens – will be reconciled to God on the basis of Christ’s sacrificial death as well.


In accord with this understanding, the word that’s translated “whether” and “or” in v. 20 (eiti) serves to amplify – and not qualify or place a limit on – what was previously said concerning the reconciliation of all to God. Its use by Paul emphasizes the fact that it’s not just those on the earth who are included in the “all”; it’s those “in the heavens” as well. Paul used the same word four times in v. 16 (where it’s translated “whether” once and “or” three times). In this verse it’s clear that Paul wasn’t placing a limit on which beings are included within the “all”; rather, he was amplifying the truth that “in [Christ] is all created.”[ii] What Paul went on to write using the words “whether…or…or…or” further emphasizes the fact that even those who are among the most powerful beings in the universe (both human and non-human) are part of the “all.” Thus, the use of the expression “whether on the earth or in the heavens” is in accord with the fact that the “all” of Col. 1:20 refers to every being included in the “all” of Col. 1:16-18.


Moreover, since we know from Col. 1:19-20 that God is just as pleased to reconcile all to himself as he is pleased to have all of his “fullness” dwell in Christ, we can conclude that God wills/intends to reconcile all to himself through Christ. And since it’s clear from what we find revealed elsewhere in Scripture that God will do all that pleases him (Job 42:2; Psalm 115:3; 135:6; Isaiah 46:10; 55:11; Daniel 4:35), we can conclude that God will, in fact, reconcile all to himself through Christ. Moreover, the fact that it’s through Christ that God will accomplish the reconciliation of all to himself is in accord with what we read in Isaiah 53:10 (where it’s prophesied that it’s by Christ’s “hand” – i.e., his God-given power – that the pleasure of God will be accomplished, or “prosper”).


But when will this take place? We know that, at this present time, believers alone have been reconciled to God (Col. 1:21-22). That is, it’s believers alone in whom God’s spirit is dwelling or “making its home.” And the total number of believers (past, present and future) is just a tiny fraction of the “all” whom God is pleased to reconcile to himself through Christ. So when will everyone else (including Satan and all other wicked celestial beings) be reconciled to God through Christ? That is, when will everyone else receive (and thus be indwelled by) God’s holy spirit?


Answer: In accord with the conclusion reached in my article on 1 Cor. 15:28, the reconciliation of all to God will occur at the end of Christ’s reign (for it’s at this future time that Christ will abolish death and subject all to himself so that “God may be All in all”). This means that, at this future time, God’s holy spirit is going to fully indwell every being in the universe (including every being who is presently at enmity with God, or who died in a state of enmity with God). 


For part two, click here: https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2024/11/a-defense-of-truth-of-reconciliation-of_28.html



[i] The literal meaning of the word “firstborn” – whether in Hebrew, Greek or English – is found in Exodus 13:2 (where we read, “Sanctify to Me every firstborn, the first offspring of every womb among the sons of Israel, both of man and beast”). Literally, then, the word denotes the first human or animal to exit the womb of his or her mother. In accord with this fact, the word from which the second element of the Greek term “firstborn” is derived is regularly used in Scripture to refer to childbirth (see Strong's Greek: 5088. τίκτω). Of course, Paul wasn’t using the term in Col. 1:15 to express the idea that Christ was the first child to exit the womb of his mother. Although Christ was the first child to be born to Miriam (thus making him Miriam's firstborn son, as stated in Luke 2:7), this isn't the truth that Paul was communicating here. Instead, Paul was using the term in accord with its figurative usage. According to this usage, the term denotes preeminence/supremacy in rank. 

For example, in Psalm 89:26-29 we read the following: 

He, he shall call out to Me, You are my Father, My El and the Rock of my salvation. Indeed, I, I shall make him the firstborn, The uppermost of the kings of the earth. For the eon shall I keep My benignity upon him, And My covenant with him is faithful. I will establish his seed for the future, And his throne as the days of the heavens. 

Just as David being made “the firstborn” refers to the future primacy of rank that he’ll be given in relation to “the kings of the earth,” so Christ’s being “Firstborn of every creature” refers to his present supremacy in relation to every creature (the expression “of every creature” is in the genitive case, and thus expresses the idea that Christ belongs to the group comprised of “every creature,” and that it’s in relation to “every creature” that Christ is “firstborn” - i.e., uppermost, or highest-ranking). For other examples of this figurative usage of “firstborn,” see Ex. 4:22 and Jer. 31:9. 

This understanding of the term “Firstborn” in Col. 1:15 is supported by Paul’s use of the term in v. 18. When we read that Christ is “Firstborn from among the dead,” we can conclude that Paul wasn’t affirming either of the following: 

1. Christ was the first to be born/first to exit his mother’s womb from among the dead (which would be in accord with the literal meaning of “firstborn”). 

2. Christ was the first one brought into existence from among the dead (which is how Jehovah’s Witnesses, for example, define the word in Col. 1:15). 

The first option makes no sense, while the second option simply isn’t true (for there are other humans who, before Christ’s death and resurrection, were brought back into existence after being dead). 

Again, according to the scriptural usage of the word “firstborn,” the term denotes either (1) the first human or animal to exit the womb of his or her mother (which is the primary/literal meaning of the word), or (2) one who is “uppermost,” or first in rank. Just as the use of the term “firstborn” in Col. 1:15 expresses the fact that Christ is uppermost/first in rank in relation to every creature, so the use of the term in v. 18 expresses the fact that Christ is uppermost/preeminent from among the dead. In both verses, it is Christ’s exalted, preeminent status – and not when or where Christ came into existence – that’s in view. 

According to the original and literal meaning of “firstborn,” Christ is the firstborn of his mother, Miriam. However, in accord with the other inspired usage of the term “firstborn” (i.e., the usage that we find in, for example, Ex. 4:22, Jer. 31:9, Ps. 89:27 and Heb. 12:13), Christ became “Firstborn of every creature” – i.e., first in rank in relation to every creature – when he was roused from among the dead. 

[ii] The state of affairs to which Paul was referring here is one that pertains to (and coincides with the existence of) “the Son of [God’s] love” (v. 13) – i.e., the “Man, Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5). But as I’ve argued in more depth elsewhere (see, for example, the following article: https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2023/06/who-created-heavens-and-earth-part-one.html) it was God (i.e., Yahweh) – and no one else – who directly created the heavens and the earth by speaking them into existence. We also know that the One whom Paul referred to as “the Son of God’s love” in Col. 1:13 – i.e., Jesus Christ – didn’t exist as God’s Son until he was generated/begotten by his God and Father (which took place when, by a supernatural act of God, Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him). 

But since Paul wasn’t referring to the event that took place in the “beginning” referred to in Genesis 1:1, what did Paul have in mind in Col. 1:16? In the first part of Col. 1:16, we read that “in Him [Christ] is all created.” Here, Paul used the constative aorist passive indicative of the Greek verb “to create” (ktizō). The aorist tense – which is the most commonly-used verb tense in the Greek Scriptures – simply points to an action without telling us anything further about it. It leaves the exact time of the action/event undetermined and undefined, and simply describes the action/event as a bare fact (for a defense of this understanding of the aorist tense, see Frank Stagg’s article “The Abused Aorist”: 1972_stagg.pdf (biblicalstudies.org.uk). 

However, in the expression with which v. 16 concludes (“all is created through Him and for Him”), Paul used the perfect passive indicative of ktizō. The use of the perfect tense focuses on the continuance of a present state of affairs that began at some point in the past. According to A.E. Knoch, this verb form (which he refers to as the “state” or “complete” form) gives “the state resulting from an action.” Other scholars are in agreement on this point. For example, Curtis Vaughan and Virtus E. Gideon explain the perfect tense as follows: “The perfect tense…represents a completed state or condition from the standpoint of present time.” (Curtis Vaughan and Virtus E. Gideon, “A Greek Grammar of the New Testament”, Broadman Press, Nashville, Tennessee, 1979, page 149) Similarly, according to M. Zerwick, the perfect tense indicates “not the past action as such but the present ‘state of affairs’ resulting from the past action” (M. Zerwick, “Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples”, Pontificii Instituti Biblici, 1963, page 96). 

Thus, rather than referring to an event that occurred exclusively in the past (i.e., when God spoke everything into existence “in the beginning”), the verb form used by Paul in Col. 1:16 refers to present, ongoing action. To quote A.T. Robertson, it expresses the idea that everything “stands created” or “remains created” through and for Christ. 

Paul used the same tense in v. 17 as well. In this verse we read that “all has its cohesion in Him.” Did all have its cohesion in Christ while he was being formed in the womb of his mother? No. What about while Christ was being crucified, or while he was entombed? Again, no. When, then, did all begin to have its cohesion in Christ? Answer: When Christ was roused from among the dead and given all authority in heaven and on earth. And the same can be said with regard to the state of affairs to which Paul was referring in Col. 1:16. It wasn’t until after Christ was given all authority in heaven and on earth (and thus became Lord of all) that he has possessed the authority to preserve everything in heaven and on earth in existence (such that it can now be said that “all is created” – i.e., all remains created – in, through and for Christ). 

Thus, rather than referring to the past event for which only the Father was responsible, Paul was referring to an ongoing state of affairs that began after Christ was given his exalted status and universal authority. Ever since Christ was given all authority in heaven and on earth (which he received from God as a result of his obedience unto death), it has been true to say that everything in the heavens and on the earth is created [i.e., remains created] through him and for him.” 

The same basic idea is being expressed in 1 Corinthians 8:6 (where we’re told that all exists “through” Christ). In this verse it’s clear that it’s as the “one Lord” – i.e., as the one who has this exalted position of authority – that Christ is the one “through Whom all is, and we through Him.” Since Christ did not receive his exalted status and position as the “one Lord” referred to in this verse until after his death and resurrection, it follows that all did not begin to be “through” Christ until after his death and resurrection. Similarly, in Hebrews 1:3 we read that Christ is “carrying on all by His powerful declaration” [CLNT] or “bearing up all things by the utterance of his power” [Rotherham]). However, we know from the immediate context that it was not until after Christ became “so much better than the messengers as He enjoys the allotment of a more excellent name than they” (i.e., after Christ was highly exalted by God) that he became the one who is “carrying on all by His powerful declaration.” 

Thus, as is the case with what’s said concerning Christ in both 1 Cor. 8:6 and Heb. 1:3, the state of affairs to which Paul was referring in Col. 1:16 is one that began when Christ was made Lord of all and thus received his universal authority. 

No comments:

Post a Comment