Colossians 1:15-23, Part 18
As for the invisible church, it consists of those whom God has truly chosen, converted, and collected into the body of Christ. In other words, the visible church consists of those who claim to be Christians, but among these are true believers and false believers, since some claim to believe but do not in fact believe. But the invisible church consists of only true believers. Although it is impossible for us to know the precise number and identities of these individuals, so that this collection of believers remains "invisible" to us, Scripture assures us that God knows those who are his.
One important point to note is that, although all true believers who are in the visible church are also in the invisible church, many of those who are in the invisible church are not a part of the visible church. This is just another way of saying that many true Christians are not members of some persistent and recognizable local communities of believers. Here the issue is not whether it is always desirable for a Christian to belong to such a community – in fact, the answer is no – but whether it is possible to be a true Christian, to truly believe in Christ, and not belong to such a community – the answer is that it is possible.
Nevertheless, it is not a neutral choice. One must have biblical and defensible reasons to deliberately remain outside of the visible church. But on the other hand, two relevant points are often neglected. First, one must possess reasons that are just as biblical and defensible to attend and support a local community that is unfaithful to Christ in doctrine and practice. And second, the visible or local church is often defined in such a way as to exclude legitimate communities that are rejected simply because they are different in their background, magnitude, organization, and other non-defining factors.
This distinction between the visible and invisible church reminds us to exercise discernment and humility. That is, it reminds us that not every member of the visible church is a true believer. He may be a demon in disguise, waiting to wreck havoc in the community. Church leaders who tolerate a stubborn offender shares in his guilt. On the other hand, the distinction also reminds us that God is greater than the community of individuals that is visible to us, or the limited number of credentials and authorities that we would acknowledge.
The Pharisees challenged Jesus, asking, "By what authority do you do these things?" when their own recognition came from one another, and not from God. Thus what purported to be a respected and organized community of teachers became nothing more than a conspiracy against the divine messenger, concerning whom God thundered, "This is my beloved Son. Listen to him!" Later the religious leaders persecuted the apostles, but Gamaliel said, "For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God" (Acts 5:38-39).
Our passage relates christology to ecclesiology in verse 18, where it says, "And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy." Consistent with its emphasis on Christ's supremacy, the passage states that he is the head of the church. The body metaphor is just that, a metaphor, so that not everything about a human body is to be applied to the church just because the church is said to be a body and Christ is the head. Those who are eager to assert their opinion sometimes take the analogy and run too far with it, so that what they say about the church may be true of the human body, but not true of the church or of Christ.
For example, to say that Christ is the head of the body does not mean that he "depends on" the church to function, as Barclay has said in connection with Ephesians 5:23, where Paul uses the same metaphor. The passage asserts his supremacy, so that such an application would in fact undermine its own purpose. Rather, the point is that Christ rules over the church, and not that he depends on it. The same is true in Ephesians 5, where it is said that the wife submits to the husband, as the church submits to Christ.
Finally, we can place verse 23 under this heading of ecclesiology, since it informs us of the mission of the church as a collective and the mission of the preacher as an individual. The mission of the church is to proclaim the gospel "to every creature under heaven." This does not refer to a "hit and run" method of preaching the gospel. As I have explained elsewhere, whenever possible, the biblical approach involves an extended period of teaching the full system of Christian doctrines, and all the commands and teachings of Christ. As for the individual preacher, he is a servant laboring at his assigned post in contribution to this broader mission of the church (v. 23, 25).
By relating the doctrine of Christ to all other doctrines in the Christian system, the passage demonstrates that christology does not stand by itself. Rather, it overlaps and interpenetrates other doctrines in such a manner that renders it impervious to arbitrary alterations. When the Christian faith is understood as a system, and when the relations and implications of all propositions are noticed and specified, then any assault against or aberration from sound doctrine becomes highly detectable and easily refutable. Christianity does not represent only a narrow disagreement against other viewpoints, but it is a comprehensive declaration of war against all non-Christian worldviews and against all non-biblical thoughts. Anything less than a full acknowledgment of Christ as Revealer, Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer – and all that these items include and imply – is not Christianity.