What do you do when expectations about ministry don’t line up with on-the-ground results?

We moved overseas more than two decades ago to take the gospel to people who had very little access to it. When we arrived, my wife and I, along with our colleagues, devoted ourselves to learning the local language. We earnestly desired that those we lived among would understand who Christ is according to the Bible. We spent thousands of hours studying grammar, learning new vocabulary, and seeking to understand the local culture, since all this knowledge would help us faithfully transmit foundational truths that are difficult to understand and communicate to those who have never heard them before.

By the end of our first year, our language ability surpassed that of our team leaders — but not because we were any more talented in language than they were. Rather, they were operating on certain assumptions about church-planting ministry that shaped their own language learning. They believed that very soon — hopefully within two or three years — many thousands of local people would embrace the gospel and start hundreds of churches. All of us expats could then leave to start another movement of disciples and churches among another unreached people.

What Are We Doing Wrong?

What was the source of this prediction about the pace and results of our work? We were told that rapidly advancing movements are the expected result in the “new paradigm” of twenty-first-century missions. It was suggested that, by following reverse-engineered methods, hundreds of churches could be planted with tens of thousands of new Christians in as little as six months.

When the pace and fruit of our work didn’t meet expectations, we began to wonder what we were doing wrong. We had been taught that if our approach didn’t lead to a church-planting movement, then we should change what we’re doing. But maybe, we thought, some ministry locations are more difficult, some peoples more resistant, some mission fields harder than others? An influential movement leader told us from the stage at a worldwide leader’s meeting that such is not the case. “There is no hard ground,” he said. That left one other possibility: we were the problem.

One leader suggested to me in a private conversation that we should consider moving aside to let a well-known movement practitioner take the lead. Many faithful gospel workers in our country became discouraged, even wondering whether they were wasting their lives by continuing to proclaim the gospel in this place.

Modern Revivalism

Students of church history may recognize similarities between these conversations and some from the past. During the Great Awakenings in North America and Britain, many Christians wanted to see a revival in their hometown. At first, as Iain Murray notes, revivals were widely viewed as extraordinary acts of God, whereby many more souls than normal became Christians (Revival and Revivalism, 374). Revivals were unpredictable and unpromised. But by 1830, some Christian ministers were experimenting with different methods to bring revival.

“Ultimately, lack of response and slow growth are not our enemies. Unfaithfulness is.”

Soon, “revivalists,” as they became known, believed they had figured out how to “originate and promote” revivals (375). Their ideas spread like wildfire among pastors and church members. “Follow our methods,” they promised, “and any church can see a revival.” The only thing preventing revival was the unwillingness of ministers to promote them. What was formerly unpredictable was now planned; what was unsure was promised. Ministers began to announce beforehand when revivals would take place.

Contrarily, “old guard” pastors were more convinced than ever that whatever true fruit of repentance they witnessed was the inscrutable work of God. While revivalists were tweaking their innovative methods, veteran pastors continued laboring in the ordinary means of ministry: weekly worship services, reading and preaching the Scriptures, prayer, Christian fellowship, singing hymns, and observing the ordinances. Though their methods remained stable, the fruit sometimes increased, sometimes decreased — suggesting to them that God was giving the growth however he saw fit (1 Corinthians 3:7).

Unfounded Promises

Today, many movement manuals begin with incredible “success stories.” One book tells how one man started two hundred churches within three months of beginning his ministry. Before ten years had passed, he reported 1.7 million new Christians and 158,000 new churches. To reports like these, we should all say, “Praise God — may it be so!” But the subtitle of this same book makes a disconcerting promise: “How it can happen in your community!”

Does the Bible promise that fast-growing church-planting movements will happen in your community if only you use the right methods? Be cautious of any training that assures you what God will do in the world — especially as it relates to the conversion of souls. We can only claim promises God has already made in the Bible. The great hymn writer Isaac Watts, who witnessed amazing revivals, cautioned ministers against depending upon them. Extraordinary works of God “are rare instances, and bestowed by the Spirit of God in so sovereign and arbitrary a manner, according to the secret counsels of his own wisdom, that no particular Christian hath any sure ground to expect them” (Revival and Revivalism, 385).

Only God can give new life in conversion and growth as Christ’s disciples. As the Bible teaches, we get to play an instrumental role in faithfully witnessing to the promise of redemption in Christ. We hope for and praise God whenever anyone places their faith in Christ. But we should be wary of predicting specific results or building our ministries on unfounded promises.

Unnecessary Discouragement

What about the pace of gospel expansion? The early church grew from thousands of followers in the first century to millions in just a few hundred years. Historian Rodney Stark estimates that the early church grew at a rate of about 40 percent per decade before trailing off (The Rise of Christianity, 6). Looking back now, most Christians and historians would consider this growth an extraordinary work of God, yet it is actually a much slower pace than that advocated by movement proponents today.

At 40 percent per decade, a house church of ten Christians would become eleven over three years’ time. Doing some quick math, the population of the Christian church in the last two decades where I live in central Asia has grown three times faster than the early church! Yet instead of celebrating this incredible work of God, some Christians are discouraged because they’ve heard that churches that don’t start a new church every six months are unhealthy.

Harvests follow faithful work. For example, the increase of Christians we see in Iran today was built on two hundred years of hard labor by Christians who patiently prayed, taught the Scriptures, and loved resistant people while they waited for them to come into the kingdom of God. We must not give up that groundbreaking work because we aren’t seeing the harvest others are experiencing. When God desires to have mercy on a sinful nation, he sends his people to labor, pray, and teach there persistently. Sometimes, we are those people who labor during generations of slow gospel expansion.

May we be faithful and encouraged, regardless of pace! The gates of hell cannot withstand the persistent proclamation of the gospel. If we will persevere in proclaiming Christ and praying for a people over years, decades, and even generations, then God’s Spirit is likely preparing them for something special pertaining to salvation. As we faithfully pursue biblical ministry, we can patiently celebrate what God is actually doing among us. Otherwise, we risk dissatisfaction during the day of small things.

Our Calling: Faithfulness

Ultimately, lack of response and slow growth are not our enemies. Unfaithfulness is. And when we are being faithful, the pace of growth is not our concern (John 21:22).

Lack of response should lead us to plead for God to work in our midst. But there is no biblical reason for faithful gospel workers to be discouraged by normal responses to the gospel. The same apostle who said, “I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some” (1 Corinthians 9:22) also emphasized that our work is to ensure generations of faithfulness (1 Timothy 2:2).

Christian friend, our faithfulness will be found as we devote ourselves to Christ — first for our own transformation and then for the teaching of Christ to others (1 Timothy 4:16). Before you commit to build a ministry that relies on quick results, ask whether Scripture commends that pursuit. Before adopting new methods in your ministry, ask whether you are committed to the ordinary methods outlined in Scripture, such as prayer, Bible study, faithful proclamation, and church membership. By these, God will build his kingdom.

So, how should we think of the pace and predictability of the spread of the gospel in missionary work today? We should strongly desire to see God work extraordinarily in the lives and hearts of those who hear the gospel from us. We should long for the same kinds of explosive increase among those we serve as we read of in the book of Acts. We should sincerely desire all people to hear the gospel and turn to Christ before it is too late (1 Timothy 2:4).

At the same time, we should give ourselves to the methods we observe in the Bible, trusting God with whatever growth he gives.

ABSTRACT: Contemporary scholarship (almost) universally argues that Elihu’s speeches in Job 32–37 should, like the speeches of Job’s other friends, be considered unorthodox in their portrayal of the justice of both God and Job. However, the careful weighing of culturally biased interpretive decisions and a better grasp of the context of Elihu’s speeches within the book indicate that a positive reading of Elihu has greater merit than most suppose.

For our ongoing series of feature articles for pastors and Christian leaders, we asked Christopher Ash, Writer-in-Residence at Tyndale House in Cambridge, to explain why Elihu’s speeches in the book of Job should not be considered in the same light as those made by Job’s three other friends.

Many of us struggle to know what to make of Elihu’s theological perspective in Job 32–37. After an introduction in Job 32:1–5, Elihu delivers four speeches (32:6–33:33; 34:1–37; 35:1–16; 36:1–37:24) that comprise almost one-seventh of the book. We breathe a sigh of relief when we get to chapter 38 and bow in reverence before the Lord God’s majestic monologue. Yet we may be left scratching our heads over the lack of response to Elihu’s speeches.

Part of the problem is that Elihu is not named when the Lord God says that Job’s three friends (Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar) have not spoken rightly of him (42:7). Does the silence mean Elihu is implicitly included in this rebuke? Does it imply that he is different? What shall we do with Elihu?

Over the years, I have changed my mind about Elihu. In my first book on Job, I argued that while Elihu was not to be dismissed out of hand, what he says is nevertheless “not authoritative.” He “is not a prophet, speaking accurately for God; but neither is he a false prophet to be utterly condemned.”1

However, while writing a full commentary on Job, I became persuaded that Elihu is indeed a true prophet of God.2 My introduction reflects this change of view: “Although many scholars disagree, and I myself used to feel that his was an ambiguous voice, I am now persuaded that Elihu speaks by inspiration of the Spirit as a true and prophetic voice.”3 Why have I changed my mind?

Soundings from Church History

My positive evaluation of Elihu cuts across the grain of much scholarly opinion. I have twelve commentaries on Job in my study. Eleven of them think poorly of Elihu.4

Nevertheless, some theologians from the past agree — or at least see Elihu in something of a positive light. Gregory the Great (ca. 540–604) thinks Elihu’s teaching is orthodox, even though he repeatedly accuses Elihu of pride.5 Gregory thinks the rebuke in Job 38:2 (“Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?”) is addressed to Elihu, in spite of the fact that 38:1 explicitly says these words are spoken to Job, and Job is the one who responds in 40:3–5.6

Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) agrees that Elihu’s wisdom is superior to that of Job and the three friends, but, like Gregory, he accuses him of seeking empty glory.7 Both Gregory and Aquinas regard Elihu’s teaching as orthodox but criticize his motivation.

John Calvin, however, has not a word to say against Elihu. In her scholarly study of Calvin’s exegesis of Job, Susan E. Schreiner argues, “There are few people in the Bible Calvin admires more than Elihu,” who speaks “as a true doctor of the church.” Indeed “Calvin’s elevation of Elihu is as decisive as that of Maimonides; like Maimonides, he sees Elihu as teaching essentially the same truth declared in the whirlwind speech.”8

Against Elihu

Despite my change of opinion, criticisms of Job 32–37 remain. Critiques in modern scholarship have taken one or more of four forms. I will consider each in turn.

1. Elihu’s speeches are a later interpolation.

Since Matthias H. Stuhlmann in 1804, many critics have regarded Job 32–37 as a secondary interpolation (despite the fact that there is no manuscript evidence for this).9 Arguments for this claim have tended to be of two kinds.

First, Elihu is not mentioned anywhere else in the book of Job and, some scholars suggest, these chapters can be removed from the book without losing anything of value.10 In answer, we might say that if Elihu has the role of a forerunner leading to the Lord’s speeches, then there would be no need to mention him at the end of the book.11

Second, it is argued, the language and style of Job 32–37 differ from the rest of the book. These arguments are usually predicated on the assumption that the book of Job is a literary construct — indeed, a literary fiction, like an extended parable — which would make us expect some degree of uniformity of style.

These supposed differences, however, are now generally reckoned not to be indicators of different provenance.12 And if Elihu is a historical character (an idea that would horrify many Old Testament scholars!), then it would not be surprising if his speeches had a distinct style and vocabulary, even after making allowances for the style of the author in reporting them.

2. Elihu’s speeches are in poor style.

Many scholars have lined up to sneer at the style of Job 32–37. For example, John Eaton writes that even when we read the prose introduction (32:1–6), “we may notice that the style is inferior to that of the Prologue, being laboured and repetitious.” When we come to Elihu’s speeches, there is a “markedly inferior” style that is “prolix, clumsy and often obscure.” Indeed, “the pomposity of Elihu is so conspicuous and at times laughable (32:17–22; 36:2–4) that one could almost think the author intended a caricature.”13

These criticisms, however, tell us more about the cultural milieu of those who make them than about Elihu himself. Judgments of style are notoriously subjective. Just because we Westerners dislike the style of a text does not give us liberty to denigrate it.

3. Elihu’s motivation is wrong.

Criticisms of Elihu’s motivation focus on three areas: anger, pride, and cruelty to Job.

First, the narrator mentions Elihu’s anger four times in the introduction to his speeches (32:2–5). Some, therefore, deride him as “an angry young man,” or one who is “passionate and hotheaded.”14

But anger may or may not be a bad quality. Jesus got angry, after all. Elihu is angry with Job “because he justified himself rather than God” (32:2); that is, he placed himself in the right in such a way as to place God in the wrong. Elihu is angry with the three friends “because they had found no answer” (32:3); that is, they had failed to persuade Job of the wrongness of his words. These motivations are arguably virtuous. It seems to me that Elihu’s anger is a commendable ire. Besides, God himself will later rebuke Job for justifying himself rather than God. So, in this respect at least, Elihu is on message with the divine speeches that follow.

Second, Elihu is confident that he is right. Therefore, those who think he is wrong consider him to be proud. But what if he is correct? To speak God’s truth with confidence is not pride. So, the key question (to which we shall come) is this: Is Elihu right or wrong?

Third, some have criticized Elihu for a lack of sympathy toward Job.15 Against this, Katharine Dell argues that “we should adopt a more favorable attitude to his motivation for intervention than has traditionally been the scholarly case.”16

Along with others, Dell notes that, unlike the three friends, Elihu addresses Job by name (33:1, 31; 37:14). She suggests that Elihu “takes a genuine interest in carefully summarizing the arguments of Job, and indeed of the friends, before he makes his own view clear. He is like a listening friend who, before moving to any kind of opinion, carefully seeks to understand what he is hearing out of respect and consideration for his friend.”17 When he disagrees with Job, “The key point is that he is not against Job in a personal way, it is Job’s theological stance that he objects to.”18 Elihu, argues Dell, speaks as a true comforter, a constructive mediator, a wisdom instructor, and one who answers both Job and the three friends.19

Assessing Elihu’s motivation is very difficult. It is at least arguable that his concern for God’s honor coexists with a robust kindness toward Job, that his words are the faithful wounds of a friend (Proverbs 27:6).

4. Elihu is simply wrong.

This is the most important question. Whatever we think of Elihu’s style, and however we assess his motivation, the critical question is this: Is he right or wrong in what he says?

Before venturing an answer, let me say first that it is not at all easy to assess content in the speeches of the book of Job. The characters say so much, and usually in poetry, that it can be quite bewildering to try to sort out the core convictions that underlie their words.

Assessing Elihu

We can consider Elihu from two angles. First, where does he appear in the book of Job, and how does this section (chapters 32–37) fit into the flow and purpose of the book? This angle, if you like, considers Elihu from outside of his speeches. Second, we need to ask what Elihu actually says, to consider not simply the context in which he speaks but also the content of his speech.

1. Contextual Factors

Content (what someone says) cannot be understood except in its context (where he says it). Indeed, someone may say something formally similar to what someone else says, and yet the different context puts a different slant on his words. I believe this is so for Elihu. Understanding the context of Elihu’s speeches will help us to determine how best to understand their content. Four contextual arguments weigh with me.

THE NARRATOR’S INTRODUCTION

Elihu is “the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the family of Ram” (32:2). In general, a genealogy indicates that someone is a person of weight. We may rightly expect, then, that Elihu is going to prove himself a man of significance in the book. Robert Gordis notes that “Elihu is the only character who bears a Hebrew name,” a name similar to Elijah. His elaborate pedigree (32:2) “would suggest to Hebrew readers . . . that as the scion of a distinguished family (Ram) he was the authentic defender of God’s cause.”20

ELIHU’S CLAIM TO INSPIRATION

In 32:8, Elihu speaks of “the spirit in man, / the breath of the Almighty” as giving someone understanding. And then in 32:18–20, he describes himself as “full of words,” constrained by “the spirit” within him, like a wineskin ready to burst (cf. Jeremiah 20:9). It is natural to understand Elihu as claiming inspiration. God has filled his spirit with understanding such that he simply must speak. In Calvin’s words, “God has imprinted such a mark on the doctrine of Elihu and . . . the celestial spirit has appeared in his mouth so that we ought to be moved to receive that which he says.”21

It seems to me that unless we are given strong reasons to reject this claim, we ought to accept it. Elsewhere in the Scriptures, when false prophets speak, we are given clear indications that their words are false (see, e.g., 1 Kings 22). The narrator gives us no such indication with reference to Elihu.

ELIHU’S PROMINENT PLACE

Many have noted the uniquely significant placing of Elihu in the book of Job. He speaks, in four unanswered speeches, after “the words of Job are ended” (31:40) and before the covenant Lord speaks directly out of the storm (chapters 38–42). If he is a forerunner — rather like Elijah or John the Baptist — then this prominence makes complete sense. If, however, he is something else, then those who think so must persuade us as to why he is given this prominent position.

Three main suggestions have been made. First, some argue that chapters 32–37 form a kind of interlude after the debates have run into the ground.22 The reader needs a break, and Elihu provides it. Elihu “is reinvigorating and renewing an exhausted and stalled debate.”23 But an interlude that comprises 13 percent of the book and includes some detailed arguments seems like a strange sort of breathing space.

Second, others contend that Elihu is like a comic turn. John Hartley writes that the portrayal of Elihu as an angry young man “offers comic relief to the tension built up by Job’s solemn oath [31:35–37]. . . . An ancient audience, feeling the full weight of that tension, would be relieved and amused by the bombastic Elihu.”24 But humor is profoundly cultural, and we ought to be cautious about appeals to supposed humor, especially when they shape — in this case deeply — the understanding of a text.

The third suggestion (and the most significant) is that Elihu voices the views of moral orthodoxy, much as the three friends have tried to do, before being overridden by God’s speeches.25 If this is so, then perhaps Elihu offers an alternative resolution of the book, such that the reader is forced to choose between the “orthodoxy” voiced by Elihu and the words of God himself. Elihu is the fool who makes us realize how wise God is by contrast.26

Janzen suggests parallels with Genesis 3 and 1 Kings 22, in each of which false words (the snake, the false prophets) are followed by true words (God in the garden, Micaiah the true prophet).27 This might be an attractive solution if there were any explicit indication in the book of Job that this is the case (as there is in Genesis 3 and 1 Kings 22).

Dell wonders “whether the author of Job is not playing with us just a little when he introduces us to Elihu. He gives us, through the mouth of this unexpected arrival, a first answer, more along the lines of the answer that we might be expecting. Then he gives us the second answer — from God himself. We are given a choice as to which answer to listen to.”28

The key question, therefore, is this: Does Elihu offer an alternative resolution to that given in the Lord’s speeches, or is his answer essentially the same as God’s?

ELIHU IS NOT CONDEMNED

Arguments from God’s omission of Elihu in 42:7 necessarily build from silence. Many consider that God omits Elihu because he is beneath contempt; he is “treated with contemptuous silence,”29 “not even deemed worthy of separate mention in 42:7–9.”30 But perhaps he is not condemned because he does not merit condemnation.31

Further, if Elihu claims to be a prophet, then he must be either true or false. If he is a false prophet, it is surely imperative that he be rebuked. The fact that he is not suggests — at least to me — that he is a true prophet.

Elihu’s final speech also prepares the way admirably for the Lord’s first speech; his final words set an appropriate tone for the Lord’s first words.32 There is, if I may put it this way, no crunching of gears as we move from 37:1–24 into 38:2–40:2. If Elihu were offering a resolution that conflicts with God’s, we might expect a sharper disjunction.

These four contextual factors ought, I think, to predispose us to expect that Elihu will be a true spokesman of God.

2. His Message

This brief essay cannot address the details of Elihu’s contribution. (For my attempt to understand each of Elihu’s speeches, see my commentary Job: The Wisdom of the Cross.)33

Some suggest that Elihu does little more than repeat the arguments of the three friends. Elihu may claim, “I will not answer [Job] with your speeches” (32:14), but many think this is, in fact, what he does.34

But Elihu offers several distinctive answers to Job. Gordis argues that Elihu cites, and then answers, Job’s three main contentions, as follows:

Job says God has ignored his sufferings (33:8–9); Elihu rebuts this charge (35:1–16).
Job says God is unjust (33:10–11); Elihu contradicts this assertion (34:1–37).
Job says he is innocent (33:12–13); Elihu attacks this claim (33:1–33).35

Hywel Jones writes, “Elihu does not address Job in the way that the Friends had done. They said that Job was suffering because he had sinned. Elihu says that Job has sinned because he was suffering. That is a vital difference to bear in mind.”36 I agree. The rebukes Elihu levels at Job are in this important respect different from the accusations of the friends. And these rebukes are echoed in the divine rebuke in chapters 38–41.

Let me return to Calvin’s positive appreciation of Elihu. Calvin perceived in Elihu an understanding of the deep sinfulness of human nature, the impossibility that any human being has natural merit with God, the underlying justice, therefore, of suffering, the inability of human beings to plead against God, a correct doctrine of providence, and a perceptive recognition of the hiddenness of God such that his providence is inscrutable.37

It has not been possible in this brief essay to consider Elihu’s speeches properly. But I hope I have given at least some headline reasons as to why I came to agree with Calvin that Elihu is a faithful spokesman for God.

Let’s begin by asking the “So what?” question. So what, if Colossians 1:15–20 is one of the greatest exaltations to Christ in all the Bible? Maybe the greatest. There are a few that come close.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. . . . And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:1–3, 14)

That’s close.

In these last days [God] has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. (Hebrews 1:2–3)

That’s close. But Colossians 1:15–20 may be the greatest. So, you are about to listen to me for the next thirty-five minutes or so wave my little expository finger, and point toward this Mount Everest of Christ-exalting Scriptures, and then you’ll go home. And the crucial question will be, So what?

I’m going to give you two answers to that question here at the outset from Colossians so you can be testing while I preach, and then when you go home: Is this happening? Is this text having this God-appointed effect on me?

Vaccine Against Error

Here’s my first answer to the “So what?” question. False teaching has begun to infect the minds of some of the believers in Colossae, and Paul intends for the clarification and exaltation of the majesty of Jesus Christ to be the theological vaccine that protects the Colossian Christians from the disease of Christ-diminishing, Christ-distorting error.

Turn with me to Colossians 2 to get three glimpses of the false teaching in Colossae. Notice that in every case the failure to embrace a clear enough and big enough Christ is what makes the church vulnerable.

Colossians 2:8: See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

If you don’t embrace a Christ that is big enough and clear enough, you will be a sitting duck for Christ-diminishing, Christ-distorting philosophy, empty deceit, and human tradition.

Colossians 2:16–17: Let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

If you don’t embrace a Christ that is big enough and clear enough, you easily mistake shadows for reality.

Colossians 2:18–19: Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head.

If you don’t embrace a Christ that is big enough and clear enough, you will stop holding fast to Christ as the great, all-supplying Head of the body, and take up sectarian strategies of self-improvement.

So, the first answer to the “so what” question is this: if you embrace a Christ who is big enough and clear enough — the way Paul shows him to be in Colossians 1:15–20 — you will have a theological, spiritual, biblical vaccination against a hundred Christ-diminishing, Christ-distorting errors — and they will not be getting fewer in the last days.

Endure and Give Thanks with Joy

Now, the second answer to the “So what?” question. Back to chapter 1. Last week, Pastor Kenny walked us through Paul’s prayer for the Colossians — and for us — which starts in Colossians 1:9. It’s the connection between this prayer and today’s text about the supremacy of Christ which clarifies the second answer to the “So what?” question.

Paul prays in Colossians 1:11 that we would be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience. And then that little phrase “with joy” could go either way, forward or backward. Endurance and patience with joy, or, with joy giving thanks to the Father.

Experientially, I can’t see any difference. We are enduring with patience the pandemic, the political acrimony, the war in Ukraine, churches in conflict, the sexual debauchery of the culture, the heartbreak of lost loved ones. Does it make any difference whether you say: “We are enduring with joy” or to say, “We are enduring, giving joyful thanks to God the Father”? In both cases joy marks our patient endurance in these days, and, God willing, to the very end. Serious joy, thankful to our heavenly Father to the very end.

“Joy marks our patient endurance in these days and, God willing, to the very end.”

But how can we have thankful joyful hearts as we patiently endure these days? Paul answers in Colossians 1:12, because God the Father “has qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints in light.” We are not going to be cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Our inheritance is a new world where night will be no more. And there will be no need of sun or moon, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb (Revelation 22:5; 21:23).

And then Colossians 1:13 adds that we have already entered into this kingdom of light: “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son.” And Colossians 1:14 adds that the reason that we guilty sinners can enter that kingdom of everlasting light and joy — it’s because “in [Christ] we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” He paid the ransom with his blood for our forgiveness. By faith we are united to him. And his sacrifice covers all our sins.

Greatest Tribute

Now, follow the flow of thought to see the connection with today’s text. Paul’s prayer in verses 11–12 is that we would endure with joyful thankfulness everything this fallen world throws at us until Jesus comes. The reason we can do that, he says, is because he has qualified us for an eternity of light and love not darkness. And the way he has done that is by paying the redemption price for the forgiveness of all our sins and bringing us already into the kingdom of his greatly loved Son.

“The supremacy of Christ is meant to sustain our joy through patient endurance.”

And at this point Paul is so full of awareness that our thankful, joyful, patient endurance depends on the greatness of the redemption of Christ and the greatness of the reign of Christ that he launches into the greatest tribute to the supremacy of Christ in the Bible (Colossians 1:15–20). In other words, the second answer to the “So what?” question is that, if your mind and heart are captured with the greatness and the beauty and the worth of Jesus Christ in verses 15–20, you will endure the hardships of this life with patience and joyful thankfulness. The supremacy of Christ is meant to sustain our joy through patient endurance.

Supremacy of Christ

So let’s look at the supremacy of Christ in Colossians 1:15–20.

I see at least five ways Christ is supreme in relation to creation — and then three ways he is supreme in relation to the church. Or if you prefer, you can use the word “preeminent,” since that is the purpose of God stated at the end of verse 19: “that in everything he might be preeminent.” That’s the immediate goal of this passage: to show that in everything Christ is preeminent, or supreme — that he is the greatest, most excellent reality that exists.

Supreme over Creation

First, then, in relation to creation — five aspects of his supremacy.

1. Christ Is God

Colossians 1:19: “For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.” Even more clearly in Colossians 2:9: “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.” Remember, in verse 13 Christ is called God’s beloved Son. Now we see that the Son is said to possess the fullness of God-ness. He is fully God.

And this divine Son came to earth and clothed himself with humanity. He has a body and a human nature. So Colossians 2:9 says, “In him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.” We call this the incarnation of the divine Son of God. There is now, and forever, a God-man. God the Son never lays down his body. He rises from the dead with it. He ascends with it. He possesses it in heaven today glorified according to Philippians 3:21. And he will return visibly in his body.

They could see him and touch him while he was on the earth. And we will see him when he comes again. I think this is what Paul means in Colossians 1:15: “He is the image of the invisible God.” God is invisible. He is spirit. But Jesus is not invisible. He is the visible God. In John 14:9, Jesus said to Philip, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.”

So I would ask you very frankly, Do you worship Jesus Christ? Matthew 28:17 says, “When the eleven saw him they worshiped him.” Do you? Is your Christ big enough and clear enough and supreme enough that you treasure him more highly than any other reality, as very God of very God?

2. Christ Is Before All Things

Colossians 1:17: “And he is before all things.” Why would Paul say that? It is so obviously implicit in virtually everything else he says about Christ in this paragraph. Well, sometimes it is very good to make implicit, glorious things explicit! Things that we just pass over and don’t ponder. I invite you to ponder the fact that before there was anything else, Christ was.

For example, this draws our attention to the fact that Christ’s relationship to things that are not Christ is very different from our relationship to things that are not us. We think that we are creators. We’re not. Not the way Christ is. When we make things, we just rearrange what’s already there. We rearrange chemicals and make a medicine. We rearrange molecules and make an atom bomb. We arrange materials and make house.

When Christ brought creation into existence, he didn’t rearrange anything, because he was before all things. There wasn’t anything to arrange. Christ is absolute reality. Everything else is secondary.

3. Christ Created Everything That Is Not God

Colossians 1:15–16: “[He is] he firstborn of all creation. 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.”

“Firstborn of all creation” does not mean he is part of creation. Four reasons:

He is God — not part of what God made. We have seen that already.
The ground of 15b in verse 16 contradicts that he is part of creation: “He is firstborn of all creation. Because by him all things were created.” It would make no sense to say, “He is part of creation because he created all things.”
The word “of” in “firstborn of all creation” does not have to mean he is part of creation any more than my saying, “David is the coach of his son’s little league team,” means he is a little leaguer on the team. “Coach of” means “coach over” and that’s what Paul means here — he is the firstborn over all creation.
The word “firstborn” came to mean, alongside its biological meaning, “having the highest rank,” as in Psalm 89:27 where God says to David, “I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.” That is, not having his origin from the kings of the earth but highest over them.

So I say again, Christ created everything that is not God. And I suspect Paul listed the particular creations that he listed to make sure that the Colossians did not try to make exceptions by saying, “No, no, the thrones and dominions and rulers and authorities do not include evil powers.” Yes, they do! And that’s the point! Verse 13 just said we were delivered from the “domain (Greek exousias) of darkness” and that word “domain” is the same as the “authorities (exousiai)” in verse 16. He made them. And he delivered us from them. They have no independent existence or power.

No exceptions, Colossians. No exceptions, Bethlehem. Christ is the creator of all that is not God. Including all the demons and their political echoes in this world. Is it any wonder that Jesus simply commands fevers, and wind, and water, and demons, and they obey? As then. So now.

4. Christ Holds Everything Together

Colossians 1:17: “He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.” Christ doesn’t just bring everything that is into being. He holds everything that is in being. This may strike home to help us feel the way we ought, even more than knowing that he is our Creator.

Hour by hour the reason you do not fly apart into a billion fragments and then vanish is because Christ holds you together. And this is true of everything in the universe. Everything that man has ever made, and every body of every man and woman and child. And every mountain and ocean and cloud and supernova — all would cease to be if Christ did not hold them in being.

He holds together the metal on the tanks rolling into Ukraine. He holds together the cellphones in Ukraine that connect the resistance. He holds together the pew you sit on, the clothing you wear, the food you eat, the skin that covers your bones. As your Creator you might think he is distant, having done that work some time ago. But to confess that in him you’re very body and soul, millisecond by millisecond, are held in being is another matter. He is not distant. You are personally and radically dependent on Christ, even if you don’t believe on him.

5. All Things Were Created for Christ

Colossians 1:16 (at the end): “All things were created through him and for him.” What does for him mean? It can’t mean, in order to meet his needs. To be God means to have no needs. Acts 17:25 says, “God cannot be served as though he needed anything.”

“Christ created everything and sustains everything for the glory of Christ.”

One clue is found in Colossians 1:18 at the end: “that in everything he might be preeminent.” Creation exists “for him” in the sense of putting his preeminence on display. He does everything he does in order put his supremacy, his glory, on display. Christ created everything and sustains everything for the glory of Christ! This is why the universe came into being — to put the preeminence of Christ’s glory on display.

Supreme over the Church

Lest you think that makes an egomaniac out of Christ, we turn now, all too briefly, to three acts of Christ’s supremacy in relation not to creation but to the church in verses 18–20.

I’ll name them quickly:

He is supreme as the head of the body. Verse 18a: “And he is the head of the body, the church.”
He is supreme as the beginning of the new creation as he rises first from the dead, the first of millions. Verse 18b: “He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.”
We’ve already looked at verse 19, so I skip to verse 20: He is supreme as the one whose blood secures a new heaven and a new earth where everything is reconciled and at peace with God. Verse 20: “And through him to reconcile to himself all things whether on earth or in heaven making peace by the blood of his cross.”

Apex of Glory: Grace

Here’s what changes the whole idea of egomaniac. When we say that Christ has created everything for the glory of Christ, the apex of that glory is the glory of grace toward his people.

It’s the glory of being the head (v. 18a) that supplies every need that the church ever has for everlasting holiness and joy.
It’s the glory not of being the only one to rise from the dead, but the first one to rise from the dead (v. 18b), bringing with him millions upon millions of people who will be delivered from the bondage of death and brought into a new world of everlasting joy with Christ.
It’s the glory of shedding his blood (v. 20) so as to make peace — to make a new world of only reconciled people in two ways: one is to supply the forgiveness of sins for everyone who believes, and the other is to strip from the hands of God’s demonic and human enemies all grounds for condemning God’s people and dismiss those enemies into outer darkness where they will not in any way infect the new heaven and the new earth.

Bethlehem,

Jesus Christ is our God.
Jesus Christ is before all things.
Jesus Christ created all that is not God.
Jesus Christ holds everything together.
Jesus Christ created everything to display the supremacy and the glory of Jesus Christ.

This is not egomania. It is love. Because the apex of that glory is the glory of grace. It’s the glory of Christ’s supplying everything his church needs to be holy and happy forever. It’s the glory of triumphing over death in bringing millions of believing sinners to everlasting life. And it’s the glory of establishing a new heaven and new earth of peace and reconciliation by the blood of his cross.

What he wants from us is the answer to Paul’s prayer — that we would find strength for all endurance and patience with thankful joy because we have embraced this Christ.