With Christmas behind us and New Years just around the corner, everyone is going to be figuring out what they are going to do for their New Year’s resolution.  Goals will be set.  Exercise equipment will be purchased.  Books will be read.  The plans will be made, the goals will be set, and a few months into the new year failure will creep in.  So how do you make a new years resolution that you’ll actually keep?

Why do we fail?  Are new years resolutions cursed?  Is there any way to be successful?  Some would say no, but I think there is.  I think the problem is with the type of resolution and not with the ideas of resolutions itself.  A few years back I had the opportunity to listen to Jeff Vanderstelt of Soma Communities in Washington share his thoughts on churches having values.  I think his ideas help answer this issue perfectly.

He stated that the problem with values is that they fall short.  Values can be narrow minded and ultimately don’t help us accomplish what we want.  Values are generally based just upon actions.  At the heart of values is the idea that we need to DO something. But we need to call people to BE something.  When we help people find a new identity, their actions will automatically follow.

In this same mindset, I think we need to give up goals and action plans and exchange them for new identities (these identities should always be subservient to our identity in Jesus). Let me give you an example.  Here is a typical New Years resolution:

I will run a 5k.

It seems simple enough.  There are even apps that will help you accomplish this goal.  But many of us will fail and those that accomplish it will only have to set another goal.  But what if we changed this from an action to an identity?

I will become a runner.

The difference in my mind is world’s apart.  With the first, you might run a 5k, but then what do you do?  With the second, you will run many 5k’s.  You’ll change your diet.  You’ll find fellow runners. You’ll buy they right equipment.  You will change your lifestyle.  Why?  Because you are a runner and that is what runners do.

When you simply set a goal, you’re done when you accomplish it.  When you decide to become something (change your identity), you change everything about you for the rest of your life.

This past June, Shannon gave birth to our second boy…Mason Lee David Qualls.  While Mars Hill Church doesn’t believe in Infant Baptism, we do have baby dedications.  This Sunday (Christmas), our church will be having baby dedications.  If you aren’t familiar with baby dedications, this is where the parents present the child to the church, the church and the parents promise to raise the child to know about Jesus, and they pray for the child and family.

There isn’t anything magical about a baby dedication. It doesn’t make the child a Christian (only Jesus can do that).  It’s actually more for the parents and the church.  This isn’t to try to secure the child a place in heaven, but it’s to set in the heart of the parents and church how the child should be raised. If it doesn’t save the child, why should you do a  baby dedication?

Well here are the three reasons, Shannon and I are doing it.

1. It’s Biblical

You see in the Old Testament that God gave Abraham a sign to show that he and his family were dedicated to the Lord (circumcision).  As we entered the new covenant, we see that this particular symbol was done away with as the sign. Baptism replaced it as the sign of someone that has believed in Jesus for their salvation.  While some would now say that we should now baptize infants because of this, I don’t see enough in scripture to support baptizing children (another topic for another time).  I see baptism consistently happening when someone comes to a personal faith in Jesus.

What I do see constantly in scripture though is parents being dedicated to raising their children to know Jesus.

• Deuteronomy 6
• Proverbs 22:6
• Luke 2:22-24

2. It’s Counter-Cultural

Where I live in Albuquerque, NM, it seems like you generally have three options when it comes to the subject of dedicating your child –   Abandonment, Religion, or Spirituality.  The majority of kids in Albuquerque will grow up without a dad in their house.  They will never know what it means to have the daily influence of a man in their lives.  They will grow up having daddy issues that only Jesus can save them from.  By the grace of God, my boys will not have to experience that.

To say that Albuquerque is steeped in Catholic tradition would be an understatement.  While I believe there are a lot of Catholics that love Jesus and I’ll be hanging out in heaven with, there are a lot of Catholics in this area that feel they have get in to heaven free ticket.  They will site that they were baptized as an infant and took their first holy communion at such and such an age.  There faith is based in a ceremony and not in Jesus.

If you’re not abandoned or religious in ABQ, then you’re left to be raised in some vague spiritual system.  Children are raised with a mix of various religious, spiritual, and demonic rituals.  This leaves the child finding their righteousness in anything and everything…other than Jesus.

I want Mason’s dedication to be a counter-cultural witness to the saving grace of Jesus alone.  We are dedicated to Jesus alone, and we dedicate Mason to Jesus alone.  By the grace of God, we are raising him to trust in Jesus and not religion or spirituality.

3. It’s Familial

Shannon and I want to build a legacy.  We want the name Qualls to decrease and the name of Jesus to always increase. When I hear the name Graham, Wesley, Spurgeon, and Edwards, I think of Jesus.  I want the name of Qualls to be synonymous with Jesus.  The sad thing is that it only takes one generation for this to stop.  Therefore, it is my hope that some day I will get to be at the baby dedications of my grandchildren and great-grandchildren.  But it must start with me.  So this Sunday I am pumped that we get to dedicate Mason Lee David Qualls to Jesus. Come join us if you are in town.

I’ve always thought that Rick Warren has been misunderstood and misinterpreted.  It is awesome seeing two men that have had an influence in my life together in the same room.  It’s awesome seeing Rick Warren’s heart and deep doctrinal basis for what he does.  I would highly recommend carving out 98 minutes and see watch two men who love Jesus and have been used greatly by Jesus.

This made me wonder though if I have a problem with being content with what God has given me at this time.  One of the areas that I struggle with in my life is being content.  I always notice the flaws.  I always want the bigger, better, newer, brighter, faster, cooler, etc.  The default of my heart is to be discontent with whatever I have.

So I’ve been seeking the Holy Spirit to work in my heart and help me be content with what God has given me.  But this one situation is really a crappy situation.  It doesn’t seem like God is going to rescue me from this situation any time soon.  So I need to be content, but do I need to be happy about it too?

I have joy that God is using this situation to purify me.
I have joy that God is giving me the strength to get through it.
I have joy that God is loves me enough to pursue me in this.
I have joy that God is providing.
I have joy that God has given me friends suffer with me.
I have joy that God is right here with me and will not forsake me.

I’m content to the extent that I’m not looking for other options.  I’m letting God work in His own timing.  But do I need to be happy about the situation itself inorder to be content? I don’t have an answer for that question at the moment.  So I’ll just keep seeking God and His word in the time being.

Most people without kids don’t realize the stress and time that is envolved with raising children.  I don’t know how many times I’ve talked to a single person and wanted to smack them when they say, “I’m so busy!  I just don’t have time to __________.”  Normally their excuse is that they are working a part-time job and taking the bare minimum of credit hours at school.  Then for some reason they feel they have the right to look down on their married friends who only have a job and a kid to raise.

The reality that this article presents is that raising children (especially a stay at home mom) is probably one of the hardest “jobs” out there.  It is a strenuous joy that you can never truly understand until you get to undertake it yourself.

So here is my challenge.  Instead of living in your bubble, step back and evaluate how you could serve and sacrifice for your friends who have kids.  When the next great movie comes out, watch your friends kids so they can see it instead of seeing it yourself (it’s called sacrifice).  Show up randomly and do some household work (cleaning, dishes, dusting, laundry, etc.).  Take their kids out and let them have a quiet night at home.  Hang out with mom and give her some adult conversation during the day.

I can tell you from experience, these are some of the greatest blessing you can give to parents.

I’m kinda emotionally overwhelmed/drained from yesterday.  The sermon was really heavy and life giving, but more than that, I found out that two guys that I was praying for accepted Christ yesterday.  The crazy thing is that I didn’t know either guy at all.

The first guy had posted something on our church’s web site a few weeks about life struggles.  It was clear that he wasn’t a believer.  God put it on my heart to pray for the guy’s salvation.  I had never met him, and had no plans to ever meet him.  The next thing I know…his girlfriend is attending out community group.  Then yesterday he attended the service with her and God saved him.

The other guy I still haven’t met.  One of my volunteers during the 7pm service asked if I would pray for his friend that was attending the service.  The guy (not the volunteer) was addicted to drugs and decided he wanted to come to church again.  I prayed a quick prayer and didn’t think to much about it afterwards.  I saw on Facebook this morning that the guy met Jesus and God saved the guy last night.

I know that God saves whoever He wants.  So I think it’s so cool that God allowed me to be a part of these guys’ story.  It just goes to show that one of the most powerful tools for evangelism is prayer.

This perspective of a missional church starkly contrasts the typical church today that sees itself as a church that has missions.  In these churches, missions are always done by a specially called person who is a missionary.  Missions is always done in a foreign country.  Missions is a program or ministry that is run by a committee in the church.  The church goes on mission trips, has a missions fund, and has a missions bulletin board in the foyer with a map of the world with colored pushpins in it.  Missions is completely separate from the church and exist out of the church.  The church has missions.

Whereas a missional church understands the opposite—the mission of God has a church.  This perspective changes everything.  This means that the mission field is where the church is.  We are all missionaries.  There is no missions program.  Instead, every program and ministry is a missional program.  The church doesn’t run missions—the mission runs the church.  The church doesn’t have a mission.  The mission has a church.  This is what it means to be a missional church.  Being missional isn’t the next catchy fad, but instead it is being caught up in the mission of God.

The word missional also gets its meaning and understanding from John 20:21 when Jesus tells his disciples, “As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” We must understand that the Father sent Jesus.  God is a missionary God.  God is on a mission to reconcile the entire world to Himself.  Therefore, the Father sent Jesus into the world to usher in the Kingdom of God in order to begin this reconciliation.  This is what theologians call the Missio Dei (Latin for Mission of God).

Jesus then tells his disciples that he is sending them on the same mission.  Jesus calls his church to go into the world and to share that the King has come and that we can be reconciled to the Father.  Being a missional church means that you understand that the church is sent on mission as an instrument and as a sign of the Missio Dei.  Although the word missional has only been used for a few years, the concept has been around since the 1950s.  Darrell L. Guder and Lois Barrett tell us the following:

By mid-century, the emphasis in mission thought shifted toward a theocentric approach that, in contrast, stressed the mission of God (Missio Dei) as the foundation for the mission of the church.  The church became redefined as the community spawned by the mission of God and gathered up into that mission.  The church was coming to understand that in any place it is a community sent by God.  “Mission” is not something the church does, a part of its total program.  No, the church’s essence is missional, for the calling and sending action of God forms its identity.  Mission is founded on the mission of God in the world, rather than the church’s effort to extend itself.[1]

A missional church exists because of and for the mission of God.

The word missional’s meaning is rooted deeply within the understanding of the church’s purpose. This purpose displays itself in three different ways. The church is a missionary sent on mission as a sign and instrument of the Missio Dei. The first area in which we are called to be missional is as a missionary in our own culture. The general idea of a missionary is a person in a foreign country in a completely non-Christian culture. But in reality, today all Christians live in non-Christian cultures. Tim Keller gives insight into this reality by focusing on the missionary Lesslie Newbigin:

The British missionary Lesslie Newbigin went to India around 1950. There he was involved with a church living ‘in mission’ in a very non-Christian culture. When he returned to England some 30 years later, he discovered that now the Western church too existed in a non-Christian society, but it had not adapted to its new situation. Though public institutions and popular culture of Europe and North America no longer ‘Christianized’ people, the church still ran its ministries assuming that a stream of ‘Christianized,’ traditional/moral people would simply show up in services. Some churches certainly did ‘evangelism’ as one ministry among many. But the church in the West had not become completely ‘missional’—adapting and reformulating absolutely everything it did in worship, discipleship, community, and service—so as to be engaged with the non-Christian society around it. It had not developed a ‘missiology of western culture’ the way it had done so for other nonbelieving cultures.

Even if you are in a “Christianized” culture, the reality is that we still need to view ourselves as missionaries. Every culture needs some amount of contextualization of the gospel. This means that you have to be missionary to do the contextualization needed to present the gospel.

What is the difference between a church that has missions and a missional church? This seems to be the question that everyone is asking lately, and it has been one that I’ve been developing a personal answer to for a while.

There always seems to be a new buzzword in Christian circles every few years. The words enter our vocabulary quickly and leave just as fast. People reword mission and purpose statements around them, and some even restructure their entire church around them. “Seeker-sensitive,” “purpose-driven,” “organic,” and “emerging” are just a few, but the newest to be added to the list is the word “missional.” It is the new buzzword of our day. There are missional churches, missional small groups, missional preaching, missional books, missional degrees, and even missional missiology.

But what does “missional” mean exactly? Most people use it without even stopping to determine what it means. Worst yet, some simply make it mean what they want it to mean to give themselves license to do idiotic and irrelevant acts. This is a sad thing, because the word missional has a deep and beautiful meaning for our churches today.

For one of my classes last semester, I had to define what the local church is.  Fo the fun of it, I thought I would share with you what my definition came out to be.

This definition is heavily based on Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears, Vintage Church: Timeless Truths and Timely Methods (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009), 38. I took a considerable amount of time studying the different elements of their definition and added where I personally thought it might be lacking.  Since I am a member of Mars Hill Church, I wanted to stay as close to Mars Hill Church’s definition of a church and only tweak it a little bit.

The local church is a community of confessing and covenantal believers of Jesus Christ who are organized under Biblically qualified leadership. They regularly gather physically for preaching and worship, and scatter in the unity and power of the Holy Spirit to carry out the mission of God by evangelizing and caring for people everywhere. They observe the Biblical sacraments of baptism and communion, and are disciplined to maintain the purity of the church in order to live out the Great Commandment and the Great Commission to the glory of God.

What do you think?  Would you change anything?  Do you have a working definition of the church?

Thanks to Mike Anderson and Jordan Buckley for asking and for all you hard work at theResurgence.com.  You and your team do amazing work, and it’s a true blessing to me personally.  If you’re not subscribed to theResurgence.com, you need to go there right now and check out all their stuff.  Once again thanks.

Click Here if you can’t see the video.

There are several more themes about Jesus that Paul presents in his letter that we don’t have time to cover here. Paul presents Jesus as the mystery of the Father,[1] our proclamation,[2] the resurrection,[3] our mediator,[4] the fulfiller of Old Testament law,[5] and our sanctifier.[6] It is clear, though, that as you read the correspondence from Paul to the Colossians, you see that they were receiving a clear, concise, complete, and authoritative teaching on several themes that would help form their (and our) understanding of the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Paul writes the letter as an “apostle of Jesus Christ…to the saints and faithful brothers in Christ at Colossae” (Col. 1:1). He gives thanks for their “faith in Christ Jesus” (Col. 1:4). Paul goes on to give them deep doctrinal truths about the person and work of Jesus.[7] He speaks of his own ministry for and in Jesus.[8] He helps the Colossians see the errors in the heresies about Jesus.[9] Lastly, he ends his letter by helping the Colossians see what a life lived in Christ looks like.[10] The letter to the Colossians was written by a minister of Jesus, to a people of Jesus, to give a better understanding of Jesus, so that the Colossians could learn to walk in Jesus. From start to finish, Paul’s letter to the Colossians is all about Jesus.

[2] Col. 1:28; 4:3

[3] Col. 2:12; 3:1

[4] Col. 3:17

[5] Col. 2:16-19

[6] Col. 1:28; 2:7; 3:16

[7] Col. 1:9-22

[8] Col. 1:23-19

[9] Col. 2:1-23

[10] Col. 3:1-4:18

Of all the ways that Paul presents Jesus’ atonement, he devotes most of his attention to Jesus being presented as the Colossians reconciliation. Colossians 1:19-22 states:

For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him….

Grudem defines reconciliation as “the removal of enmity and the restoration of fellowship between two parties.”[1] It is through Christ that the relationship that God once had with humanity in the Garden of Eden is restored.

Paul tells the Colossians that they were alienated. MacArthur explains that “Apallotrioo (alienated) means ‘estranged,’ ‘cut off,’ or ‘separated.’ Before their reconciliation, the Colossians were completely estranged from God.”[2] There was no relationship between them and God. As we’ve already seen, this wasn’t an estrangement in which God was simply ignoring them though. Instead, they were cut off from God and under His wrath.

This estrangement went two ways though. Paul continues to write that the Colossians were “hostile in mind” (Col 1:21). Stott says, “True, we were ‘God’s enemies,’ hostile to him in our hearts. But the ‘enmity’ was on both sides. The wall or barrier between God and us was constituted by our rebellion against him and by his wrath upon us on account of our rebellion.”[3] The Colossians’ estrangement from God was their choice as they were hostile towards God and chose to do “evil deeds” (Col. 1:21). God in his righteousness could not be in their presence because of their sin and had to separate himself from them.

Paul shows the Colossians are no longer estranged from God though. The relationship has been restored, and it is Jesus who reconciles them by “making peace by the blood of his cross” (Col. 1:20).  Jesus “has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death” (Col. 1:21). Reconciliation happens by the blood of Jesus on the cross. Hendriksen explains what this reconciliation means:

Through the blood of the Son of God’s love peace had been made. He, meaning this Son of God’s love, in his body of flesh (that was the sphere of the reconciliation), and through his death (that was the instrument) had brought about a return to the proper relation between the Colossians and their God. A return, not as if there had been a time, many, many years ago, when these Colossians had been Christians, but rather in this sense, that the establishment of peace between the Father-heart of God and the soul of the sinner is for the latter a going back to the state of rectitude in which God originally created man.[4]

Jesus pays the penalty for their sin and cleanses them from it, allowing the Colossians to have the close, intimate relationship that man once had with God.

In this passage, Paul also speaks of Jesus’ reconciliation of all of creation. This isn’t reconciliation in the same sense that is spoken of for the Colossians. Paul isn’t presenting a doctrine of universalism. Instead, Paul is referencing back to the preeminence of Christ in creation that is stated in verse 16 as Paul says, “For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.” MacArthur clarifies that “there is a sense in which even fallen angels and unredeemed men will be reconciled to God for judgment – but only in the sense of submitting to Him for final sentencing. Their relationship to Him will change from that of enemies to that of the judged.”[5] Paul is speaking of a reconciliation that brings all things under the rule of Jesus Christ.

[2] MacArthur Jr., Colossians and Philemon, 60.

[3] Stott, The Cross of Christ, 197-198.

[4] Hendriksen, Phillippians / Colossians / Philemon, 83.

[5] MacArthur Jr., Colossians and Philemon, 59.

In the same way that Paul presents Jesus as their propitiation, he presents to the Colossians that Jesus is their expiation. On the Day of Atonement after the high priest had sacrificed the goat and sprinkled its blood on the mercy seat as Israel’s propitiation, he performed a ceremony with another goat:

And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins. And he shall put them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who is in readiness. The goat shall bear all their iniquities on itself to a remote area, and he shall let the goat go free in the wilderness (Lev. 16:21-22).

Whereas the first goat paid for the sins of the people, the second goat actually removed those sins from the people. This cleansing from their sin is what we call expiation.

Paul reminds the Colossians that they were “doing evil deeds” (Col. 1:21). The Colossians are reminded of their “old self with its evil practice” (Col 3:9, NASB). They were a people that were marred by their sin, but Paul also reminds them of the expiation of Jesus. Jesus “has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him” (Col 1:22). Through the cross of Christ, their sins are “set aside” (Col 2:14), and they are presented to God as holy. This is only possible because Jesus acted as their expiation, cleansing them from the filth of their sin.

In Paul’s letter to the Colossians, it is clear that he wants them see that Jesus is their propitiation. Wayne Grudem defines propitiation as “a sacrifice that bears God’s wrath to the end and in so doing changes God’s wrath toward us into favor.”[1] This is a concept that would have been familiar to Paul’s Jewish readers in Colossae. Every year on the Day of Atonement, the high priest would offer a goat as a sacrifice for the sins of the people in order to deter the wrath of God.[2]

Paul clearly shows the Colossians that they were under the wrath of God because of their sin. Paul tells them to “put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming” (Col. 3:5-6). The earthly things that are in them, their sin, will lead to nothing more than the wrath of God. Wright clarifies:

Destruction, indeed, will be the result for those who disregard the warning: because of these, the wrath of God is coming. It is not the case that God happens to dislike this sort of behavior and so has decided as it were arbitrarily, to punish it. On the contrary. ‘The wrath of God’, it hardly needs saying, is not a malicious or capricious anger, but the necessary reaction of true holiness, justice and goodness to wickedness, exploitation and evil of every kind.[3]

Paul wants the Colossians to know that their sin will lead to the wrath of God. On the other hand, Paul doesn’t simply present the wrath of God. He also presents Jesus as their propitiation.

Paul tells them that God the Father is “making peace by the blood of [Jesus’] cross” (Col. 1:20). In the same way that a goat’s blood was offered on the Day of Atonement for the sins of Israel to hold back the wrath of God, it is that Jesus’ blood is offered on the Colossians part to bring peace with God. Unlike the goat’s blood though, Jesus’ sacrifice was done once and for all “by canceling the record of debt…nailing it to the cross” (Col. 2:14). It is through the cross that Jesus becomes a propitiation for the Colossians taking the wrath of God upon himself.

[2] Lev. 16:8-9, 15

[3] Wright, Colossians and Philemon, 135.

Paul also connects Jesus’ work on the cross as a victory over sin and the rulers of this world. “Christ was victorious over evil powers in his death, resurrection and ascension. In recent years this emphasis has been particularly associated with the Swedish theologian Gustav Aulén, whose own position has become known as Christus Victor, after the book of the same name.”[1]

Paul presents Jesus as the Colossians’ Christus Victor in his letter when he states that “by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him” (Col. 2:14-15). In one single act on the cross, Jesus took the penalty for the Colossians’ sin and a conquered its power. John Stott makes the connection in these verses for us in his foundational book The Cross of Christ:

Paul here brings together two different aspects of the saving work of Christ’s cross, namely the forgiveness of our sins and the cosmic overthrow of the principalities and powers. He illustrates the freeness and graciousness of God’s forgiveness (charizomai) from the ancient custom of canceling debts. ‘The written code with its regulations, that was against us’ can hardly be a reference to the law itself, since Paul regarded it as ‘holy, righteous and good’ (Rom. 7:12); it must rather refer to the broken law, which on that account was ‘against us and stood opposed to us’ with its judgment.…God frees us from our bankruptcy only by paying our debts on Christ’s cross. More than that He has ‘not only canceled the debt, but also destroyed the document on which it was recorded’.

Paul now moves from the forgiveness of our sins to the conquest of the evil powers…[I]t is surely significant that Paul brackets what Christ did to the ceirographon (canceling and removing it) with what he did to the principalities and powers (disarming and conquering them). The bond he nailed to the cross; the powers he defeated by the cross. It does not seem necessary to insist on the latter being any more literal than the former. The important point is that both happened together.[2]

Paul wanted the Colossians to see that Jesus’ death wasn’t only substitionary death on their behalf to pay their debt, but that his death was also victorious. Through Jesus’ victory on the cross, they now had victory over the power of sin and the rulers and authorities of this world.

[2] Stott, The Cross of Christ, 233-234.

Jesus is also presented to the Colossians as their redemption. Paul tells the Colossians that God the Father “has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:13-14). As Jesus has paid for their penalty of sin, he also redeems them from the domain of darkness.

As a slave is redeemed from an evil master, so are the Colossians. They are no longer mastered by sin because of the forgiveness found in the cross. Paul restates it to the Colossians and says, “you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses” (Col. 2:13). In the atonement, Jesus becomes their redeemer.

Paul presents Jesus to the Colossians as their penal substitutionary atonement. Being unable to take care of the penalty of their sins, Jesus substituted himself on the cross for them. Paul writes to the Colossians: “the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross” (Col. 2:14). The Colossians were in debt and deserved the penalty of death and hell.

The New American Standard translation of the Bible says that the certificate of debt was “hostile to us” (Col. 2:14, NASB). “The certificate was hostile to us, that is, it was enough to condemn us to judgment and hell, because ‘cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them’ (Gal. 3:10).”[1] But this debt was set aside when God took out the Colossians’ punishment in Jesus on the cross, thereby making him their penal substitutionary atonement. “As our substitute Christ did for us what we could never do for ourselves: he bore our sin and judgment.”[2]

[2] John R. W. Stott, The Cross of Christ (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1986), 276.

While Paul presents many different themes about the person and work of Jesus Christ in Colossians, none is more predominant than Jesus as the atonement for sin. It is in Christ that they have “the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:14). Paul makes reference after reference to the fact that Jesus died on the cross for the Colossians.

Each one of these is a reference to Jesus as the atonement for sin in one way or another, but each reference has its own flavor as to how Jesus is our atonement. The fact is that books have been written on each one of these themes in and of themselves. Therefore over the next couple weeks, we will briefly look at each one on it’s own to gain an understanding of the fullness of the message of atonement in Jesus that Paul was trying to convey.

Police cars in front of the house.

My mind is still spinning as I constantly ask myself the question…why?  Why would a father shoot his own daughter.  Two days ago only five blocks from my house, a father shot his 9-month-old daughter in the head in revenge for his girlfriend being unfaithful to him.  (Read the story here)  I found out the vague information from one of my neighbors and friends as news helicopters where circling the neighborhood.  My heart broke today as I read the full news story of what had happened.

I’ve known for awhile the dirty soul that lies within Albuquerque.  My pastor has said that Albuquerque is a city that is so beautiful on the outside, but dirty when you take a closer look.  I couldn’t agree more.  We have the Sandia mountains, amazing sunsets, deep culture, incredible food, and stunning art.  When you look closer though you see our high crime, fatherlessness, drug abuse, drunk driving, and list goes on and on.

But the dirty underside use to be a distant aspect of Albuquerque to me.  That was until we moved into our neighborhood about a year ago.  I love our neighborhood.  It is a socio-economic, life stage, ethnic, and linguistic mixture of Albuquerque.  The neighborhood has retired couples and newly weds buying their first homes.  It has migrant workers that are trying to give their kids the life they never could.  The school across the street from me is bilingual to accommodate english, spanish, and bilingual students.  There is an active neighborhood association.  One of the main bike routes for the city runs right in front of my house.   It is also part of the International District of Albuquerque.

If I didn’t tell you anymore, you would think I lived in a picturesque suburban neighborhood.  But when you take a closer look, you see something quite different.  It’s called the International District because it use to be called the War Zone and the city didn’t think that helped with PR.  The park across the street that is part of the elementary school is used by prostitutes at night to service Johns.  This was made very clear to me when our Community Group pick up trash a few months ago and threw away over 15 condoms.  While riding my bike, there have been a few times that I’ve nearly ran over hypodermic needles.  I live less than a mile from a gay cowboy bar (I don’t even know how that works).  Five cars were stolen in the neighborhood last month and now homicide can be added to the list.

I live in this weird tension of loving and hating the neighborhood that I live in.  I love the progress and culture of my neighborhood, but hate the sin and depravity that is here.  The thing that keeps me from selling my house and moving to suburbia though is Jesus.  In a weird way, I love knowing that I live in a neighborhood in Albuquerque that needs the gospel the most.

Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” – Mark 2:17

Instead of getting mad when I find used condoms by the curb, I find hope.  I know that I’m in a neighborhood that needs Jesus.  I know the gospel gets to shine the brightest in the darkest of places.  My heart is breaking for the family of the little girl that was shot.  My hands are shaking in grief and anger as I type right now.  I take peace in knowing that the full wrath of God will be poured out on the man that shot that beautiful little girl.  But I ultimately hope that for the man to trust in Jesus so that wrath that he rightly deserves will be taken out on the cross.

Please pray with me for my neighborhood.  That God would be glorified as family after family are changed by Jesus.  Pray for me that God will open doors in this neighborhood for the gospel to be proclaimed.  Pray that God would send and raise up more leaders to reach this neighborhood.

While Paul displays Jesus’ preeminence and authority over all of creation, he also takes the time to show Jesus in authority over the church. Right before Paul declares Jesus’ preeminence over everything in Col. 1:18, he states that Jesus “is the head of the body, the church.” Wright states:

It is to this Jesus Christ, none other, that the Colossians now belong in belonging to the church. This is the moment when…the thought moves from creation to new creation. Paul starts where the Colossians are, as members of the one world-wide people of God. If God’s people are the new humanity, the metaphor of a human body is utterly appropriate to express not only mutual interdependence (as in Rom. 12:5; 1 Cor. 12:12ff.) but also, as here, an organic and dependent relation to Christ himself.[1]

Jesus isn’t just the ultimate authority in the church, but he intimately leads his church. As it is impossible for our bodies to survive and move without our head, so it is true of the church. Jesus is in a deep and intimate relationship as he leads his church. Jesus is the head and we are “his body, that is, the church” (Col. 1:24).

Jesus’ headship in the church is also reiterated in Paul’s references to his and Colossians place in the church under and for Jesus. From the very first sentence in his letter to the Colossians, Paul shows Jesus’ headship by saying that he is “an apostle of Christ Jesus” (Col. 1:1). Paul’s apostleship is only shown to be of value because of its relationship to Jesus. When Paul speaks of Epaphras, he says that Epaphras “is a faithful minister of Christ” (Col. 1:7). Being called to one body in Christ, the Colossians are called to “let the peace of Christ rule in [their] hearts” (Col. 3:15). As the body of Christ, they are called to “do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him” (Col. 3:17). Lastly, Paul gives them a clear perspective on their work, saying that “Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men…You are serving the Lord Christ” (Col. 3:23-24). As members of the body of Christ, the person the Colossians ultimately work for isn’t here on earth but the person of Jesus Christ.

Jesus isn’t just the head of the church, but he is also displayed at the source of the church. Paul continues in verse 18 to say that Jesus “is the beginning.” MacArthur gives a better understanding of what Paul meant when he used the word beginning:

Arche (beginning) used here in the twofold sense of source and primacy. The church has its origins in Jesus. God “chose us in Him before the foundation of the world” (Eph. 1:4). It is He who gives life to His church. His sacrificial death and resurrection on our behalf provided our new life. As head of the Body, Jesus holds the chief position, or highest rank in the church. As the beginning, He is its originator.[2]

Because of the work of Jesus on the cross, the Colossians have been brought into the body of Christ. The source of the church is Jesus, as “in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross” (Col. 1:19-20). The Colossians have been saved from their sin to Jesus and his body, the church.

[2] MacArthur Jr., Colossians and Philemon, 51.

Because of Jesus’ standing as fully God and his role as the agent of creation, Paul naturally displays Jesus’ preeminence over all of creation. Paul tells the Colossians that Jesus is “the first-born of all creation” (Col. 1:15). Some might see this as confusing and think that Paul was saying that Jesus was created. Paul’s Jewish readers would have understood exactly the point he was making. “’Firstborn’ was a Hebraic-Jewish way of saying ‘specially honored.’ In the Old Testament the nation of Israel was called ‘firstborn’ (Ex 4:22). So was David (Ps 89:27). In such contexts, the reference is not to physical birth but to position of honor before God. Paul is saying that Christ has ‘pride of place’ over all creation.”[1]

Paul goes on to tell the Colossians that Jesus “is before all things” (Col. 1:17). Jesus “is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent” (Col. 1:18). John MacArthur Jr. comments on these verses, saying, “As a result of His death and resurrection, Jesus has come to have first place in everything. Paul summarizes for emphasis in verse 18. He wants to drive home the point as forcefully as he can that Jesus is not merely another emanation from God.”[2]

In the same line of thought, Paul focuses on Jesus authority. Jesus is “the head of all rule and authority” (Col. 2:10). The Father “disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him” (Col. 2:15). Ultimately, Jesus reigns over all of creation as he is “seated at the right hand of God” (Col. 3:1). Paul emphasizes the authority of Jesus by continuously using the title of Lord [kurious] for Jesus.[3] The word kurious ascribes to Jesus the place and position of might, power, master, and owner and is “the NT Gr. Equivalent for the OT Hebr. Jehovah.”[4] As Paul is writing to the Colossians, it is clear to see that he wants them to see Jesus in his rightful place, high and exalted in complete preeminence and authority over all of creation.

[2] MacArthur Jr., Colossians and Philemon, 52.

[3] Col. 1:3,10; 2:6; 3:13,17,18,20,22,23,24; 4:7,17

[4] Zodhiates, The Complete Wordstudy Dictionary, 900.

Paul also displays Jesus as creator in Colossians. He states that “by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities” (Col. 1:16). Paul wants to hammer home the point that everything was created by Jesus.  In fact, he goes on to restate his point. He says that Jesus was the agent and purpose of creation as “all things were created through him and for him” (Col. 1:16).   William Hendriksen explains:

All things – it makes no difference whether they be material or spiritual – were created in him, that is, with reference to the Son, the firstborn. As two walls and the bricks in these walls are arranged in relation to the cornerstone, from which they derive their angle of direction, so it was in relation to Christ that all things were originally created. He is their Point of Reference. Moreover, it is through him, as the Agent in creation, and with a view to him or for him as creation’s Goal that they owe their settled state.[1]

The Apostle Paul wanted to make sure there was no confusion about Jesus’ place in creation. He wanted to make it very clear to the Colossians that Jesus was creator and not creation.

Paul also goes on to emphasize Jesus’ intimate relationship with his creation. The next verse states that “in him all things hold together” (Col. 1:17). Jesus didn’t simply create the heavens and the earth to only walk away. Instead, Jesus sustains creation. Wright comments on Col. 1:17 saying, “The world is now sustained and upheld by Christ…The verb, again, is in the perfect, indicating that ‘everything’ has held together in him and continues to do so. Through him the world is sustained, prevented from falling into chaos. No creature is autonomous. All are God’s servants (Ps. 119:91) and dependents (Ps. 104).”[2]

Jesus’ act of sustaining is also focused on the Christians in Colossae. Paul states that “when Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory” (Col. 3:4). It is only the life that is lived in Christ that ultimately leads to glory with him. Paul refers to Jesus’ sustaining power elsewhere in Colossians. Paul is “struggling with all his energy that [Jesus] powerfully works within me” (Col. 1:29). The Colossians are told that since they have received Jesus Christ, they are now to “walk in Him” (Col. 2:6). Jesus is their savior and sustainer.

[2] Wright, Colossians and Philemon, 73.

While Jesus is fully God, he lives in relationship with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit as a member of the Trinitarian Godhead. Paul consistently presents Jesus as fully God, but he also presents Jesus as the Son of God. This doesn’t make Jesus any less of God, because Paul clearly articulates Jesus’ deity. But Paul distinguishes Jesus’ role and relationship within the Trinitarian Godhead. According to Bruce Ware,

The Son, then, is fully God. He is not one-third God, but fully God. Yet, it is not the Son alone who is fully God, but he eternally exists along with the Father and the Spirit, each of whom also possesses fully the identically same divine nature. Because of this, what distinguishes the Son from the Father and the Spirit is not the divine nature of the Son. This–the one and undivided divine nature–is also possessed equally and fully by the Father and the Spirit. Therefore, what distinguishes the Son is his particular role as Son in relation to the Father and to the Spirit and the relationships that he has with each of them.[1]

Throughout the epistle to the Colossians, Paul shows the relationship between Jesus and God the Father. Paul’s first reference between Jesus and God the Father is in Col. 1:3 when Paul gives thanks to “God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Paul establishes that there is God the Father and God the Son. Continuing in Colossians, God the Father delivers “us to the kingdom of his beloved Son^” (Col. 1:13). Paul declares that it is “the Father’s good pleasure for all the fulness to dwell in [Jesus]” (Col. 1:19, NASB).

Paul also makes known that the Son’s role is in submission to the Father’s authority. Jesus was used by the Father “to reconcile to himself all things” (Col. 1:20, ESV). “God [the Father] made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses” (Col. 2:13). Jesus’ role as the Son is to be used as the Father’s agent of salvation. Jesus is the Father’s agent of creation as “all things were created through him” (Col. 1:16). The Father also “disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in [Jesus]” (Col. 2:15).  Lastly, Jesus is our mediator to the Father. Paul says that the Colossians are to give “thanks to God the Father through [Jesus]” (Col. 3:17). Through Jesus, the Colossians had a relationship with the Father.

While Paul makes several references to God the Father, there is only one reference to the Holy Spirit in the epistle to the Colossians. In Col. 1:7, Paul speaks about Epaphras being a “faithful minister of Christ” to the Colossians. In the same sentence, Paul says that Epaphras has “made known to us your love in the Spirit” (Col. 1:8). While this doesn’t give us much of an understanding of the role and relationship between Jesus and the Holy Spirit, it does let us know that the Colossians would have known there is a third person of the Godhead. The Colossians would have to rely on other epistles from Paul that would eventually circulate to them, the gospels, and the teachings of Epaphras to get a better understanding of the rich interaction between Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

[SIDE NOTE: To have a better understanding of the Trinity, go buy Bruce Ware's book "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Relationships, Roles, and Relevance" right now and read it immediately.  It is the best book I've read on the Trinity to date (not like I've read a lot...but it's really good).  Don't wait...go do it.]

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Relationships, Roles, and Relevance