Implications that “it pleased the Father” for “all the fullness” to dwell in Jesus (Col. 1:19, NKJV)

[Kilk1]

Colossians 1:19 states (NKJV):

For it pleased [the Father that] in Him all the fullness should dwell.

Now, the New King James Version supplies "the Father," but to my knowledge, most understand the Father as the one referred to here. In saying "it pleased the Father" that "all the fullness" should dwell in Jesus, does Colossians 1:19 suggest that the Father gave "all the fullness" to Him? (For example, "It pleased the king that you should be a knight" could imply that your being a knight was given by the king.)

If this is the meaning, what are the implications should "all the fullness" mean the same thing as Colossians 2:9's "all the fullness of the Godhead"? And if this is not the meaning, what is the true meaning? Thanks!

 

[Mark Quayle]

Colossians 1:19 states (NKJV):

For it pleased [the Father that] in Him all the fullness should dwell.

Now, the New King James Version supplies "the Father," but to my knowledge, most understand the Father as the one referred to here. In saying "it pleased the Father" that "all the fullness" should dwell in Jesus, does Colossians 1:19 suggest that the Father gave "all the fullness" to Him? (For example, "It pleased the king that you should be a knight" could imply that your being a knight was given by the king.)

If this is the meaning, what are the implications should "all the fullness" mean the same thing as Colossians 2:9's "all the fullness of the Godhead"? And if this is not the meaning, what is the true meaning? Thanks!

I think it is worth keeping in mind that none of our concepts quite precisely apply to God. He is not like us.

 

[Kilk1]

I think it is worth keeping in mind that none of our concepts quite precisely apply to God. He is not like us.

Yes, things are different with God than they are with us. In whatever sense it would be, though, would Colossians 1:19 suggest that the Father gave "all the fullness" to Christ? If so, would this mean that He gave "all the fullness of the Godhead" (Colossians 2:9, NKJV) to Him, in some sense?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Yes, things are different with God than they are with us. In whatever sense it would be, though, would Colossians 1:19 suggest that the Father gave "all the fullness" to Christ? If so, would this mean that He gave "all the fullness of the Godhead" (Colossians 2:9, NKJV) to Him, in some sense?

To some it might, but it does not necessarily grammatically imply that the Father "gave" it, as far as I know. But I'm not a Koine Greek master.

Many places in the Bible, what is translated "it pleased him", elsewhere if not in the immediate context is implied God's will, God's decision and God's causing, so maybe this one too, though it says, "the Father", i.e. it does not say 'God'.

If it does mean that the Father gave "all the fullness" to Christ, in what sense can we say that he 'gave' it? And what would "all the fullness" mean? Most translations show (in Colossians 2:9) the fullness living in him and that, bodily, or in bodily form. I don't know if that could have been rightly translated, "in his body", as a way of saying "within him" the way we are told that the Spirit of God has taken up residence within us (since we know our body is the temple, so..., at least certainly in the mind or soul) and verse 10 says that we are complete in him.

Either way, it seems apparent to me that Paul is referring to Jesus' life as a human, with lasting effect in his present 'form', whatever it is.

We have many references to the notion of Christ's subservience to the Father, and that may have more to do with what you are looking for. It is not implied that Christ was CREATED (nor improved on) by the Father, since he is from everlasting to everlasting God, and was there in the beginning, being himself the Creator.

There is, of course, a lot more to it than just that, but this runs long already.

 

[Kilk1]

To some it might, but it does not necessarily grammatically imply that the Father "gave" it, as far as I know. But I'm not a Koine Greek master.

Many places in the Bible, what is translated "it pleased him", elsewhere if not in the immediate context is implied God's will, God's decision and God's causing, so maybe this one too, though it says, "the Father", i.e. it does not say 'God'.

If it does mean that the Father gave "all the fullness" to Christ, in what sense can we say that he 'gave' it? And what would "all the fullness" mean? Most translations show (in Colossians 2:9) the fullness living in him and that, bodily, or in bodily form. I don't know if that could have been rightly translated, "in his body", as a way of saying "within him" the way we are told that the Spirit of God has taken up residence within us (since we know our body is the temple, so..., at least certainly in the mind or soul) and verse 10 says that we are complete in him.

Either way, it seems apparent to me that Paul is referring to Jesus' life as a human, with lasting effect in his present 'form', whatever it is.

We have many references to the notion of Christ's subservience to the Father, and that may have more to do with what you are looking for. It is not implied that Christ was CREATED (nor improved on) by the Father, since he is from everlasting to everlasting God, and was there in the beginning, being himself the Creator.

There is, of course, a lot more to it than just that, but this runs long already.

Ah, that might help clear things up to me. First, let me say that I'm not confident that "the fullness of the Godhead" can be construed to mean merely that God lives in Jesus the same way He lives in us. Colossians 2:9 doesn't say that "God" dwelt in Jesus but that "the Godhead/Deity" (Greek theotés, "the state of being God" according to Thayer) dwelt in Him bodily--and "all the fullness" of theotés at that! So it pleased the Father that all the fullness of Deity, everything that'd make one be God, would dwell in Jesus bodily. However, I think what you said may solve the dilemma.

On the one hand, Barnes says the phrase "it pleased the Father" means "that he chose to confer on his Son such a rank..." To say that God gave Jesus everything that'd make Him qualify as God, seems problematic out of context. On the other hand, Colossians 1:19 by itself doesn't say when or where (beyond "in Him") that all the fullness would dwell. Colossians 2:9 clarifies that the fullness would dwell "bodily."

So, all things considered, is the meaning maybe that it pleased the Father for Christ to have "all the fullness" dwell in Christ's body (a body prepared to manifest God to the world and to be sacrificed for our sins, Heb. 10:5, 10)? If so, this could be more about saying that He'd have Deity even in His body in order to manifest God to the world, rather than implying there was a time when the Son didn't have the fullness.

Does this make sense? What are your thoughts? Thanks!