Colossians Chapter 2
Paul says he's telling them this so they will know how much concern he has for them, and for Laodicea. He wants them to have a full and complete knowledge of the mystery - which is Christ now revealed. There is this verse:
4 I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. [Col 2:4 ESV]
Paul knows that the deceivers and plotters can make their arguments sound very plausible, and that they can present impressive credentials as to why you should believe what they say. They pretend to "build" on Scripture, and to "reveal" the truth of Scripture that isn't written in so many words but that you have to be brilliant to understand. They can help you out...in exchange for your generous love offering in any amount....
2021-2, Go back just a bit and look at how this is worded:
[Col 2:2 ESV] that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ,
[Col 2:3 ESV] in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
The idea here is that the key to understanding the "mystery" - and apparently the false teachers were really playing up the secret, mysterious, inner circle knowledge that only they could share - is to understand Christ and his work. The mystery is not in secret rituals, hidden explanations, or very likely additional revelations (think Book of Mormon and Quran, both of which play right into this), but in what Christ did. He is the entire mystery, and understanding Christ completely is all the mystery there is.
2022 - Paul mentioned "the mystery" twice in Chapter 1, and now again here in 2:2. It is "mystery" that was the currency controlled by the false teachers here and by direct reference in Laodicea, and indirectly I think we see it other places, and circulated only minimally among the rank and file. These false teachers claimed that their exclusive mastery of advanced logic, debate, and oratory - such as they and they alone had, and only they could teach to the special, qualified, and biggest contributors - qualified them to decide what was required for salvation by and proper service to God. This is what Paul is arguing so strongly against. He is not saying that secular knowledge is bad or faulty nor is he saying that religion is only for dumb people. What he is saying is that the rules and regulations and methods of science will not and cannot reveal supernatural truth. He says this multiple times. Each time he uses that word mystery he is saying that God is supernatural and cannot be proved by theorem and corollary. In vs 3, above, he says the truths of God are "hidden" in Christ. The treasures of wisdom and knowledge are HIDDEN in Christ, and only through Christ, therefore, can they be discovered. Vs 8, below, is more of the same.
2021-2, vs. 5 seems to be a refutation of another argument of the false teachers - If Paul cared anything about you really, he would be here. We ARE here, so listen to us. Paul says that's a straw man.
2021 - I think here also Paul is acknowledging by his repeated use of the word "mystery", that the Trinity is a supernatural concept, not reducible to logical syllogisms, no matter how brilliant the person trying to express it. Yes! Because the concept of the Trinity is supernatural, and not subject to logic anyway, any attempt to "confine" it to logical argumentation must necessarily lead to error!!! Any strictly "natural" definition of the Trinity will be incomplete by definition! YES, this is what it means! And this is the way to argue it - just as Paul is doing. The Trinity is a mystery not yet fully revealed!
Still 2021 - Paul uses the word mystery four times in this little book. 1:26,27; 2:2; 4:3. The word is used 21 times in the NT, 17 times by Paul in his letters - 7 of these in Ephesians - and 4 times by John in Revelation. It does not appear in the gospels. A good study here I think, making the point that God is supernatural, and because of that, there are things about Him that strict compliance with the natural cannot begin to grasp.
2021-2, Vs. 6, You don't need anything new. There is no further revelation than the mystery of Christ that converted you in the first place. Continue in that.
Then this to follow it up:
8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. [Col 2:8 ESV]
MSB says "takes you captive" is robbery. By their deceit, the false teachers are stealing the true knowledge, wisdom, and sufficiency that can be found in Christ alone, outside the helpful hands of the false teachers. "Elemental spirits of the world", or "elementary principles of the world" per TCR footnote. The gist is that anything the philosophy, psychology, and conjecture of man can devise, are but simple, immature, childish primers in light of the truth of the gospel of Christ. Paul tells them these self-described enlightened ones are in fact trivial in their philosophies. 2021 - Further, the highest heights of logic, rhetoric, debate, science and so on, must necessarily be inadequate to explain what lies outside their naturalistic scope. These things are all aimed at describing/explaining/unraveling the intricacies of the natural world. As such, they cannot be applied correctly to the supernatural world. This repetition of what I think vs 4 was saying is pretty good corroboration that we're on the right track.
This statement is in direct refutation of the teachings of the Gnostics. Paul pulls no punches, leaves no room for quibbling:
9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, [Col 2:9 ESV]
Christ is divine, indistinguishable from God Himself, because Christ IS God Himself.
2021-2, This is nearly a repeat of 1:19: [Col 1:19 ESV] For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
What is to be learned by a word to word comparison/contrast of these two verses.
2021-2, This whole section, vss 9-15, are a picture of what happens when we are saved. The key to it is, I think, here:
[Col 2:10 ESV] and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.
We have been "filled in him". Here are the meanings of the word "pleroo", pronounced "play-rah-oh":
to make full, to fill up, i.e. to fill to the full
to cause to abound, to furnish or supply liberally
I abound, I am liberally supplied
to render full, i.e. to complete
to fill to the top: so that nothing shall be wanting to full measure, fill to the brim
to consummate: a number
to make complete in every particular, to render perfect
to carry through to the end, to accomplish, carry out, (some undertaking)
to carry into effect, bring to realisation, realise
of matters of duty: to perform, execute
of sayings, promises, prophecies, to bring to pass, ratify, accomplish
to willful, i.e. to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment
It is a very encompassing word, and this is likely why Paul chose it. He is saying first of all that nothing is wanting after salvation. When we are saved, we are completely filled and there is no more room for anything else. Some other translations:
[Col 2:10 KJV] And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
[Col 2:10 NASB95] and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;
[Col 2:10 RSV] and you have come to fullness of life in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.
You have received all there is to receive. If you already have all that the one who is head of all rule and authority - which would include these false teachers - then there is nothing additional to receive from them. They are "adding what is unnecessary, and you have no room for it, since you're already full". And see how the picture is put together after that. We see in vs. 11 that once saved, we are participants with Christ in all that he did physically. Our participation is through our spiritual analog to his physical foundation. We are circumcised spiritually, as he was circumcised in the flesh. This is because he fulfilled the old law physically, followed all its rules, which are outward and physical. But the new covenant is spiritual. So we are not physically circumcised, only spiritually. He died physically, we die spiritually to the old law of sin and death. He rose physically, we rise spiritually as new creature "on the inside". It seems likely from the way this is stated that the false teachers were either preaching that some of the old ritual needed to be continued, or they were introducing new rituals. Paul is explaining that physical ritual is no longer required.
2022 - To clarify, this is about salvation because of vs 10. Christ is all-encompassing. He is the "fullness" of deity, not removed from deity (read from God) by several degrees of separation so that he might be born as a human. Paul is saying that Jesus is fully God. But regarding salvation, once Paul establishes that Christ IS God, then all wisdom and knowledge would be "in Christ". We ALSO are in Christ, according to vs 10. We are complete in him. If we are in Christ, we have all that we need because we are "in there with divine knowledge". Paul's point is that the saved have no need of secular experts to come to an increasingly precise and complete knowledge of God. Access to this is INCLUDED with salvation, positionally.
Then he seems to broaden his scope to include the legalists by saying they already have a circumcision done without hands, a spiritual circumcision even more efficacious than that done in the flesh, through their position in the body of Christ - who was circumcised, and in whom the saved already dwell.
This verse:
11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. [Col 2:11-12 ESV]
As we are circumcised spiritually, we are raised spiritually. We are circumcised because we are in Christ who was circumcised. We are raised from the dead because we are in Christ, who rose from the dead. Circumcision - which was a physical, bodily symbol of participation in the Old Covenant - is now needed only in the spiritual sense, because that Old Covenant has run it's course. It is no longer of effect, so the signs of participation in it are of no use whatever. Baptism, which does not require any modification of the flesh, is the symbol of participation in the New Covenant, and since the New Covenant has no ongoing physical requirements, it's symbol need not be permanently observable either. The circumcision was an identification in the flesh of the Law, which required physical signs of compliance. But now that Christ has fulfilled all the requirements of the law, the renewal - which was annual under the law - is now once for all and a spiritual internal invisible thing, of which baptism is now the one, dare I say required, outward sign. Recall that even under the law, it was faith only that mattered to salvation, not the physical observance. The Law only delayed wrath until Christ fulfilled the Law. Then those with faith escaped the penalty of the Law, being made perfect by their position within Christ as he shed his blood and died. We died in Him when he died. All the physical manifestations of the Law - sacrifices, feasts, observance of the Sabbath - were symbolic of the underlying faith of those who were saved while the Law was in effect. Outward signs of ongoing inner faith. In that same way, baptism is now symbolic of the underlying faith that saves us under the New Covenant. All the religious observances of the Law are now compressed into the single physical symbol of baptism. Faith alone saved men before the Law was given. Faith alone saved under the Law, and faith saves under the New Covenant. This must be true, and the same arguments Paul uses over and over in the NT wrt the Law, are just as applicable to the New Covenant. The rites of the Old Covenant and Baptism of the New Covenant are therefore not requirements for salvation, but symbols of underlying faith. In the case of baptism, the symbol is also of the death, burial and resurrection of the One in whom we live.
(So much here...and looking back at last year's notes, I see that I didn't even mention baptism in this chapter.)
2022 - Later. Got a call from Dwight about how this "idea" of mine about baptism as the sign of the new covenant is almost precisely the argument made for infant baptism - paedobaptism. The idea is that circumcision was performed on male children at 8 days old. They weren't making a choice, but by birth were a part of Israel, a part of God's people, and so a part of God's covenant. Under the New Covenant, baptism can be understood as the same thing. Born into a New Covenant believing home, to believing parents, and so in a sense, by birth a part of the New Covenant. As circumcision did not save, neither does baptism, but it is a sign of the covenant. This is NOT where I was going with the argument, and it certainly needs some serious rethinking in light of Dwight's phone call. There is also much in Grudem on this topic - including a whole section in refutation of this argument as justification of paedobaptism.
2021 - Nothing to add. I believe this more than ever. Especially the highlighted statement.
2023 - 11-13 are surely the best explanation we can have for the purpose of baptism. It is literally contrasting circumcision and baptism, physical vs "invisible", while comparing them as evidence of faith. Can we say, though, that as circumcision was required in the old, so baptism in the new. It WAS NOT SAVING in either case, but it can be required without being "saving".
2022 - The Kingdom of God, in our time, is a spiritual Kingdom. Therefore, its seal, its promises, its basis, are all spiritual. Under the Old Covenant, made with Israel, the laws were tangible, literally written in stone. Therefore, the seal of all who depended on that covenant for salvation needed a tangible sign of their participation. That sign was circumcision. A physical sign imposed on the bodies of all those who sought God's will through the physical, tangible Law. The New Covenant is spiritual. The Law is written on our hearts. We don't need stone tablets to discern right and wrong, our consciences, in collaboration with God's Holy Spirit inside us, reveal God's truth to us. Baptism is the outward sign of our commitment to this spiritual covenant. This sign does not remain with us. No one can determine whether or not we were baptized. Water is often used as a metaphor for spirit. Circumcision saved no one under the Old Covenant. No one would argue that. I would argue, based on that, that baptism saves no one now. Circumcision was "required" under the Law, but was not saving under the Law. Salvation was based on faith and faith alone, under the Law. In the same way, baptism is "required" under the New Covenant, but is not saving under the New Covenant. Salvation comes by faith. Baptism spiritually "marks us", tattoos us, brands us as followers of Christ, just as circumcision marked Israel as Israel, under the Law.
Possible FB post for 12/8/22.
2021-2, This verse: [Col 2:14 ESV] by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. This surely says that there is no sin left in us to be judged. All that is done. And how can we be "lost again" if ALL our sins are set aside. All of them were future when he died. Why would he only take some of them? If he already paid for them, then they cannot come back to condemn us - not the ones he's already died for. So we would have to commit "unanticipated" sins, sins that Jesus excluded from his redemptive work on the cross, and those sins would condemn us anew. But...how then can those sins ever be paid for? Jesus is not going to die again. (Perseverance of the Saints)
These verses, starting with therefore:
16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. [Col 2:16-17 ESV]
These were symbolic of spiritual truth yet to be revealed. They are not what they appear to be literally, but are symbolic of what will someday be revealed as the underlying truth. MSB note says it better: "The ceremonial aspects of the OT law (dietary regulations, festivals, sacrifices) were mere shadows pointing to Christ. Since Christ, the reality has come, the shadows have no value."
2021 - I would rush to point out that during the Millennial, there will be sacrifices, there will be a high priest, and there will be other priests taking care of the new Temple. At that time, the shadows will be overcome by light, and we will understand what these things were really about.
2021-2, The main points of the false teaching are listed here:
[Col 2:16 ESV] Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.
[Col 2:18 ESV] Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind,
It is this whole Greek "body bad spirit good" thing again. Deny the body (asceticism) and you increase the spirit. They wanted to make a hierarchy of poor, better, best Christians based on the sacrifices you were willing to make. I am sure these teachers were very visibly ascetic in what they did publicly - denying good food, good drink, and wearing long faces. Not sure where the angel worship came in, unless it is because they are higher beings than us, and so ought to be worshiped. Much like Catholics do with saints. They were having visions - which they were representing as new revelation from God about the practice of the gospel. Only they were having these visions, therefore this gave them authority to teach and credibility in what they said. They were focused on the physical, on eating and drinking, or not, on mysterious visions and their interpretations. It was all about the "experience" of the gospel. Paul says they had it all wrong.
Paul says that no one on earth has authority to condemn another to hell based on the actions of the one condemned. You don't eat according to their rules? No matter. You don't speak in tongues? No matter. You don't practice asceticism? Who cares. You can do those things, but not doing them gives no one the right to condemn you. If we take to heart the previous verses saying we are dead to the world - physical things that foreshadowed Jesus are no longer of any use - why would we still submit to regulations based on what was required while we were still part of the world? It used to be heavily weighted to the physical and now is heavily weighted to the spiritual. Don't mix them up!
2021 - In vss 16-19, I think Paul is making a direct, unmistakable attack on the false teaching and false teachers that were trying to catch on in the church at Colossi. It is interesting to me that so many churches had these serious internal attacks coming against them, and Paul never ever says to abandon that church and start a new one and do it right. He never tells anyone to leave because of false teachers. Instead, Paul sends a letter - a written word - that shines a light on the error of this doctrine that is introduced AFTER the church is founded on Christ alone - and urges the church to correct it's problems, to shut down false teaching, and if necessary to put out the false teachers. But Paul never says "just let them have this one, and we will start over across the street." The lesson is to get back to orthodoxy. Get back to the original teachings of the church, to those things clearly supported by the written word in the Bible.
2021 - Paul never says "Well, I understand that there in Corinth, the idol worshipers outside the church have women preachers and are cool with "all church orgies", and it is absolutely true that the Bible says men and women are the same in the sight of God, so the idolators do kind of have that part right so it is surely ok to do things the way they say...since they have this little part correct, we shouldn't correct them about their larger application of the precept." Hmm...That's what they do isn't it? They use a principle found in one place in the Bible to overrule a commandment somewhere else in the Bible, and then they justify it by their advanced knowledge, their deeper understanding, their greater maturity in the Word, which allows them to pick which concept is the keeper. Could I not as easily say that not suffering women to teach means that women are less than men in the sight of God? If it is ok to say the Bible's teaching that men and women are equal in his sight makes it ok to ignore the injunction against women teaching, then why can I not reverse it and make the other concept the one that needs to be "updated"? Well...because that's just not what it means - according to the ones who prefer to read it the other way. This is exactly the kind of thinking that has always been used by outsiders to undermine the church. It is because we do things like this, depending on the times and the cultures and the priorities. We NEVER SHOULD do this!!! Not in either direction. The fact is that the Bible says both. Says men and women are equal, says women are not to teach. We have to resolve these two in a way that both are true, both are observed, both are inviolable!!!! And we can, all we have to do is talk about different roles for equal men and women. Your defensive tackle makes a very poor wide receiver in almost every case.
2022 - Vss 16-19 are saying that physical things are not a "path", and especially not a "highway" to be a better Christian. You do not gain if favor with God by petitioning him indirectly through angels - or those who died before us. Not having any "religious visions" does not mean we are not saved. We live and breath and grow through the Spirit of Jesus Christ, NOT through physical, external things, whether signs of dedication or self-denial or self-harm. Paul does not prohibit these things, he just says they are not going to "earn" you anything. And that is all summed up in these verses:
20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations-- ... 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. [Col 2:20, 23 ESV]
Vs 23 - Physical things might make it LOOK like you are a profoundly advanced Christian, but they do nothing to make you a better Christian SPIRITUALLY...which is the only thing that counts under the New Covenant! And I think that last phrase means that such things don't help you physically either. You body will still crave the things of the flesh, no matter how many self-inflicted scars you have.
I believe the last few verses of the chapter say that physical sacrifices - like not eating certain things, like living only on bread and water in a cave in the winter - do not actually preclude in any way the sin that living in a mortal body entails. He is saying that wherever you live, whatever you do, no matter how "divorced" your life is from the comforts and pleasures of a physical body, that body is by its very nature just as sinful as one who eats bacon every day. Self-denial in no way diminishes our sinfulness in the flesh.