The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Transferred from Darkness to Light

Theology Biblical Theology
#1

Colossians 1 is one of those chapters that infernalists (and conditionalists as well) have trouble side-stepping. There’s a lot more to it than that, of course, but verses 13-23 are of particular use to universalists, I think, and as it behooves us to always be ready to give an answer for the hope that lies within us, definitely worth a close study.

Dave posted a guide to studying scripture – not exhaustive but an excellent place to start, and I would LOVE to have some of us join in a short study together here, if anyone is willing to partake.

#2

What is the HCSB?

#3

Hi Cindy!

I think verses 19-20 are referring to the physical creation - heaven and earth. Creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed (Romans 8). This makes sense for the opening words of verse 21, Paul narrows his focus from all of physical creation to the believers in Colossae. The emphasis is now on God’s purpose and plan of sanctification. The purpose of God’s plan of reconciliation is personal holiness in His people only. Paul’s reference to Christ’s physical death stresses a vital truth of the NT - Jesus is the only one perfectly qualified to deal with the problem of sin by dying in the elects place. In verse 22, the phrase “holy, without blemish, and blameless” pertains to this element of sanctification, and the picture of believers being presented refers to the final judgment of Christ. The purpose of God’s work of reconciliation in Christ through the cross is holiness. The holy person is one who is set apart to God in the world. This flies in the face of universalism. For salvation is a process of justification, then sanctification, then glorification. Not one of being purified in the Lake Of Fire. Just my view anyway.

#4

Also,

Refers to physical creation

refers to the different ranks of angels

#5

1 )To approach it methodically, using Coverdale’s method, I like to make sure I get the words and sentence flow as clear as I can. So I will usually parallel a couple of translations to see if any major differences show up that I might have to get straight before I go delving any deeper. Here’s Cindy’s translation paralleled by YLV. (If you click once on it, it enlarges so that the whole thing is visible.)
Do you see any wording that makes the two translations go in different directions?

#6

I see a couple of differences, Dave, but nothing that seems to me to make a huge difference. There are some things in most translations that do matter to me though. But before I bring any of that up, do YOU see some significant differences?

(BTW, the HCSB is the Holman Christian Standard Bible – not a bad translation, but you do have to keep an eye on it as you do for any translation.)

Cole, how nice to have you here! I’ll go back over and read your notes again, but for the moment, I wanted to welcome you. Thanks for joining us! :slight_smile:

To add to the mix, I’ll look over the 5 W’s you talked about, Dave.

Who? I gather that most scholars believe this was indeed authored by Paul. His companion in prison was Epaphras, who appears to have been the founder of the Colossian fellowship. The letter would have been delivered by Tychicus, who also delivered the epistle to the Ephesians and the letter to Philemon concerning Onesimus.

What? Paul often communicated with the churches by sending letters (lucky for us!)

Where? The letter, of course, went to Colosse. It seems likely that the Colossians read the letter to the Ephesians and vice versa. They somewhat compliment one another.

When? He wrote it while in prison, probably in Rome, probably around 63AD according to most scholars.

Why? Scholars feel that from the tenor of the epistle that Paul wrote this primarily to combat some sort of heresy. The theory I’ve most often heard is that the heresy was a kind of angel worship or veneration, and that it also may have had something to do with legalistic thought (big surprise there!)

How? This is an interesting point about Colossians, and the reason scholars are unsure as to the nature of the heresy. Paul hints at it, but his main thrust in this letter is to paint a magnificent picture of the Lord Jesus Christ. That alone is, perhaps, an effective solution to all kinds of heresy. If we see HIM, then all the shadows fall away all by themselves.

#7

Cole, here are verses 19 and 20 (to make it easier for me)

of which you said:

I do think 20 refers to the entire creation. I think it’s an interesting note that the word “things” isn’t usually present in the passages where this sort of statement is made, and it isn’t present here either. If we were to translate it more literally it would be: "And through Him to reconcile the all unto Him, making peace through the blood of His cross – whether (things/those) on earth or (things/those) in heaven. I always think of “things” as meaning inanimate objects or at the most, animals – but not human beings. Yet Paul doesn’t include the word “things,” so to me, in order to make the verse read better, I would use both “things” and “those” as the language implies both – that is to say, everything and everyone.

As for verse 19, this is one of the verses where the version Dave posted is probably more accurate. The wording here is apparently somewhat nebulous as it gets translated in different ways, but I believe that most theologians agree that this is talking about the fulness of God. I think the creation probably lacks the capacity to choose whether or not to dwell in Christ, and even if it/we COULD so choose, at present it seems unlikely that the WHOLE creation would delight to dwell in Him. (Oops! I just realized I’m quoting another version – I spent quite a lot of time studying Colossians 1 a while back.) The version I finally decided to memorize has: “For in Him the entire Fulness delights to dwell,” which seemed to me at the time to be the most literal while still being understandable.

Also, in your second post: "For all was created by Him both in heaven and on earth; the visible and the invisible; whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities – I think you’re spot on. This also refers to the physical and the spiritual creation.

Dave, I like your version “the Son of His love” better than “the Son whom He loves.” There’s a lot of meat in this passage, and I’m interested to hear what you guys think this passage tells us about human beings?

Love, Cindy

#8

Hello Cindy,

Yes I would have to agree with you. This passage(among others) ‘troubled’ me into my current consideration of universal restoration. Currently though, for me it all mostly hinges on what Jesus and the authors of scripture meant to communicate by death—how far or short they mean to extend it as a metaphor, or if it was elastic in their minds. I thought I did, but I don’t know.

Looks like a promising thread.

Grace and peace to you.

#9
  1. Most of Coverdale’s awareness questions have already been addressed by Cindy:
    -of whom
    -and to whom,
    -with what words, (we’ll need to define some terms)
    -at what time,
    -where,
    The remaining awarenesses are:
    -to what intent,
    -considering what goes before and what follows after.

I’m going to have a go at those questions without a commentary and see what pops up. I’m sure I’ll fall short of what an expositor could do, but at the least, this approach will help me see the difficulties and issues that I cannot ‘solve’ myself. This is a thickly theological section, so the meaning of particular terms (“with what words”) will be very important.
Tomorrow.

#10

Cindy,

It doesn’t make any sense to say that "all’ means everything and everyone because then God would be reconciling holy angels to Himself that don’t need to be reconciled because they are already holy.

#11

It might not make any sense if you take it to that degree of literalness, Cole. Still, though – that’s what it says. That’s just literally what Paul wrote. So I think you make a valid point. Obviously those who are already in right relationship with God don’t need to be reconciled. Because of that, I guess I’d say that Paul was assuming that people would understand that he wasn’t talking about the holy angels needing to be reconciled.

We all exercise this kind of latitude in our speech from time to time. For example, an abolitionist might say, “We will not rest until all people are made free!” When she says this, she doesn’t include people who are already free, but she doesn’t see this as a problem. Everyone knows that the people who are already free don’t need to be set free. Maybe you or others will have a different view on this, but based on the fact that a) This is literally what Paul wrote, and b) the holy angels don’t need to be reconciled, I’d say that c) Paul did not (in his mind) include the holy angels in the group of “all” who need to be and therefore will be be reconciled.

Anyway, that’s my thought on it. What do you think?

Good catch! You’re good at picking up on all these details – very astute. :slight_smile:

#12

Thanks for commenting, Jeremiah. I LOVE this passage for that very reason :laughing: and of course also because it’s beautiful. :slight_smile:

#13

Cindy,

I think verses 19-20 are referring to the physical creation - heaven and earth. Creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed (Romans 8). This makes sense for the opening words of verse 21, Paul narrows his focus from all of physical creation to the believers in Colossae.

#14

“everything” cannot mean everything and everyone because the Holy angels don’t need to be reconciled. “Everything” means the universe or all physical creation.

The present universe will be reconciled. We will live in a new heaven and earth.

#15

Okay, Cole. That’s fine. My opinion is different from yours – that’s all. I heard what you said the first time and I gave my take on it, but you’re always welcome to your own ideas. Others listen to you; you listen to others; sometimes one or the other of us is persuaded and sometimes not. That’s okay. :slight_smile:

#16
  1. I think I jumped the gun by not considering the ‘to whom’ more closely. Naturally, it was to the Colossians, and Timothy. But who did Paul say they were?
    To answer this I scanned through the letter looking for clues. These things came up:
    -saints and believing brethren
    -they have faith in Christ and love for all the saints
    -they have the spirit of love
    -once, they were estranged and enemies in comprehension, by wicked acts
    -now reconciled by His body of flesh
    -are persistent in faith, grounded and settled
    -are not being moved from their great expectation - the Evangel
    -they are complete in Christ, entombed with Him in baptism, raised with Him
    -are dead to the offenses and the uncircumcision of their flesh
    -are 'dead together with Christ 'from the ‘elements of the world’
    -their life is hid together with Christ in God
    -they shall be manifested together with Him in glory.

Coverdale then goes on to ask: of Whom is this written. So I rescanned the letter (thankfully it’s short!!)(I noticed some recurring things, underlined - especially the word ‘ALL’) It is abundantly clear that one Whom is Jesus Christ, of which Paul says:
-grants Grace and Peace along with God our Father
-in whom we have deliverance - the pardoning of sins
-is the image of the invisible God, firstborn of every creature
-is before all, and all has its cohesion in Him
-all is created in Him, through Him, for HIm
-all that is in the heavens and the earth, visible and invisible, thrones, lordships, sovereignties, authorities
-Head of the body, Firstborn from among the dead
-in Him are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge
-in Him the entire complement of the Deity is pleased to dwell bodily
-all will be reconciled to Him, whether those on the earth or those in the heavens.
-Christ among us is the hope of glory
-He sits at the right hand of God

There are also some very clear statements about the Father:
-made Paul an apostle
-is the God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ
-makes us competent to share in the inheritance of the saints in light
-who rescues us out of the jurisdiction of darkness
-who transports us into the kingdom of the son of His Love
-wills to make known to us the glorious riches to be found in Christ
-raised Christ from the dead
-is sending indignation on the sons of stubborness
-receives our thanks through Christ

I think that merits stressing: those are things Paul said specifically about the Father.

to be continued

#17

Just wanted to say “thanks” for a great thread, great discussion and teaching, Cindy and Dave! :smiley: I’ll be following along and chime in if I have anything edifying to say…

#18

Thanks, Steve! :slight_smile:

#19

Wow, Dave! You certainly dug a whole lot more out of the “Who” than I ever did. :slight_smile: Totally impressed. This will help me look at some more aspects – I like the “of whom is it written” part. Somehow I’ve skipped over that part (as obvious, I suppose, but it’s not so obvious, is it?) until now.

#20

“everything” cannot mean everything and everyone because the Holy angels don’t need to be reconciled. “Everything” means the universe or all physical creation.

With regards to “Holy Angels” , are not demons usually considered to be fallen angels. If angels can get to be be fallen were they once Holy? Are angels immortal? I know the phrase “Holy Angels” is used in Revelation but “holy” just means to be set apart, it is not necessarily meant as “divine” and if these angels are not divine then i think they are not perfect beings.
Are they perfect, like God? If not do they also need to be reconciled to God?