Introduction: The Council of Nicea
Exactly 1700 years ago, from 20 May until late July in 325 CE the Epistle we read this morning became a key text in a dispute which almost tore the church to shreds. The issue hinged on the interpretation of Colossians 1:15. Arius, a Presbyter, taught that God the son was created by the father at a certain point and was therefore subordinate to the Father. In response, Alexander, Archbishop of Alexandria, insisted that God the Son was eternally generated from the Father, and a council of Egyptian bishops sided with him. Arius then whipped up support even from the great church historian Eusebius of Caesarea, and his namesake, Eusebius of Nicomedia. Emperor Constantine, who had recently become sole emperor, decided he could not afford to have the church he had recently sided with divided, and he called for a Council of the Church to settle the issue. It began at Ancyra, but then was moved to Nicaea in Bithynia, close to the imperial capital (then at Nicomedia). Some 300 bishops attended. By the time it concluded, a first version of the Nicene Creed was adopted, although the version we use on feast days was amended by the First Council of Constantinople in 381.
Colossians 1:15
On the face of it, Arius was sure that Colossians 1:15 was for Arius, the smoking gun. “Firstborn over all creation” could certainly be read as saying that “there was a time when the Son was not”. (This is also a favourite proof text of Jehovah’s Witnesses today). But in response Alexander – and above all the redoubtable Athanasius, also from Alexandria, pointed to the first part of the verse “the Son is the image of the invisible God”. As Ambrosiaster wrote, “This is said here so that it might be understood that the Son is the same kind of being as the Father. He comes from him and is no different from him in the divinity of his nature. He is said to be the Father’s image and likeness, so that unbelievers will not think that he is a different god, since he is included under the same name. He is therefore called the true Son, so that people will believe that he comes from God the Father himself.” Prototokos is a rare word, but the concept is familiar from the LXX. The first-born has a special status, chosen and beloved. And the paragraph goes on in v 17 that he precedes all creation and is the glue of all creation so he cannot just be the first created being.
This whole extraordinary paragraph argues that God the Son is eternally with the father, and in relationship to the creation, is the agent of God. If he were created, then he is part of creation, a lesser being. Paul insists that the Jesus of Nazareth has had an eternal existence before all time. “If the pre-incarnate Lord was the agent of all creation and pre-existed before everything, it leads to the conclusion that only God can satisfactorily account for Christ’s being.” (Ralph Martin Colossians, p. 45). Athanasius pointed to the very next verse (1:16) and argued “if all the creatures were created in him, he is other than the creatures, and he is not a creature but the creator of the creatures (Orations against the Arians, 2.62).
We who hardly think about these issues today need to recognise what is at stake. Paul in writing to the small city of Colosse, which he had never visited, is clearly concerned in chapter 2 – and so presumably n chapter one – with what people have called Gnosticism (although we are not quite sure). Alexander 3 centuries later, was alarmed by a move towards treating the trinity as a hierarchy of Gods, with all the potential to allow for multiple points of entry through other sons of God, to the one eternal God. And we need to be concerned at any hint that treats Christ as one among the prophets or one inspiration against a multitude of inspired people. As Tom Wright has said,
What they need to know above all, if they are to grow as Christians, increasing in wisdom, power, patience and thanksgiving, is the centrality and supremacy of Jesus Christ. The more they get to know, and know about, Jesus Christ, the more they will understand who the true God is and what he’s done; who they are as a result; and what it means to live in and for him.
First Place in Everything [v18]
The central argument in this account is that he is the lord over everything. Here is an astonishing statement for Christians who could remember the earthly Jesus,
This is possibly meant to be sung. Often described as a hymn. It is a creed to the Jesus of Nazareth who is now universal lord over creation. This means that the heresies of chapter 2 are empty deception.
The hymn is about creation and the creation order under God. It draws on the wisdom tradition and applies them to Christ.
But it is more glorious than this. Christ is the cosmic Christ, the source and the centre of all life, of all authorities, He is pre-existent, and he is the glue for the whole of the created world. So we must not consign the created order as evil or nothing, for God in Christ ordered it to be so.
The thrones and dominions must in some way refer to the mythos of the empire, seen by many in Paul’s day as universal, with the divine emperor using the powers of the universe. From the days of Alexander onwards, the notion that through force the empire would advance is central. Instead Paul see this as reconciled by the cross.
The Eikon or image is a statue or paintings or a mirror image or the figure on a coin. It is a depiction of the essence of a person. So it has a radiance, a visible revelation of the being. This is a platonic idea, but here not creation but Christ is the eikon, because he reveals God. Invisible may be misleading, it is what we cannot see, but it still exists. Note the word play in, through, to. Stoics (eg Marcus Aurelius) use this construction. Through and for explain “In” in this verse. The argument is anti-stoic. Creation is not the goal. “the omnipotence of God has been placed into the hands of one man, the Jewish Messiah, who dominates all of creation as Lord”. (AYB, Barth). “It was an apt instrument to counteract pantheistic notions, to proclaim the historic manifestation of God’s omnipotence in one man … to ridicule magic ways of perceiving and manipulating God’s power, and to introduce statements on the ethical responsibility of Christians.” (Barth). The various types of authorities seem to mean earthly and angelic authorities (maybe guardian angels). Pre-existence is here. Firstborn from the dead obscure, but it is the resurrection which installs the son of God into power. Verse 19 not clear if God is the subject, but seems to mean all the fullness of God fills Jesus. Does the reconciliation bring alienated creation back into connection with God? Did some angels need to be reconciled. It may not focus on the alienation of all things but just the force of the peace of God creating fruitfulness.
The father is made visible in Jesus.
Peace through the cross (1:20)
If this is an early Christian hymn which Paul is adapting, then very likely the second verse starts in verse 18, where a new creation is described (again the word “firstborn”, and again obviously not meaning literally the first). But this new creation is signalled by the resurrection. So this signals a new creation. Note the links between creation and redemption, evident in the OT. The huge significance of the church – cosmic significance in verse 18! So we become presented and holy (v 22) so the reconciliation changes who we are.
The passage goes on in verse 20 onwards to expound how the glory of creation takes new and significant extension in what the incarnate Son of God did in making a new creation. So there is a link between Christ in creation and the doctrine of the incarnation. As F.F. Bruce noted, “there is a close association between the doctrine of human creation in the divine image and the doctrine of our Lord’s incarnation. It is because humanity in the created order bears the image of their Creation that the Son of God could become incarnate as human and in his humanity display the glory of the invisible God.”
He came on a mission to reconcile all of creation, the whole universe to its creator. And so in the incarnation of God the son as the baby of Bethlehem, and in the sacrifice of Christ on the cross reconciliation was made. Note that I used the term sacrifice. Whatever that meant in the old Jewish rituals here in the “blood of the cross” is a statement that the deepest alienation running through creation has been given a fresh beginning.
The empire regularly sought to defeat other powers and declare the pax Romana, through its might. But here is reconciliation in quite a different way. The blood of the Christ defeated is actually the means of reconciliation. Reference to the blood of the cross = violent death. Also see v 22 possibly sacrifice. But also a reference to incarnation.
The text thus is best understood as declaring the sufficiency or the adequacy of Christ as saviour. Some see this as a damaging approach, that Jesus becomes the new emperor. But the emphasis is (v 22) on Christ’s physical body through death, that this is the means to accomplish our redemption. There are various ways to understand this, as we saw in the theology group, but note that this event created a universal gospel (verse 23).
What a profound description this is. It goes on to include overcoming alienation (v21) Is this about the estrangement of humans and creation from God? Barth/Blanke argue instead argue this is part of the deepest eschatological purpose of God, not just for peace, but for enrichment and fulfilment.
V 27 Christ in You, the Hope of Glory
Did you notice the goal of salvation in 1:28? To present every person mature in Christ. For Paul’s goal is our maturity, our fullness in Christ. In a service where we have marked the beginning of Christian commitment it is important that we look forward to its long-term goal. Normally the New Testament picture is us in Christ. But here the picture is different, of someone at work within us, giving us hope for the future of what we may become.
This universal sufficiency of Christ is a profound goal. The mystery hidden for ages is the open secret that Christ is all and in all, the sovereign Lord.
We need to be careful.
Eusebius draws on Colossians to celebrate a preexisting Son of God through whom all things were created, who is now enthroned in splendor, triumphant over the nations, but who now has an earthly representative, Constantine, who is the earthly image of that cosmic rule and who is overthrowing pagan religions and extending the Christian empire to include Greeks and barbarians. Christ and Caesar are together united in a cosmic and global rule. Thus what began as a subversive challenge to the current power could in the history of its reception become a support system for that power.
But it comes about as we share in the messianic woe. Recall Jesus’ words to Paul “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting (Acts 9). One with Christ we also participate in the experience of agony.
Again, to cite F.F. Bruce, “This Christ, whose life flows in all his people, is the one whom the apostle and his associates proclaim. He is the sum and substance of their message, whether in the saving news which they announce, to bring men and women to faith, or in the teaching which they impact to those have believe. They have not learned all there is to know when they have come to Christ; that is only the beginning.
But we need to see that we do not need to claim a special endowment of Christ to accept his fullness as a special endowment. Justification is enough.
Conclusion
So we may see that good and rich theology is the food which may make us strong. Realising that he has first place in everything, that he has provided reconciliation for all who come to God in Christ, and that in Christ is the hope of glory, we need constantly to understand how we are on very different paths than most of the world. In our community there are many salves, cures, techniques and apps that are supposed to bring us harmony and help and community. But we need a new Nicene creed today, not that the old one has failed, but we need a fresh assertion of the universally sufficient and pre-eminent Christ, and to discover in our spirits that he is indeed our hope of glory.
The gospel reading praises Mary who prefers to stop and meditate rather than action. And I think we need to be careful that our Christian action is built on understanding Christ himself.