Let me pick up our observations on this important verse.  Check the previous post here for context of the opening words.

Paul follows up with two participles: “teaching and admonishing.” Some contend that these participles receive imperatival weight from the previous imperative (“Let . . . dwell,” cf. NRSV)[1], yet this seems doubtful[2] and it is best to find their meaning in subordinate relationship to that imperative.  Just what is that relationship?  They could indicate the means by which we are to let the word of Christ dwell in us richly,[3] or the mode in which this dwelling becomes reality[4], or they could indicate the result of letting that word so dwell within us.[5] There is obviously a evenly divided split in opinion regarding the function of these participles in the sentence.  All in all the best option seems to view them either as expressing means or mode, the difference in meaning being negligible.

These two actions have already been used to describe Paul’s personal ministry in 1:28, though in reverse order.  Now they are to characterize what the local believers are to practice with “one another.” The plural form of the reflexive pronoun (“one another”) can function also in a reciprocal manner and pictures the back-and-forth nature of the fellowship intended.[6] In speaking of “teaching” Paul uses a word which is used at times to speak of official teaching of doctrine within the church and the scope of those who are to undertake this ministry is limited (1 Tim. 2:12).  But here the word is clearly broadened to include all members of the body of Christ.  The word “admonishing” comes from a word which in turn comes from a compound of “mind” and “to place/put.”  Thus the literal sense of the word is “to put in mind.”[7] It means to admonish, to warn, or to instruct in the sense of “giving instructions in regard to belief or behavior.”[8] Being coordinate (“and”) with one another they present a positive (“teaching”) and more negative (“admonishing”) side to the total ministry of the word among the believers.

As one can quickly see this ministry must be undertaken “in all wisdom.” This is the third time this precise phrase has been used in Colossians (1:9, 28; 3:16).  Most telling is its use in 1:28 where it similarly tells us the manner in which Paul undertook these same two ministries.  Wisdom is a significant theme in this letter (1:9, 28; 2:3, 23; 3:16; 4:5), playing a more prominent role than it does in Ephesians (1:8, 17; 3:10).  This may be due to a special emphasis on wisdom among the false teachers in Colossae (2:23).  Paul has in view “all” or every form or expression of God’s wisdom.

[2] Wallace, 652.

[3] Harris, 168.

[4] Moo, 228; O’Brien, 207.

[5] Alford, 3:238; Wright, 144.

[6] Robertson, Grammar, 690.

[7] Thayer, 429.

[8] Friberg, 273.

I’ll warn you now, that I’m going to take at least three separate posts to try to unpack this marvelous verse!  So, to get us started within Paul’s context, I ask: How may we ever keep the well of God’s grace bubbling up within us (vv.12-14)?  How are we to cultivate a habitual gratitude (v.15)?

The Apostle steers us directly into the path with his next imperative: “Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you.” This is an obvious parallel to the opening expression of the previous verse (“let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts”).  The expression “The word of Christ” is found only here in the New Testament.  The “word of the Lord” (1 Thess. 1:8; 4:15; 2 Thess. 3:1) or the “word of God” (e.g. Rom. 9:6; 1 Cor. 14:36; Eph. 6:17) are more common.  Our present expression, however, is in keeping with the Christological focus of this letter.  Elsewhere in this letter Paul speaks of the afflictions “of Christ” (1:24), the circumcision “of Christ” (2:11), the substance (lit. body) “of Christ” (2:17), the peace “of Christ” (3:15), and the mystery “of Christ” (4:3).  The genitive (“of Christ”) here could be subjective (“the word which Christ speaks”)[1] or objective (“the word that speaks about Christ”).[2] Probably the latter is closer to Paul’s intent, but perhaps he provides an intentional ambiguity—it is the message Christ gave, which expounds and explains who He is, that has its core and center in Him.[3] This would be another way of referring to the gospel message itself, as expounded from the Scriptures—primarily at that time Old Testament (he does, after all, refer to Him as “Christ” or “Messiah[4]), but also to include in time the New Testament (cf. Rom. 16:25-27).

This “word of Christ” we are commanded to “Let . . . dwell” in us.  The present imperative form, as with the command of verse 15, demands that action be taken repeatedly, as a habit of life.  The word simply means to dwell or live in.  But here surely it means to dwell personally and powerfully, pulling in some of the idea of the parallel verb from verse 15 (“Let . . . rule”).  It is used five times in the New Testament, all by Paul and all metaphorically.  It describes God (2 Cor. 6:16) by the Holy Spirit residing in the believer (Rom. 8:11; 2 Tim. 1:14).  It also, closer to our usage here, can describe faith dwelling in the believer (2 Tim. 1:5).  Here the word of Christ is to dwell “in you.” Continuing the idea of their corporate experience and life (from verse 15) the plural form means “in your assembly”[5] not simply in each one of you personally.  Certainly for this to be true of all of them together it must be true of each one individually, but the point is that if “the peace of Christ” is to rule their relationships (v.15) then “the word of Christ” must dwell in their midst (v.16).  Personal opinion must bow to Christ’s word.  Personal feelings must yield to what Christ says.  Individual ideas must bow to Christ’s determinations through His word.  When this happens then peace will rule in their relationships.  Paul emphasizes even further the nature of this indwelling by saying it must be “richly” undertaken.  The adverb is used four times in the NT, three of those by Paul (Col. 3:16; 1 Tim. 6:17; Titus 3:6; 2 Peter 1:11).  It is related to the more frequently used noun which is translated as “rich.”  The adverb thus has the sense of richly, abundantly, and lavishly.

When God’s people live together in fellowship and gather together for worship “the word of Christ” must have a prominent and primary place.  Christ dwells among His people where His word is anticipated, sought out, welcomed, and allowed to rule.  Christ’s own indwelling is enabled through His word preached and taught in the power of the Holy Spirit.

[2] O’Brien, 206; Moo, 285-286.

[3] Dunn, 236.

[4] Moo, 286.

[5] Thayer, 217.

To his previous imperatives the Apostle now adds another command: “Let the peace of Christ rule.” The present imperative demands that action be taken repeatedly, habitually, and as a pattern of life.  The verb meant to be a judge or umpire in the public athletic games.  Thus it came more generally to mean to preside, to direct, to control.[1] That which we are to given such broad powers is “the peace of Christ.”  Just how is the genitive to be construed?  It could be an objective genitive: the peace which Christ possesses.  But surely it is a subjective genitive: the peace which Christ gives, the peace which comes from Christ,[2] or “the peace brought by Christ.”[3] Robertson suggests a combination of the two, saying it is the peace that Christ “has and gives.”[4] The peace which Christ brings and gives to us is first redemptive and vertical—establishing peace with God (Col. 1:20).  From that restored relationship Christ then brings to each of us peace within our hearts (the peace of God) and peace within our circle of relationships.

The arena of this peace’s reign is “in your hearts.” The heart is the core of one’s being—the place where intellect, volition, and emotion arise from.  In and from this locus peace is to be permitted sovereignty.  The preposition (“in”) identifies the location of peace’s rule, but it could mean either “in” or “among.”  The former would point to a personal experience; the latter to an interpersonal, communal experience.  Which is intended here?  Though the verb (“Let . . . rule”) is singular this phrase is in the plural.  Each individual believer is responsible to make certain that Christ’s peace reigns in his heart and from his heart in his relationships with others.  This would seem to underscore the more inclusive sense of the phrase “the peace of Christ” – it is something each one must receive, experience, and appropriate, but it is something that is also then experienced collectively as God’s people.

This is not simply a good idea passed on by the good Apostle.  Rather this is that “to which indeed you were called.” The preposition (“to”) is used spatially, meaning it was “into” such “peace” that we were called.  To this “you were called.”  Paul has just referred to the Colossians as “those who have been chosen by God” (v.12).  Now he elaborates on something of what that privileged grace gives and requires.  Here the aorist tense looks upon the event of God’s call extended to each believer.  The passive voice pictures God’s initiative in calling each believer.  God’s call to Himself through Christ is a call to be at peace (with Him) and to live at peace (with ourselves and one another).  This was a call “in one body.” This should be understood in the sense of “the oneness of the body being the sphere and element in which that peace of Christ was to be carried on and realized.”[5] Each one is called individually, but God is calling more than one and all of them together discover that they have been called into one unified body.

Paul now adds (“and”) a second imperative: “be thankful.” The verb (“be,” lit. “become”) may be drawing “attention to the ‘constant striving after this exalted aim as something not yet attained.’”[6] The present imperative demands repeated habitual action.  Gratitude is to become the default setting of our hearts and minds.  Though this particular adjective (“thankful”) is used only here in the New Testament, thanksgiving is major theme in Colossians (1:3, 12; 2:7; 3:16, 17; 4:2).  The present word designates the compulsion of one who is grateful to another for a favor bestowed.[7] Here then it views the believer’s gratitude in response to God’s grace extended into his life.  The emphasis may be not simply upon thanksgiving, but upon thanksgiving expressed.[8]

In the midst of all the hard work of relationships (vv.8-14) in which the believer must constantly be focused on extending grace to the next person, the well of God’s unceasing grace must constantly be bubbling up within him, manifesting itself in gratitude to God for His grace extended to him.  Apart from this ever present, always flowing supply of God’s grace and our resultant gratitude, we will soon run dry of grace to extend to the next person and our relationships will no longer be marked by the touch of God.

[2] Thayer, 182.

[3] BAGD, 227.

[4] Robertson, Grammar, 499.

[5] Alford, 3:237.

[6] O’Brien, 206.

[7] Rienecker, 581.

[8] O’Brien, 205.

“Beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity.” (Colossians 3:14)

The Apostle has commanded that we “put on” five virtues (v.12, see this post).  He has now one more notion to add before he closes the sentence: “Beyond all these things.” By “these” Paul is referring to the graces set forth in verses 12 and 13.  This is clear because the imperative “put on” from verse 12 should be supplied here (which the NASB does by “put on” in italics).  The precise emphasis of the word translated “Beyond” has been debated.  It could mean “over” (as in the final piece of clothing placed over all the other garments/virtues; cf. NIV), “in addition to” (as in “love” being counted as just one more virtue to be “put on”; cf. NET), or “above (all)” (thus marking “love” as the superlative or crowning virtue in the list; cf. ESV).[1]

That additional virtue is to be “love.” Unlike the previous nouns, this one is accompanied by the definite article, while those virtues were anarthrous.  This touch underscores the elevated estimate of this final virtue.

Indeed, it is that “which is the perfect bond of unity.” The relative pronoun (“which”) is in the singular and points back to “love.”  The verb (“is”) is in the present tense underscoring the ongoing nature of “love.”  The noun (translated “bond of unity”) refers to “that which binds together.”  It could be used in non-biblical Greek to describe the fasteners that hold different ships together.  In Ephesians 4:3 Paul uses it to exhort the Christians to preserve the unity of the Spirit “in the bond [same word] of peace.” (cf. its only other New Testament usage in Acts 8:23).  Paul used it in Colossians 2:19 in a metaphorical reference to the “ligaments” which hold the body of Christ together in unity.  The relationships of believers within the body of Christ must operate in “love” if they are to maintain the unity of the Spirit.  That which here is thus bound together could be either the previously listed virtues of verses 12 and 13[2] or the believers who are to practice them.[3] The former seems the more likely, given the nature of the imagery used.  In that case “love” could be seen either as the final layer of clothing (virtue) “put on,” as a necklace or broach which caps off the clothing, or as a sash or girdle which physically binds all the virtues together.  Here Paul adds a genitive noun to round out the meaning (“perfect,” lit. “of perfection”).  The noun speaks of a state of completion or perfection.[4] But how are we to understand the genitive?  It is unlikely to be a subjective genitive: “the bond produced by perfection.”  It could possibly be a genitive of apposition: “the bond that consists of perfection.”[5] It might be a “descriptive gen[itive] indicating the bond which signifies or indicates perfection.”[6] Thus this makes it “the bond that unites all the virtues (which otherwise have no unity) in perfect harmony or the bond of perfect unity for the church.”[7] Or it could be an objective genitive: “the bond which brings about perfection” or “the bond that perfects.”[8] In this case it would be the “new self” as a corporate whole, not simply the individual believer, which is brought to “perfection.”[9]

[2] Harris, 164; Moo, 281.

[3] DNTT, 3:592; Lohse, 148-149; O’Brien, 203-204.

[4] Friberg, 377.

[5] Robertson, 4:504.

[6] Rienecker, 581.

[7] BAGD, 785.

[8] Harris, 164-165; Lohse, 136, 148-149; Moo, 282; O’Brien, 203-204.

[9] Moo, 282.

Having enumerated five virtues which we are commanded to “put on” (v.12, see this post), the Apostle now (using two participles) reveals just how we are to do so.[1]

The first is “bearing with.”  The present tense marks this as a constant necessity in relationships.  The middle voice pictures the subject taking action on himself so as to bear up with others.  The word means to endure, to bear with, or to put up with difficult people or circumstances, the former being the focus here.[2] This action is to be taken reciprocally upon “one another.”

A second participle is now added (“and”): “forgiving.”  Again the present tense pictures this as a repeated, regular feature necessary to make relationships within the body of Christ work.  The middle voice again pictures the subject acting upon himself to extend forgiveness to the others in his life.  The word means to give freely or graciously as a favor and then by extension to forgive or pardon.[3] This action is to be taken upon “each other,” the reflexive pronoun being used for the reciprocal pronoun.[4] The reflexive pronoun pictures action “of each one toward all, –yea even to themselves included, Christians being members of one another.”[5]

These two actions, then, are the way we demonstrate “a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience” (v.12) toward one another.  The object of forbearing and forgiveness are not the same, however.  Indeed, they may be extended to one and the same person, but that within the person which requires forbearance and forgiveness are not the same.  As someone has well said, we forebear silliness, we forgive sin.

This must be the response of “whoever has a complaint against anyone.”  The use of the conditional particle and the subjunctive mood of the verb (“has”) forms a condition which pictures the condition as uncertain of fulfillment, but still likely (e.g. “if one has a complaint,” esv).  The unfortunate fact is that wherever followers of Christ live together complaints arise one against another.  Paul is ever the realist and here outlines the prescription for such occasions.  The issue is individual and personal—both pronouns being singular.  Indeed, the Greek text pictures the reality by setting the two indefinite pronouns in careful juxtaposition over against one another (lit. “someone to someone”).  In such a pair someone “has”—present tense—“a complaint” against the other.  The noun is used only here in the New Testament.  The verb from which this noun arises refers most commonly to errors of omission, meaning “to find fault with.”  Thus the noun is probably pointing to “a debt, which needs to be remitted.”[6] Far too often in the body of Christ someone concludes that some brother or sister “owes” them something for a wrong done.  And far too often they are out to extract payment from that person.  In such cases, the Apostle says, forbearance and forgiveness from “a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience” (v.12) are the order of the day.

And this cannot be merely granted in some grudging way.  Both the “ground and motivation”[7] of such grace are set forth when Paul adds: “just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you” (cf. Eph. 4:32).  The comparative conjunction (“just as”) provides the hinge point of similarity between our forgiveness and that of Christ.   The standard is “the Lord forgave you.”  He “forgave” is an aorist tense simply noting the doing of the deed.  The middle voice pictures Christ acting upon Himself to give Himself up in our place, taking our sin, exhausting the judgment of the Father against our rebellion.  Paul repeats the same verb used earlier in the verse, here however describing the forgiveness of the Lord toward us (cf. 2:13).  This He did for “you,” a plural pronoun acknowledging Christ’s death for each one of us, but picturing us as a redeemed company.

This beautiful picture of redeeming grace in view, the Apostle now says, literally, “so also you.”  The adverb (“so”) correlates this statement regarding us to the preceding statement regarding Christ.  What is true of Christ toward us should “also” be true of us toward one another.  The pronoun is again plural (“you”), laying the responsibility upon us each one, but picturing us as a whole body practicing such grace among ourselves.

Obviously none of us can give ourselves with the same redemptive effect as Christ gave Himself.  His work is done “once for all” (Rom. 6:10; Heb. 7:27; 9:12; 10:10).  He alone is the sin-bearer.  Yet precisely because of what He has done for us we can (and must) in like fashion extend grace to one another, not holding our offenses against one another.  Reflection on the relationship of Paul’s instruction here and Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 18:23-35 will prove instructive.

[2] BAGD, 65.

[3] Ibid., 876.

[4] Ibid., 212.

[5] Rienecker, 580.

[6] Lightfoot, 220; cf. Little Kittel, 580.

[7] O’Brien, 202.

Click here to see my chart of Galatians: galatians.chart

• “I always do the things that are pleasing to him.” (John 8:29)
• “I have obeyed my Father’s commands.” (John 15:10)
• “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Cor. 5:21)
• “… a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.” (Gal. 2:16)
• “It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us … our righteousness.” (1 Cor. 1:30)

Christ died to pay the penalty for my unrighteousness before God.

• “For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. ” (1 Pet. 3:18)
• “You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” (Rom. 5:6-8)
• “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.” (1 Pet. 2:24)

Christ lives again to produce in and through me the righteous life God requires of me.

• “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” (Gal. 2:20)
• “Christ … is your life.” (Col. 3:4)
• “… through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.” (Rom. 8:2-4)

Which should we, as followers of Jesus Christ, aim for more: impact or intimacy?  Should we strive to be used of God?  Or should we strive to know God and to be known by Him?  It is not an entirely either/or proposition, I admit.  But too often it is an unexamined question.  Perhaps we’ve never thought about it.  Or maybe we’ve assumed an answer.  But may I drag it out into the open for a few minutes?

If we make impact our aim, what happens?  Who knows, maybe we’ll attain it!  But then how would we know that we have?  How should one measure impact for God?  Numbers?  Size?  Budget?  Name recognition?  Influence?  Position?

It is a dangerous path to trod, is it not?  It is filled with plenteous landmines planted by the world, the flesh and the devil.

But even if we miss the landmines, what does aiming for impact get you?  In proportion to the purposes laid upon him and within his own lifetime would Abraham have been considered successful?  Probably not.  How about Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel or most of the rest of the prophets?  Not likely.

What is it the writer to the Hebrews said regarding the greatest people of faith?  “… none of them received [in their lifetimes] what had been promised.” (Heb. 11:39b)

Here’s at least part of the struggle – Impact is a highly pragmatic thing, which is fraught with opportunities for compromise.  Intimacy, on the other hand, is a personal, relational matter in which all that matters is the relationship to the other person (in this case, God).

Pursue impact and you’ll never rise above a performance-based intimacy, even if outwardly successful.  If you produce you will matter – or at least you’ll think you do.  But this is anti-grace; it is pro-works.  It is self-righteous.  It is thus anti-gospel.  Pursue impact and chances are you’ll miss out on intimacy.  But pursue intimacy and you may just make an impact.  Any such impact may not be immediately detectable.  In fact you may not even be able to take an accurate impact-reading before you’ve left this life.  But if you do make an impact by pursuing intimacy, it will be God’s doing.  If you do, it will be by grace.  If you do, it will be to God’s honor and glory, not your own.

But there is a certain danger in both paths, isn’t there?  The danger of pursuing impact is in the pragmatics.  I will do whatever it takes to produce – perhaps even things that will diminish my intimacy with God (not to mention my intimacy with the others He has put in my life).  The danger in pursuing intimacy is in the subjectivity of it.  When am I authentically intimate with the Almighty?  When is He genuinely intimate with me?  Many along this path fall victim to false voices, ideas and promptings.

Characteristically, Jesus made the matter of intimacy simple and clear.  He declared that He is intimate with the one who is obedient to His Word!  “Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.” (John 14:21)

All of this reminds me of Paul’s great concern for the Christians of Corinth: “But I am afraid, lest as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds should be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.” (2 Cor. 11:3, nasb)  I think often of that last phrase – “the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.”  That sounds like a life of intimacy.

I want desperately to be used of God.  I want—even more desperately—to walk closely with Him, even if there is no apparent outward impact from my doing so.  For I believe that any impact made while not walking intimately with Him is negative impact—no matter how spiritual it may appear on the surface.  And I am equally convinced that a life of true intimacy with Christ will never be without radical and lasting impact—regardless of what the temporal, time-laden readings may say.

From this fount of grace (“as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved,” see the previous post) the believer is to “put on” five graces.  These five stand in contrast to the socially destructive vices of verse 8 and mark those qualities which make actual the unity in the midst of diversity that characterizes the body of Christ (v.11).

The first is “a heart of compassion.” The first word, when used literally, refers to one’s “bowels” or the inward parts located in the belly (Acts 1:18).  Metaphorically, however, it referred to the seat of one’s deepest emotions and for that reason is often rendered in English as “heart.”  Paul uses the word in eight of its eleven New Testament appearances.  Interestingly, four of those are in his correspondence with those in Colossae (Col. 3:12; Philemon 7, 12, 20). The second word (“of compassion”) is described as “a motivating emotion” such as pity, compassion, mercy, etc.[1] Moving out from this inward disposition the other graces are enumerated.

Next is “kindness.” The word is used only by Paul in the New Testament.  It refers to goodness, kindness and generosity, either of man (2 Cor. 6:6; Gal. 5:22; Col. 3:12) or of God (Rom. 2:4; 11:22; Eph. 2:7).[2] Naturally man has no such “kindness” in himself (Rom. 3:12).  It can only describe him as God produces this “kindness” in him (Gal. 5:22).

After this comes “humility.” Paul uses the word five times, three of which appear here in Colossians (2:18, 23; 3:12).  The word is generally used in a positive sense, as it is here, to describe “a quality of voluntary submission and unselfishness humility, self-effacement.”  But, again interestingly, in both Colossians 2:18 and 23 it was clearly used in a pejorative sense, meaning “a misdirected submission in cultic behavior self-abasement, (false) humility, self-mortification.”[3] In those cases it described the misguided practices taught by the false teachers at work in Colossae.  But clearly in this case Paul has in view the possibility of a right, godly, Spirit-produced practice of humility.

The next grace to be “put on” is “gentleness.” It points to a humble and gentle attitude which bears up under offense with patient submissiveness and without a move toward revenge.[4] Such “gentleness” is a fruit of the Spirit’s work in an individual’s life (Gal. 5:23).  Paul uses it in regard to confrontation or discipline (2 Cor. 4:21; 10:1; Gal. 6:1) or in general instructions about avoiding difficulties in relationships (Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:12; Titus 3:2).  It is usually set as the opposite of harsh, divisive, defiant, brusque attitudes and actions.  It speaks of humility, courtesy, considerateness and meekness, in the sense not of weakness, but of power under control.[5]

Finally, there is “patience.” The word is used by Paul in ten of its fourteen New Testament appearances.  It is often used of human patience (2 Cor. 6:6; Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:12; 2 Tim. 3:10; 4:2), but also of God’s (Rom. 2:4; 9:22; 1 Tim. 1:16).  Such patience is produced in us only by the indwelling Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22).  The word generally refers to a longsuffering endurance in the face of indignities and injuries by others.

This grace for living is only possible because God’s grace first lives in us.  From “the unfathomable riches of Christ” (Eph. 3:8) made actual within us by His electing grace (“chosen by God”), His justifying grace (“holy”), and His benevolent grace (“dearly loved”) we are able then to extend outward toward others the grace of “compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience.”

In short: because God has put us “in Christ” we are able to “put on” His character!

[2] BAGD, 886.

[3] Friberg, 375.

[4] Rienecker, 485.

[5] BAGD, 699.

Paul now draws a logical inference (“So”) from what he has just explained.  He takes up the same verb (“put on”) he used in verse 10.  Previously he stated that believers “have put on” the “new self.”  Now, in keeping with that new reality and identification, we are exhorted to “put on” the graces that match our standing.  We are to become in experience what we have been declared to be in fact.  The aorist imperative indicates that the necessary action is urgently needed and demands that it be undertaken at once.  The middle voice pictures the subjects as responsible to take this action upon themselves.

In verses 5 and 8 the Apostle chose in each instance to name five vices to be “put aside.”  Now he identifies five graces which are to be “put on.”  But before he identifies what those are he uses a subordinate clause to explain how it is he is able to expect obedience to this imperative.  We are to undertake this action “as those who have been chosen by God.”  Such an imperative is not laid upon us in our humanness and finite strength, but “as” we are under the electing love of God.  The word is used to “introduces the characteristic quality of a pers[on] . . .”[1] Here we are considered as we are “in Christ.”  The adjective refers to “those whom God has chosen fr[om] the generality of mankind and drawn to himself.”[2] This selection was “by God.”  The eternal God, before time began, laid His electing, choosing love upon those He selected.  It is only in this way that His grace came to us and we believed unto eternal life.  It is precisely because of this that we are therefore deemed by Him to be “holy and beloved.”  God alone is “holy” by nature.  Yet, because of His grace made possible through the sacrificial death of Jesus, God Himself will present us before Himself as “holy and blameless and beyond reproach” (1:22).  Because of this He can rightly call us “saints” (1:2, 4, 12, 26).  To this adjective Paul adds (“and”) a participle: “beloved.”  The perfect tense indicates that they became so at a point in time in the past and continue to be in this abiding state at the present moment.  The passive voice reveals that this was accomplished by God’s electing love.  God simply chose to set His love upon the elect from the creation of the world.  The Apostle is not indiscriminately laying moral imperatives upon people and expecting them to fulfill them in their own strength.  Rather it is precisely because of this gracious favor of God that we are able to “put on” these various graces.  Gospel imperatives are possible precisely because of Gospel grace.

[2] BAGD, 242.