If we read this passage IN CONTEXT, Paul will tell us what he’s talking about. Starting with verse 10, “…in Him you have been made complete…and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of THE BODY OF THE FLESH by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised with Him THROUGH FAITH in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions…” (Emphases mine.)
This passage explicitly states that the “body of the flesh” was removed “by the circumcision of Christ” when the believer was baptized, at which time the believer was also raised into new life. Yet Reform Theology states that when those who are to be saved were “dead”, that is, before they believed, they were monergistically regenerated by God to enable them to believe. Yet Paul says that the believer is not “made alive” until he comes up out of the water of baptism. Obviously, one does not agree to be baptized unless he has already believed. Reform Theology has the believer being regenerated before his baptism; indeed, Reformed Theology has the believer being regenerated even BEFORE he believes, but Paul here seems to say that being made alive occurs at baptism, which occurs after one believes.
I think that this problem (it’s only a problem if you believe that regeneration precedes faith) is due to the fact that we tend to take phrases like, “made alive” and “dead in trespasses and sin” and even “regenerated” more literally than Paul used them. When Paul says that “the body of flesh” has been removed, is this to be taken literally? Obviously not, I’m using my body of flesh to type this manuscript. When Paul says elsewhere that we have “died to sin” (Romans 6:1) does that mean that we are INCAPABLE of sinning? That unless someone else were to monergistically enable us to sin we COULDN’T sin? Why doesn’t Van Lees say that the believer is not mostly dead to sin, not just sick to sin; but DEAD to sin? Because, in fact, Reform Theology DOESN’T take “dead to sin” literally. It takes it as a figure of speech. Reform Theology does in fact hold that one of whom it is said that they are “dead to sin” can still actually sin. How can that be if they are “dead to sin”? But “dead in sin” is not a figure of speech, it’s literal. Why is one “dead” a figure of speech but the other “dead” is not? (More on this subject in the next chapter, "Dead IN Sin - Dead TO Sin.")
Paul says that the body of flesh has been removed by the circumcision of Christ. According to Paul, when did this happen? When the believer was buried in baptism. At that time the believer was also raised with Him THROUGH FAITH (v12). “When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh [before your baptism through which the body of flesh was removed] He made you alive together with Him, [by removing the body of flesh and raising you to new life at your baptism] having forgiven us all our transgressions…”
Physical circumcision is a physical metaphor; the biblical term would be “a sign”. The circumcision of Christ is a metaphor. Water baptism is a physical metaphor. “Dead in transgressions” is a metaphor. “Dead to sin” is a metaphor. None of these things are literal. Notice verse 20: “If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourselves to decrees…” Here Paul uses the same language as he did two paragraphs earlier, and asks, “why do you submit yourselves to decrees” when he had just stated that “you have died with Christ to the elementary principles”. As if a person who was dead could actually do the very thing that they had died to! This indicates that Paul is using the idea of “dead” metaphorically and not literally.
As we continue reading, we aquire the context for Paul’s statements. In Colossians chapter 3, Paul gets more literal as to what he is talking about. From verse 1: “Therefore, if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. SET YOUR MIND on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hid with Christ in God.” He’s talking about a way of thinking, not some kind of literal death and birth of my spirit or whatever. Keep reading. Verse 5: Therefore CONSIDER THE MEMBERS OF YOUR EARTHLY BODY AS DEAD…” The phrase “as dead” indicates the term, “dead” is metaphorical, not literal. And how does one “consider the members of your earthly bodies as dead”? The term “consider” indicates “a way of thinking” i.e. “set your minds” (verse 1). Consider verse 9: “Do not lie to one another, since you laid aside the old self with its evil practices…” WHO laid aside the old self? “Laid aside the old self” is a metaphor for the same thing as “dead to sin.” Continuing, verse 10: “…and have put on the new self who is being renewed to a TRUE KNOWLEDGE according to the image of the One who created him.” WHO put on the new self? Furthermore, the issue is true knowledge – which is according to the image of the One, i.e. a way of thinking that reflects (i.e. according to the imange of) God's (i.e. the One) way of thinking.
Speaking metaphorically, there is an old self; there is a new self. When we believe and are baptized, we metaphorically bury the old self and rise to the new self. We then are to CONSIDER OURSELVES dead to sin, and alive to God. Is it possible to live from the old self even after it is “dead and buried” in baptism (speaking metaphorically)? Of course it is, because all we’re really talking about is a way of thinking (i.e. "consider yourselves"), and I can change my mind. If you read the rest of Colossians, chapters 3 and 4, you will find very practical, non-metaphorical ways to live from the new self. Put aside anger wrath, malice etc. Do not lie. Bear with one another, forgive each other. Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts. Be Thankful. Wives be subject to husbands, husband love your wives. Children, be obedient to your parents, fathers, do not exasperate your children. Slaves, obey your masters. Do your work as for the Lord, not for men. Masters, grant to your slaves justice and fairness. Devote yourselves to prayer etc etc etc.
The very same message concerning a way of thinking is given in Romans 6:11-14: “Even so, CONSIDER YOURSELVES to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God AS those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace.”
The phrase, “as alive from the dead” indicates that this is not meant literally, but is metaphorical. Notice, “…do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin…” Even though we are “alive from the dead” we can still “go on presenting the members of…[our]…body to sin” - i.e. we can still sin, even though we are spoken of as being dead to sin. We are to CONSIDER OURSELVES to be dead to sin, but alive to God. WHO is it that does the presenting to sin and CONSEQUENTLY becomes slaves of sin (see Rom 6:16)? WHO is it that does the presenting to obedience resulting in righteousness (again, see verse 16)? The result of THE PERSON IN QUESTION presenting THEMSELVES to obedience, that is, CONSIDERING THEMSELVES as dead to sin and alive to righteousness, is that “sin will not be master over you”! That statement (Rom 6:14) is reminiscent of what God told Cain, “Sin is crouching at the door…but YOU must master it.” There is no divine monergism in sight.
All this is once again given in the context of baptism, starting with 6:1ff. Notice verse 5: “For if we have become united with Him IN THE LIKENESS OF His death, certainly we shall also be IN THE LIKENESS OF His resurrection…” We participate in Christ’s death and resurrection metaphorically (“in the likeness of”) through baptism. The REAL issue is being “obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed…” (Verse 17)
The Greek word translated, “repentance” ( metanoia) means “to change your mind.” In other words, to change the way you think about something. The way you think causes the way you feel, and the way you feel causes the way you act. What was Jesus moved by? What caused His actions to heal and deliver? Compassion. He was moved by compassion. John the Baptist said, “Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.” Repentance comes first, the changing of the way we think, and then our actions (fruit) are to follow.
There is much that I can’t speak of due to lack of space and time, and it removes us from the question at hand, which is the doctrine of total depravity. Things like: water baptism, though a metaphor, is also a sacrament, and how the metaphor becomes the sacramental reality “through faith.” (Aquinas’ Poetic Knowledge.) Things like: one of the problems I’ve seen among many Christians is that they tend to live from the “old man” that is, they don’t REALLY consider themselves dead to sin, and so they become slaves to sin, and that the “way of thinking” being spoken of is “believing in the heart” or as Paul said above, “obedient from the heart” (which results in the metaphor becoming a sacramental reality through faith), which is more than just intellectually assenting to a set of propositions, and many other issues spoken of in these passages from Ephesians and Colossians.
Nevertheless, as far as the doctrine of total depravity is concerned, we have so far seen that two of the major proof-texts used to support the doctrine, Ephesians 2:1-3 and Colossians 2:13, actually say the exact opposite, and the account of man’s “Fall” given in Genesis also gives us a view that does not support the Reformed doctrine of total depravity.
The literalness with which we tend to interpret scripture is due to our inheritance of the Greek way of thinking (Plato and Aristotle) and applying it to scripture interpretation. The integration of Western Christianity with Greek philosophy (mainly through Augustine) is another subject. However, the problem of taking the passages in Ephesians and Colossians, and the whole Bible in general, too literally, and not getting the “metaphorical-ness” of it all, and WHY that happens, is summed up beautifully by the Reformed theologian and pastor John Armstrong in his message, Why Are Some Reformed Christians Mean? Please be aware that Dr. Armstrong is commenting on a completely different subject, and I’m pretty sure that he would NOT agree with my heretofore exegesis, after all, he IS Reformed in his doctrine, and so I say with some chagrin that in a sense I am co-opting what he has said to support an argument with which he most likely would not agree, but what he has to say about our modern way of thinking is very apropos to what I am talking about, and I agree with it, and couldn’t say it any better.
(Quote) “One final reason strikes me as very common to Reformed Christians and their tendency to be mean. By embracing a way of thinking about truth that relies heavily on modern philosophical ideas about truth and how to establish what is truth [they] unwittingly, or otherwise, approach truth almost entirely as a set of propositions that are provable and thus established by common sense and reason. Truth is, in this approach, compartmentalized. We talk about politics, history and religion as if they were separate categories of truth to be discovered the way mathematics is done. I have noticed, after years of studying philosophy and theology, that the apostle John approaches these matters quite differently. In the First Epistle of John we see there is a vital unbreakable connection between belief and practice. Truth must always be communalized in loving relationships or it becomes ugly and distorted. When will we finally learn that what we do is as important as what we think? The Christian ministry is always about helping real people embody truth in day-to-day ways. Many Reformed believers, operating out of a system of epistemology (the way we think about things) that is deeply rooted in modernism fail to see how detached from the world of the Bible they really are.” (Close quote)
Firstly, I don’t think Reformed Christians have a monopoly on meanness! However, relative to the discussion at hand, I would say that not just Reformed Christians, but Christians across the board miss the metaphorical-ness of scripture because they are “operating out of a system of epistemology that is deeply rooted in modernism [and] fail to see how detached from the world of the Bible they really are.” They are “…embracing A WAY OF THINKING about truth that relies heavily on modern philosophical ideas…” I contend that “modern philosophical ideas” are rooted in Plato and Aristotle, not any of the Biblical writers.
And so when Dr. Van Lees says, (quote)“This passage states that fallen man is "dead in sin," that he has no spiritual life whatsoever. It is important to note that the Apostle Paul did not say that man is sick in sin or simply influenced by sin; he declared that fallen man has no spiritual life” (close quote) - he is giving a literal meaning to the phrase, “dead in sin” (i.e. no spiritual life whatsoever) that neither the apostle Paul nor ANY of the other Biblical writers had in mind. Nowhere in the Bible can we find the phrase, “dead in sin” equated with the concept, “no spiritual life whatsoever.” What we find is that the Apostle Paul equated “dead” with “consider yourselves” and “alive” with “consider yourselves.”
Dead IN Sin - Dead TO Sin
Main Index
Site Introduction/Setup
