#9. The “presentation” and “inheritance” of Col. i. 22, 28
and Col. i. 12 & iii. 24 compared.


We have shown that to attempt to compare the teaching of James, concerning the “perfecting” of the believer, with Paul’s concerning the justification of the ungodly, leads to confusion and false statements. The epistle to the Colossians provides an illustration of trying these “things that differ”, for the false principles that we have seen would rob the reader of the truth of the epistle of James will, if applied here, rob him of the truth as taught by Paul in Colossians. We might take the word “present” that occurs twice in Col. i. One could take his stand upon verse 22 and repudiate the apostle’s desire to present every man perfect that is found in verse 28. Another, coming upon verse 28 first, might conceivably criticize the doctrine of verse 22 as “dangerous”, yet who can fail to see that both passages teach glorious truth, but two passages in the balance, in order that our faith may comprehend truth as a whole.

“In the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in His sight” (Col. i. 22).
“Warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus” (Col. i. 28).

Here are two separate statements. (1) Christ’s presentation of the believer. (2) Paul’s presentation of the believer. Christ’s presentation is “in the body of His flesh through death”, Paul’s presentation is by “warning and teaching”. Christ will present the believer “holy”, Paul desires to present the same believer “perfect”. These passages contain the only reference to peristemi in Colossians. Col. i. 22 is basic truth, and can give no place for “works”, Col. i. 28, is subsequent truth, and contemplates the believer as amenable to “warning”. Col. i. 22 is parallel with Paul’s basic doctrine of justification by faith without works, and Col. i. 28 is comparable with James’ teaching of the “perfecting” of faith by works, subsequent to salvation. In neither case is there contradiction, the subjects differ as do foundation from superstructure, or as root from fruit. Can “holiness” be perfected? The reader who is unacquainted with the epistles of Paul might conceivably answer this question with an emphatic negative. Yet he would be wrong, for Paul uses the very expression “perfecting holiness” (II Cor. vii. 1). If we turn aside for a moment to consider the context of this important expression, we shall better appreciate the intentions of the apostle in Col. i. 22-28.

II Cor. vi. 14 - vii. 1.
A1 | vi. 14, 16. No unequal yoke.
     B1 | vi. 16. Reason. Ye are Temple. I will dwell.
A2 | vi. 17. Separation.
     B2 | vi. 17, 18. Reason. I will receive, be a Father.
A3 | vii. 1. Perfecting holiness.”

Throughout this passage Paul is dealing with believers, in contrast with unbelievers, urging them to act in harmony with their calling. They were “saints” (I Cor. i. 2), and this sanctification was theirs through Christ Who had been made unto them “sanctification” (I Cor. i. 30). It was complete and unalterable, and rested upon no merit, growth or godliness of the believer; all this is most evident in the epistle to the Corinthians, for these “saints” in themselves were guilty of most “unsaintly” conduct. The apostle did not and could not take away from these Corinthians, their sainthood, but he could and he did urge them to “perfect holiness”, which in other words, was their own response to such a holy calling.

“Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (II Cor. vii. 1).

The position of the believer in Col. i. 22 is so gloriously complete, that the mind is overwhelmed at the very contemplation of that presentation which will place the erstwhile enemy and sinner “holy, unblameable and unreproveable” in the sight of God. The apostle, however, was not content that the believer should be thus sanctified by the death of Christ. He longed to see the “fruit of holiness”, and so he warns them of the specious teaching, that is repudiated in Col. ii., which would beguile them of the reward which is associated with “perfecting” as in II Tim. iv., Phil. iii. and James. Supplementing the two “presentations” Col. i. 22 and 28, are the two “Inheritances” of Col. i. 12 and iii. 24. And again we have the same relationship and the same differences as we found in the two “presentations”, and the two aspects of “justification”, moreover we observe the same harmony when the principle of right division is applied.

“Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light” (Col. i. 12).
“Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ” (Col. iii. 24).

In the first instance, the work of grace is already accomplished. The Father “hath made us meet”, He “hath delivered us”, He “hath translated us”. No works of ours can be admitted in any shape of form. In the second instance the atmosphere changes from acceptance through grace alone to that of the desirability of acceptable service. The words are addressed to “servants” who are exhorted to serve their earthly masters “as to the Lord”, and that recognition of faithful service would be “the reward” of or pertaining to the inheritance.

In the presentation of Col. i. 22, it will be remembered, the reconciled sinner is to be presented, not only “holy”, but “unblameable and unreproveable”, but, the servant in Col. iii. is warned that

“He that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons” (Col. iii. 25).

Here “blame” and “reproof” come within the radius of the possible, just as surely as they are entirely outside the blessed scope of Col. i. 22. Both doctrines are compatible, both are truth, and the conjunction of the two, reasonable, salutary and right. Why cannot the same reasonableness be exercised when remoter comparisons are made, such as those between Romans and James, or between the doctrines of Hope and Prize?

---------------------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 34, page 240).

--------------------------------