|
This is exactly the verse, with the same emphasis
and force (He has reconciled you [done deal, his agency], in the body of his
flesh through his death [via the Incarnation]), that was preached to us in
church today! So I was reflecting on it too, and finding it profound
and exciting for the same reasons.
Your analysis and conclusion are compelling to me,
JD. I think you're right that separating the act of reconciliation from its
purpose is anomalous--and at the same time, as you point out, it's to
the purpose, and not the act, that the if-clause applies. (How could
it apply to a reconciliation that has already happened?) This is
important to distinguish so that we're clear about the agency of
reconciliation--not our faithful action, but his.
Something else happened in church. The church was
so packed that during Communion we ran out of the bread, so they asked the
people nearest the aisles to break their pieces in two and put half back on the
plate as it went by again so they could take it to those who had none. In the
end there were pieces left over. It was a beautiful image: the Bread being
multiplied as we broke it to each other.
Judy, thank you for your message reminding us who
Jesus is.
Debbie
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 5:29
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Eternal
Judgment
In a message dated 3/27/2005 4:37:03 AM Pacific
Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
The following is a rather involved and technical explanation for
Col. 1:15-23. I sincerely apologize for boring nature of the
text. It is the best that I can do. All of it is
exciting to me -- and when I preach, the technical element
is missing. This is the kind of study that turns me "on."
And from it comes all manner of practical application.
The Smithmeister to you .
>John
Smithson wrote:
>>The Message of hope as found in Col
1:17-23
>>is profound and exciting.
>>... I am comfortable
thinking that YOU can keep
>>your sin and still be considered
righteous
>
>Aren't you ignoring some of the content of the very
passage that you
>referenced? Paul puts a condition upon our
realization of this
>reconciliation:
My answer to the
question, above, is "no," which will come as no surprise to you. But
what may be of some surprise is this: I did review the passage and my
evolving belief concerning it's wording with your question in mind.
Thank you, David Miller.
I am sincerely hoping that I
will be able to convey to you with some effect the truth of Col 1:15-23
as I see it. As you know, I believe that it is wrong for any
of us to speak with interpretive certainty of anything that is biblical in
tone and nature. It is never "this is what the Bible says."
Rather, the truth of the matter is found in these words, "this is what I
believe the Bible says." And when I speak of "truth" in the
above, understand that I always have in mind the truth as I see
it.
>
>Colossians 1:21-23
>And you,
that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked
>works,
yet now hath he reconciled in the body of His flesh through [His]
death... to present you holy and unblameable
>and unreproveable in
his sight: If ye continue in the faith...
You, David
Miller, have unwittingly left off a most important consideration
within this text and I have added it back into the text (highlighted in bold
print). I would venture to say that you have omitted this
portion of the passage because you did not see it as being important to the
discussion at hand. What other noble reason could there be for the
omission???
You misunderstand (IMO) the teaching of this Col. passage AS
EVIDENCED by this omission.
>
>Paul
speaks about reconciliation, but he adds, "IF YE CONTINUE IN
THE
>FAITH." Maybe we need to talk about what that means.
This passage seems
to
>indicate that faith leads to being UNBLAMEABLE
and UNREPROVABLE. Other
>passages also would lead us to understand
that faith does this by
producing
>the fruit of righteousness,
obedience, and good works rather than
>wickedness, disobedience and evil
works. Do you see it differently?
Well, our (yours and mine)
theological construct is entirely differeent -- as different as
two world religions. I am of the unmerited grace based,
Jesus-did-it-all religion and you are not. Each of us own a
rather comprehensive and systematic theology that, in and of itself, defies or
resists change. You can pull a stone from under my foundation and
the construct, the system, remains in tact because there is much more to the
foundation than a single stone. We are, indeed, worlds
apart. Our gospel is not the same ---------- but
our God is. And that is important to me. God does not exist
in my definition of Him or in my understanding of His grace and His judgment
and His partnership. He is a sovereign reality. And,
because of that fact, He continues to be the Father of us
all.
The short answer to your question is "yes, I do
see it differently."
In this passage (Col 1:15-23
for those of you are following along), I see the fact of reconciliation
and the purpose of reconciliation .
The fact of reconciliation
cannot be separated from the purpose, in my thinking, and the following will
demonstrate that point. But first, let's establish the fact
of reconciliation as present in this passage.
v. 15-16 (and I will be using Comfort/Brown
as the text/translation of reference). Beginning in the beginning with
Paul in this passage, I see a very specific, very specific brief
on the purposeful inclusion of all things in the Christ. Jesus is
indeed the Incarnate God. And I write this with far greater
understanding than ever before in my life. In His is the
Godhead. In Him are all things, in the heavens and in the earth, both
visible and invisible. And it is critical that we remember His "ranking"
as herein described ---------- for it is much more than a
"ranking."
v 17 He is not just the firstborn (rank) but, here in this
verse, He is the cohesive element that holds and binds all things
together (Rogers - the emphatic pronoun autos is
indicative of this conclusion). The phrase in this particular verse that
reads ".......all things in Him have been held together" is a critically
important aspect pf this theological presentation (Paul's presenation, not
mine). "Have been held together" is put in the
perfect/indicative/active tense. The "perfect" tense in the
Greek has no equal in English. The "past tense" translation is
only an accommendation (Summers). Some of you will remember
comments concerning"present/indicative/active" as being present action with no
end in sight -- linear in nature as opposed to a point in
time. Well, the perfect tense is action COMPLETED IN PAST TIME BUT
WITH ONTOLOGICAL APPLICATION THROUGH PRESENT TIME. Summers
(a Greek grammarian - his was my first year gk reference) puts it
this way: "This is the greek tense of 'completed action,' i.e. it
indicates a completed action with a resulting state of being. The
primary emphasis is on the resulting state of being. Involved in
the Greek perfect are three ideas: an action in progress, its coming to
a point of culmination, its existing as a completed result."
The non-scholar, Juan Smithsoon, would say it this way -- "it
is past action with no end in sight. " The NKJV translates this word
"all things exist." In Him all things exist. But more
specifically, the text is saying that "in Him all things have been held
together and continue to be held together." And why am I
taking so long to draw this out? Without this
background, we miss the ontological nature of the Christ
event. The fall of man, in the first days of the creation
story, presents a problem, if you will, that is solved in the Incarnate
Christ Event. Mankind was alienated (in his own thinking, in
his own mind) and God in Christ has taken that consideration away.
The ontology of man's existence, of creation's existence, has been changed in
Christ. It is a done deal. We HAVE BEEN AND CONTINUE to be
reconciled -- and that is exactly where Paul is going with this line of
reasoning. I do not separate my ontology from my
ralationship with the Christ; rather, I believe my very ontology has been
forever defined or redefined by the relational nature of the Christ
Event. Summers, in the above puts it (again) this way:
it indicates a completed action with a resulting state of being.The primary
emphasis is on the resulting state of being. A resulting state of
being !!! In Ephsians 1:10, Paul speaks of the
"summing up of all things in Christ" (NASV). The Greek word translated
"summing up" is better translated "recapitulated in." As it turns
out, the English definition of "captulate" is vital to our discussion.
That definition includes this thought: to surrender often after
negotiation of terms b : to cease resisting . We have no
exitence apart from the Creator of the Universe. We are in Him
whether we care to make that admission or not. To
"re-capitulate" is to put us back into that ontological state of
affairs -- our ontology is relational in nature and
cannot be understood apart from our inclusion IN Christ. WE HAVE
LOST OUR VERY EXISTENCE IN HIM.
v. 18 I was taught that a
participle is a word used to explain how something is performed or
completed. "Make them disciples, baptising them ......and teaching
them ......" (Matt 28:19,20) expresses the command and the method
of fulfillment. We are to make disciples of all nations by
baptising them and by teaching them (participle
nouns are verbal forms having the force of adjectives). Again, they
(participles and participle phrases) express how things get done or how they
are expressed. Here in verse 18, the
phrase "so that He, Himself, might come to have first place in
everything" is actually a participle phrase ("come to have first
place" a present active participle) expressing how things occur or the
relationship of one thing to another in a causative
way. Christ is the head of the assembly because of His
existence, His being the one who possesses a continuing hold above and beyond
all of that which is included within Him -- making Him the
"first," a restatement of the ontolgical relationship between Him
and His creation. It all works because He he is the one
holding to first place as the Creator and Incarnate God. All are in Him
because of who He is. The fact that of His place in the scheme of things
IS THE CAUSE BINDING ALL THINGS UNTO GOD. The ontology of God is
the very supply of all that exists
!
v 19 uses the translated
phrase "In Him all the fulness [of God] was to dwell." Paul here
pictures the permanent dwelling place (Rogers) of God in
Christ. Again -- a statement of being.
Paul in this passage (1:15-23) is describing the essence, the
existence of all things; all things in heavens, all in in the earth,
that which is visible, that which is invisible AND EVEN THE VERY FULNESS OF
THE GODHEAD IS LOCATED AND HAS EXISTENCE IN CHRIST. Again,
He is the cohesive element in the binding of all
things. We are not rugged individualists -- rather, we
are completely lost in Christ. If such is true for all
things INCLUDING THE GODHEAD, it most certainly is true of each of us,
individually.
v.20 This reconciliation is
accomplished in the blood of the cross. We are told by those who should
know (Rogers, Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New
Testament) that "cross" in this passage is a genitive of
RELATIONSHIPS. The blood is not an event, a point in
time, but a relationship sourse ------------------ an
ongoing affair fully accomplished in past time but having the power and effect
of placing us into relationship with both God and our selves!!!
This continuing but completed event is that which "has made peace"
(aorist active participle ------------------ ah, here we go
again !!) To quote Rogers, "the insertion of the part.
indicates that reconciliation is not to be thought of as a cosmic
miracle ....................but shows that reconciliation is primarily
concerned w. the restoration of relationships" (p. 461).
The fact of reconciliation includes the reaffirmation of our
existence in Christ and in this affirmation, we discover our
ontology --- In the relationship we have with Christ
we find our identify and very existence, our being. Such
CANNOT BE DENIED OR REJECTED. There is no condition
for the truth or fact of this reconcilation because it is relational in
substance and ontological in nature. I can run into the front
room of my home and scream at the grandchildren, "Papa John DOES NOT
EXIST," then leave the room. And what would I have
accomplished? Nothing except that I am some kind of
nut -------- and we all know that this is not
true. And why is this the case? BECAUSE EXISTENCE HAS
NO RELATIONSHIP TP MORAL LAW AND RIGHTEOUSNESS
RESPONSIBILITIES -- my denials have no bearing upon my
existence; my compliance to righteousness can never be a condition of
existence itself.
v.21 [as was the case for all in
the earth and in the heavens], the Colossians were likewise alienated in their
minds, doing evil deeds (a perf. part. phrase).
v.22 It is important to realize that these brethren
WERE RECONCILED IN THIS VERY CONDITION --- alienated
in mind; doing evil deeds." He died for us while we were yet
sinners. This passage tells us that this reconciliation
was completed in the "body of His flesh through [His] death. The
Incarnation of Christ accomplished this reconciliation and everything in this
larger passage tells us that the work of reconciliation was and is a completed
act IN CHRIST. Christ is the conditional feature for the FACT of
reconciliation.
BECAUSE of the relationship
of Christ to all things, reconciliation has occurred.
And there is a purpose for this relational success. We
have been reconciled for a purpose. For a
purpose. Holiness. Blamelessness. A life
above reproach.......in His sight .............
v. 23 if we
continue !! Finally, a condition. But this
condition applies to the purpose and not the fact of
reconciliation. Holiness is, indeed conditional. And
we must be careful here. We are saved by
"faith." It is His faith AND ours. Faith unto
faith. But God the Father sees us IN CHRIST. We are
asked to practice righteousness, but God the Father us sees us in
CHRIST. It is His faith the Father sees, and because of that, the
promise for the New Covenant is the pronouced blessing that God will bring to
mind our sins NEVER MORE (Jere. 31:34).
In Eph
4: 20-32, Paul describes this process of holiness and righteousness as a part
of a competing nature(s). He asks them to "lay aside the old self WHICH
IS BEING CORRUPTED in accordance with the lusts of deceit
......... [and be] renewed in the spirit of your minds"
(vv.22,23). Clearly, the picture in Ephesians is one of a whole
congregation of The Reconciled involved in the precess of
conversion. We are being converted from the old to the new.
The both exist AT THE SAME TIME. And that effort involves a
willing partnership on our part. This conversion takes place
BECAUSE OUR VERY EXISTENCE HAS BEEN CHANGE.
In the beginning of the this brief, I asserted that the
fact and the purpose of reconciliation cannot be separated. I
should have said, the two should not be separated. For the Christian,
the Disciple, the one who has actually heard of Jesus and knows of His life
and death and ascension, who is called to the purpose; for him,
the two (fact and purpose) CANNOT be separated. The latter is
accomplished in the fact of the former -- and all the
blessings of salvation are therein. We share in the seal of the Spirit,
the benefit of righteous living, and the eternal _expression_ of our
committment. Indeed, the purpose, benefit and fact are all
inseparable.
But for those who move away from this purpose, who
separate their very existence from the purpose of their existence
(remember -- our existence is now and forever defined by the fact of
reconciliation -------- existence =
reconciliation !!), only death and self destruction awaits. They
are dead ALREADY.
John
>suppose that I love this
passage at least as passionately as you do, but I
>don't see any kind of
"positional righteousness" of all of humanity being
>taught by
it.
|
