“Why Continue in the Faith?

”
Doctrinal Difficulties in Colossians 1.22-23
The Problem:
In my mind, the biggest question I’ve had when reading Colossians comes from 1.22-23:
the believer will be presented “holy and without blame” if he continues in the faith?! What
happens if he doesn’t “continue in the faith”? What constitutes a departure from the faith that
results in me not being presented “holy and without blame”? This makes it sound like I can lose
my salvation if I don’t “continue in the faith.” When I choose to sin (have you ever done that?),
am I not continuing in the faith…and have I just lost my salvation?
I believe the rest of Scripture points overwhelmingly towards “once saved, always
saved,” but as I have read Colossians I couldn’t figure out 1.22-23…and so I have often skipped
over it! “I know salvation is secure, but this passage makes it sound like it’s not, but that makes
no sense. I have no idea what this passage is talking about, …so let’s figure it out later in life!” I
bet there are passages in Scripture that you’ve done something similar with!
So…does Colossians 1.22-23 teach a “conditional security” for the believer? The
believer has security if he meets certain conditions, and here in Colossians one of those
conditions is “continuing in the faith.” There are three ways to interpret the passage, resulting in
two different ways of life.

Background:
Before we get into those three interpretations, some background is in order: Daniel
Wallace in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics describes the difference between an “infinitive of
purpose” and an “infinitive of result”.1 The “infinitive of purpose” asks the question “why?”, in
this case, “why did He reconcile you?” The answer is “in order to present you holy, blameless,
and faultless by (you) continuing in the faith.” Colossians 1.22-23 could not be an “infinitive of
result” (i.e., “He reconciled you with the result that you will be presented holy, blameless and
faultless”), since the result is less-than-sure. Though reconciled to God, it is not a sure thing that
that believer will be presented “holy, blameless, faultless.” That presentation is based on what
the believer does!
This means that “reconciliation” and “presentation holy, blameless, faultless” are not the
same thing. One is done (reconciliation) for the purpose of the other (presentation). Paul puts a
timeline to this: reconciliation takes place before presentation, whatever one thinks the
“presentation” is. This “presentation” therefore is not part of the package deal of positional truth
the believer gets at salvation: it’s based on what you do with your life.
What presentation is this? The verbs and “you” in verses 21-23 are all plural. Is he
speaking to the church as a whole: either the entire body of Christ, or the local body of believers
in Colosse? Are people ever judged on someone else’s actions? Certainly there are
consequences or blessings that we may experience (even unbelievers were “blessed” under
David’s rule, and even believers suffered when Babylon conquered Jerusalem). But a judgment
based on an individual’s actions is an individual judgment. Therefore, the “you” throughout
seems to be individual rather than corporate (more on this later in the article).

1
Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 590-594.

Pg 1
 The big question on everyone’s minds in this passage has to do with the “if” clause in
verse 23: “you will be presented holy, blameless, faultless…IF you continue in the faith.” This
leads us to the “conditional” nature of 1.23: “if you continue in the faith.” Whatever else we
think is going on the passage, we need to recognize that Paul lays out a condition for the
Colossians: “continuing in the faith.” Whatever you think this is (a work? A gift? Merely
“believing”?), it is an ongoing occurrence: “continuing” in it.
If this “presentation” based on your “ongoing continuance in the faith” refers to
justification and reconciliation (i.e., salvation “past”), then “salvation” is based on Christ’s work
and my continuing to believe that it is true.
If this “presentation” based on “ongoing continuance in the faith” does not refer to
justification/reconciliation, then it does not change the fact that “salvation” is entirely by Christ’s
work on the cross. This kind of “presentation” is different than justification/reconciliation.

Being “holy and blameless before Him” is a positional statement in Ephesians 1.4. It
happens because of what Christ did. In Colossians 1.23, being “holy and blameless and above
reproach” is not based on Christ’s work, but on the believer’s response to something (in Col
1.23, seemingly, an ongoing walk in the faith). We can’t arbitrarily say one passage is positional
while the other is conditional (especially when they use some of the same words!). But if one
passage inserts a condition and the other presents itself as a part of the believer’s position, we
need to recognize this and allow the distinction.
There is incredible similarity between Ephesians and Colossians (see the discussion
later), but in these declarations “holy and blameless,” there is dissimilarity: one is position and
one is presented with conditions.
There actually are two conditional statements following the statement of being presented
holy, blameless, and faultless, both found in verse 23. “Not shifting from the hope of the
Gospel” seems to be the opposite side of the coin of “continuing in the faith.” It’s the negative
way of presenting the exhortation to “continue”: “positively, continue…; negatively, not
shifting…” Therefore, “continuing in the faith” is repeatedly referenced in the following
discussion.

Three Different Interpretations: Calvinism

The interpretation that you can lose your salvation is difficult for many evangelicals, so
many have interpreted the passage from a Calvinist perspective. The people that Paul was
writing to (and by extension, all believers) would show that they really had salvation by
“continuing in the faith”. If someone doesn’t “continue” they (1) show they hadn’t really
exercised saving faith, (2) never had a real salvation, and thus (3) would not be “presented holy,
blameless, faultless before Him.”
This is the “P” in Calvinism’s TULIP acronym: the “perseverance” of the saints. True
saints will persevere (because God makes them to persevere) until the end of their lives and then
die and go to Heaven. If you don’t persevere (though not in an absolutely perfect sort of way),
you show that you never really had saving faith. You were exercising false faith, temporary
faith, pretend faith, demonic faith, spurious faith, intellectual faith, or some other kind of faith
(please note the emphasis on you and your work in this interpretation!).
Is Paul in Colossians 1.22-23 urging his audience to show whether or not they really are
saved ones by continuing/persevering in the faith?

Pg 2
 First off, up to this point in the letter has he been talking to believers or non-believers?
The immediate context says that they stand in a position now where they are reconciled (this is
one of those great words we use to describe salvation; redemption, propitiation, and justification
are others). Once they were enemies and hostile (1.21), but now they have been reconciled by
Christ’s work. Despite never having seen this group of people (2.1), he calls them saints,
brothers and faithful (1.2). He said he’s heard of their faith (1.4), and there’s “hope” laid up for
them in Heaven (1.5). As a lead-in to the rest of the epistle, Paul focuses on the fruitfulness of
the Gospel (1.6; the Colossians are considering adding other things to the sufficiency of Christ’s
work in order to deal with life and growth. Paul urges them to remember what has been fruitful
so far, and stick with that fruitful thing and trust the minister that brought the Gospel to them.).
Paul says the Father has qualified them to share in the inheritance (1.12; the Father did this, not
their own work), and that He has delivered them from Satan’s kingdom to Christ’s (1.13). In
Jesus they already have redemption and forgiveness (1.14). It would be very dangerous for Paul
to say these things about them if the determination of “heaven or hell” for them were not made
until after they’ve “continued in the faith”. Is the apostle saying, “I’m not really sure you are
saved, but if you continue in the faith (i.e., continue believing the Gospel message) you’ll
eventually be presented faultless before God, and show that you were indeed saved.”
The objection could be raised here that Paul was writing to believers in the audience, not
unbelievers. “If the church were anything like our churches, there were many unbelievers in the
audience, and it’s sometimes hard to discern who was Christian and who was just religious!”
The problem is that the first century churches were not like our churches at all. In our day and
age, going to church is a cultural-thing; then, becoming a Christian was very counter-cultural,
perceived almost like joining a cult. Now, going to church is an accepted thing; then, it was not,
and in many cases it was dangerous to identify as a Christian. Paul says over and over again and
in various ways, “you are saved and are going to Heaven.” Plus, he hadn’t been giving assurance
to any potential unsaved people in the audience. He has confidence and he gives them
confidence.

Second, we might interpret that Paul is talking to people who have been reconciled, but
“reconciliation” is not really a full salvation; it’s a deficient salvation. “Reconciliation is good as
far as it goes, but it’s not enough to get you to Heaven. For that, you also need to continue in the
faith and persevere!” Understand what this does: it has Paul talking out two sides of his mouth.
One side says, “you don’t need anything more (like what Jewish Ascetic Mystic teachers are
pushing)”, and the other says, “you need something more: persevering!”
Instead of saying that reconciliation is some kind of deficient salvation, Romans 5.10
states that it is a full salvation: “Having been reconciled to God through the death of His Son,
we also shall be saved through His life!”

Third, Paul says that the reason for being presented “holy, blameless, faultless” is by
continuing in the faith: “if you continue in the faith, then and only then will you be presented
holy, blameless, faultless…”
This has been interpreted as “if you ‘continue,’ it shows whether or not you had
salvation!” However, this misinterprets the verse, which makes salvation (if this is what it is
talking about) dependent on Christ’s work plus my continuing. At the beginning of the epistle he
said they were believers because of their faith (1.2, 4). There’s no hints in Colossians or other
Pauline literature that salvation is Christ’s work plus my work.

Pg 3
 To sum up the reasoning against the “perseverance of the saints” interpretation of the
verse: the audience in Colosse has been reconciled, and reconciliation is not a partial salvation.
Paul is very confident of their salvation, repeats this confidence many times in many ways, and
gives the audience this assurance as well. Salvation is dependent on Christ’s work alone, not on
Christ’s work plus my continuing.

Three Different Interpretations: Arminianism

The interpretation of Colossians 1.22-23 that most readily presents itself is from the
opposite end of the theological spectrum from Calvinism: the Arminian interpretation that one
can lose their salvation. Arminianism interprets this passage as saying, “it is possible to lose
your salvation. If you don’t ‘continue in the faith’ (or meet other criteria) you won’t be
presented ‘holy, blameless, faultless,’ and will lose eternity in Heaven.”
Certain other criteria (according to this view) mentioned in Scripture for the securing of
our salvation: 1 Corinthians 15.2 says “By this Gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly…”
Hebrews 5.9 states “…and once made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation for all
who obey Him…” Hebrews 6 mentions falling away from the faith, which fits with this idea.
The Arminian interpretation is called the “conditional security of the believer”: the believer has
security if he meets certain conditions. It’s important to state that neither of these first two
interpretations demand absolute perfection, but what exactly the standard is is often difficult to
determine.

Looking at the context of Colossians, the answer to the “conditional security”

interpretation of this passage is much the same as the “show that you really are a believer”
interpretation.
First is the assurance Paul gives this audience. Paul views this audience as saved. He
makes sweeping generalizations regarding their eternity rather than give a bunch of qualifiers
describing them only if they continue in the faith. He does not say, “you are saints (1.2) if you
continue in the faith” or “you are brothers (1.2) if you continue in the faith.” He doesn’t promise
there is hope laid up for them in Heaven (1.5) if they continue in the faith.” He doesn’t say “the
Gospel has borne fruit in you (1.6) if you continue in the faith” or “you were qualified to share in
the inheritance of the saints (1.12) if you continue in the faith”. He does not say they were
transferred into the Kingdom of God’s Son (1.13), given redemption (1.14), or even reconciled
(1.22) only if they “continue in the faith.” The way he gives assurance is not a “qualified”
assurance: dangerous, if the determination of “Heaven or hell” isn’t made until the end of life
and “continuation in the faith” or not is determined!
Not only does Paul give assurance to his audience, but he himself has assurance. There’s
no fear on Paul’s part as to what the audience heard and believed, and the effect it had on their
eternal lives.

Second is comparing Colossians with a concurrent epistle: Ephesians was written at the
same time and with the same mind. Something like 75 of the 99 verses in Colossians are
incredibly similar to verses in Ephesians, as if Paul wrote them one after another. Ephesians
teaches that we are saved and have certain guarantees of the afterlife as our present possession
now. Ephesians 1.4 says we are “holy and without blame” (interesting contrast with Colossians

Pg 4
1.23! One is positional, and one is conditional!). Ephesians 1.7 tells us we have redemption and
forgiveness of sins (which sins?). The believer has the seal of the promised Holy Spirit as a
deposit/earnest, guaranteeing our inheritance until that final redemption (1.13-14). We “have
been saved” (2.5, 8): both these verses are verbs in the perfect tense, show past completed action
with continuing effects. In writing both of these epistles, Paul is drawing from the same pool of
information wherein there are many guarantees of salvation and assurance, all based on Christ’s
work rather than a Christian’s imperfect obedience or faith.

To sum up the reasoning against the “conditional security” interpretation of the verse:
Paul is very confident of their salvation, repeats this confidence many times in many ways, and
gives the audience assurance as well: and not a “qualified” assurance, “if and only if…”
Ephesians, an epistle apparently written at the same time and with the same mindset, also talks
about guarantees of salvation and assurance, all based on Christ’s work alone.

Three Different Interpretations: Not Salvation, But Reward

From a standpoint of Biblical support, immediate context, theological reasoning and

cohesiveness, and logical reasoning, both of these two interpretations leave a lot to be desired.
Both the “perseverance of the saints” and “conditional security of the believer” interpretations
end up in the same place (though they start from opposite ends of the theological spectrum):
they both end up with the focus on you and your activity to secure your salvation. Both of these
interpretations believe the passage is talking about salvation: either losing it or showing you
never had it to begin with, by your failure to continue in the faith.
A third interpretation has nothing to do with salvation and entering Heaven, fits the
context of Colossians better, and matches the message of the entire epistle in miniature. This
interpretation sees the passage not talking about salvation (i.e., forgiveness of sins) but rewards
for how you live your life.

First off, there is a progression of time in these verses (1.21-23): “once you were…now
you are…and you will be…” Past position (enemies), present position (reconciled), and future
position (presented holy, blameless, faultless if they continue in the faith). Other passages of
Scripture tell the Christian to look forward to the future presentation at the Bema Seat, the
Judgment Seat of Christ, for rewards for things done in the body. This presentation at the Bema
seat is based on how well you live your life, and that in turn is based on living according to the
truth God has given us. The presentation Paul looks forward to in Colossians 1.23 is also based
on how you live your life, and that in turn is based on living according to the truth God has given
us, “continuing in the faith” as Paul puts it.
Second, Paul himself is partaking in this presentation of “holy, blameless, faultless.” The
Word Biblical Commentary says “These words of verse 22 prepare the way for a similar
understanding of Paul’s aim in his ministry, namely ‘to present (parasthswmen, the same verb,
appears) every man perfect in Christ,’ verse 28, i.e. acceptable to God at His tribunal on the final
day (Rom 14:10).” 2 Jesus labored to reconcile people so they could eventually be presented
“holy, blameless, faultless” (1.22); Paul labors to present people mature in Christ (1.28). Jesus
suffered in His body (1.22); Paul suffers in his body (1.24).

2
Peter T. O’Brien, Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 44 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1982).

Pg 5
 Paul’s labor is not just to get the Gospel to people, but to see believers mature (1.29 cf
2.1). his struggle and conflict is to get the Gospel to the unsaved world, and to get the message
of “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (1.27) to saved ones. He realizes he has something to add
to believers.

Being presented “holy, blameless, faultless” is not just based on Christ’s work: if it were,
the “if” condition would not be present. Neither is this presentation based on Christ’s work plus
Paul’s work (Paul’s work of evangelism). It is based on the believer’s response to the faith/truth
delivered from God through His messengers (i.e., you “continuing in the faith”). This is after
justification/reconciliation, which is entirely Christ’s work. It matters what the Colossians
believe in their Christian walk after salvation: this is why Paul explains deep truths about the
preeminence and all-sufficiency of Christ, and the fruitfulness of the truth in chapters 1-2 before
he gets to exhortations based on those truths in chapters 3-4. “Don’t abandon Christ for
something else!” he says, “continue in the faith, the truth about Jesus!”
Our real trouble in understanding the passage: we think that words like “holy, blameless,
faultless” can only be our position in Christ, and based on His work alone. This isn’t the only
way of interpreting those words. Here in Colossians 1, those words are conditional, based on the
believer doing something (“if you continue in the faith”). This isn’t the only place those words
are used to describe a believer’s actions. Here is a sample of other places where those words are
used of the believer’s condition:

Holy: Paul told the Thessalonian church that his conduct was holy and righteous (1
Thessalonians 2.10), and they were witnesses of this. Titus 1.8 says that an overseer/elder must
be self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. In Romans 12.1 Christians are urged to present
their “bodies as a living sacrifice, holy…” Peter urges his audience to “be holy in your conduct”
(1 Peter 1.15). This is definitely not a complete list of “holy” used conditionally (not only
positionally).
Blameless: “Blamelessness” is urged on the believers in Philippi: “don’t complain or
grumble,” they’re told so they’d be “blameless and innocent, children of God without
blemish…” (Philippians 2.14-15). Revelation 14.3-5 uses “blameless” to describe the 144,000
witnesses: “in their mouth no lie was found, for they are blameless.” This goes beyond saying
they are believers, and is a commentary on their conduct. Half of the eight references to this
word in the New Testament are to a believer’s conduct.
Faultless: “Faultless” or “above reproach” is used of church leadership regarding their
qualifications in 1 Timothy 3.10 and Titus 1.6,7. This again is in reference to their conduct
rather than saying they are positionally believers. Four of the five New Testament references
deal with conditional conduct. How “good” does an elder or deacon need to be to be described
“faultless”? This isn’t perfection, but describes his character and actions: his condition.

These words are tough to wrestle with when we’re talking about our conduct! How much
does the believer need to do (because again, this is conditional, not based on Jesus’ work for
initial salvation) to be considered “holy and blameless” before God? Nothing seems
satisfactory! If this were talking about salvation (“continue in the faith and make yourself
holy-enough for salvation by your works”), nothing would be acceptable. No law-keeping or
works could merit salvation (“if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no
purpose.” Gal 2.21).

Pg 6
 At the moment of salvation, we are placed “in Christ” and considered “holy and
blameless” (Eph 1.4). This is our new position and identity. In reference to Christian living, we
are holy as far as Christ lives through us. We have holy actions when Christ lives through us.
This passage in Colossians 1 urges the believer to obey Christ, draw from His resources, and live
a good and different life, abstaining from sin.
These actions relying on Christ’s resources merit being called “holy” and “righteous” in
Scripture. In Revelation 19.7-8, the “Bride [i.e., the Church] has made herself ready, clothed
with fine linen, bright and pure – for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.” Think
for a second who this is: the entire Church, including people like Paul, Barnabas, and other
“rock stars” of the last 2000 years of church history, and including people that lived sinful lives
before accepting Christ on their deathbeds. They are all clothed in “the righteous deeds of the
saints” (“every man” receives some reward for their spiritual lives, 2 Cor 5.10). In verse 14, the
armies of heaven follow Jesus in His return to the earth, and they are “arrayed in fine linen, white
and pure.” In her glorified state, the Church is seen as “righteous” because of her deeds, not
merely because of the positional actions of Christ on the cross. This, again, isn’t salvation, but a
subsequent walk with the Lord that earns reward from God, and declarations that someone’s
deeds were “righteous.”

A note needs to be made about “rewards” in Christianity: the subject is often confusing
to us. We feel that we’re being selfish to think about rewards, “shouldn’t we live for God out of
love for Him?!” Doesn’t “rewards” mean that our works have some merit before God? Will my
“performance-based mindset” be a distraction from a real relationship with God?
Overwhelming thankfulness and love for God because of this great salvation is definitely
enough of a motive for living for Christ. However, God in His Word also gives us the added
motivation of living lives that earn reward from God: 2 Corinthians 5.10, speaking to Christians,
says we will all appear before the judgment seat of Christ and receive his due for the good or bad
things done in the flesh. First Corinthians 3.10-15 tells us to be careful how we build, and on
‘the day’ (of judgment) the quality of our building will be evident (v13) and we will receive
reward or loss (v14-15 cf Rev 22.12). The Scripture talks about certain things that will be
rewarded (1 Cor 3.8; 2 Tim 4.8; Jm 1.12; 1 Pt 5.4; others). The robes that the saints (presumably,
the Church) are clothed with as they return to earth with a conquering Jesus are “the righteous
acts of the saints” (Rev 19.8,14).
Doesn’t this contradict “walking in the Spirit”? No. Paul acknowledges the
divine/human cooperation in the Christian life. In Galatians 2.20 he said “I no longer live, but
Christ lives in me.” Yet, for all intents and purposes, it was Paul making decisions, yielding,
preaching, teaching, suffering for Christ, etc (cf Rom 6). In Colossians 1.29 he says he labors,
but only as far as Christ works in Him (and He works powerfully). Paul labors powerfully
because Christ’s life in him is powerful. Revelation 4.10-11 picture the 24 elders (again
presumably representing the Church) casting their crowns/rewards before Christ’s throne: very
appropriate since as Paul realized it was Christ’s life in our own that bore fruit and reward.
We still may be uncomfortable with the idea, but God sees fit to offer the Christian
further encouragement to live for Christ: rewards in heaven. What we do in this life echoes in
eternity. What we believe in this life affects what we do. Believe the right things; do the right
things; and afterwards receive reward from God for living a faithful life.

Pg 7
 How will a believer receive rewards? Only by living a life worthy of God (Colossians
1.10): walking in truth and bearing fruit. Lowering Christ or seeking strength somewhere else
does not result in a life of fruitfulness.
What “faith” does Paul tell the Colossians to continue in? Is it merely subjective faith? I.
e., “Just keep believing”? No, they’re starting to believe wrong things about Christ. Continue in
“the” faith: the objective truth from God about Christ’s sufficiency and preeminence for
salvation and ongoing life. “The” faith that he just rehearsed in 1.15-20, exalting Christ far
above everything else and finding one’s sufficiency in Him.
The believer will be presented to God, whether or not they “continue in the faith.” We
are reminded to make that presentation one that deserves praise and reward. Will that
presentation be “holy, blameless, faultless”? Or will it be “unholy, blameworthy, at fault”
because you tried to live the Christian life on your own strength, not seeing that you had
everything needed for life in Christ? These actions are judged to be “wood, hay and stubble” (1
Cor 3.12): worthless. This is based on your works, which flow from your beliefs.

“Reconciliation has two goals. One goal of reconciliation is eternal life. That goal is
guaranteed and is fulfilled immediately at the very moment of faith (John 3:16; 6:47). The
second goal, being presented holy, blameless, and beyond reproach before God, is neither
guaranteed nor fulfilled immediately at the point of faith.

“The second goal concerns a future presentation. The question is, what is in view here? Is
there to be some judgment of believers? Is there some time when believers will be
presented before God?

“Yes. The Judgment Seat of Christ is such a time. Believers will be judged and then
presented by the Lord Jesus before God the Father. Some will be found to have been
good and faithful servants (Luke 19:16-19). These are those who will be presented as
having lived lives which were holy, blameless, and above reproach. Others will be found
to have been worthless servants (Luke 19:20-26) and they will not be presented as having
lived exemplary lives.”3

Reconciliation has already happened; presentation is yet to happen. Reconciliation is

based on the peace made through Christ’s sacrifice; presentation holy and without blame is based
on the believer continuing in the faith.

Colossians 1.22-23 does not support the “conditional security” of the believer, nor the
“perseverance of the saints” interpretation. Instead, this passage is a message that it matters what
someone believes and how they behave. Interpreted this way, this difficult passage is merely a
microcosm of the entire epistle of Colossians. “Continue in the faith,” since this is where
fruitfulness and reward comes from.

3
Bob Wilkin, “Is Continuing in the Faith a Condition of Eternal Life?” Grace in Focus, March 1991 (Denton,
Texas: Grace Evangelical Society).

Pg 8