The Church as the Fullness of Christ and the Fullness of the Godhead

The two relevant texts are:

"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." Colossians 2:9

and

"Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all." Ephesians 1:23

On the surface, there seems to be a tension: Christ has all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, yet the church is called "the fulness of him that filleth all in all." Does this mean the church somehow completes Christ or adds something that He otherwise lacks?

Fullness in Christ Versus Fullness in the Church

In Colossians 2:9, Paul affirms that all the fullness (pleroma) of the Godhead (better, Godhood) dwells in Christ bodily. That is, in His person, in His incarnate and now glorified humanity, all that God is in essence and attribute is present. He is the essential, personal, bodily locus of the fullness of God.

In Ephesians 1:22–23, Paul says:

"And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."

Here, the church is identified as "his body" and then called "the fulness of him that filleth all in all." The same term pleroma is used. But the relationship is different: the church does not contain the fullness of the Godhead in itself. Rather, it is the fullness of him who does. The fullness of God is in Christ; the fullness of Christ is, in a representative and expressive sense, in His body, the church.

Representative, Not Essential, Fullness

We are not forced to say that the church adds anything to Christ's essential fullness. Christ does not lack any attribute or capacity of God apart from the church. He remains the one in whom all the fullness of the Godhood dwells bodily, regardless of what the church is or does.

Instead, think in terms of representation and manifestation:

• Christ is the fountain or source of divine fullness.
• The church, His body, is the channel or vessel that manifests that fullness on earth in this dispensation.

In that sense, the church is "the fullness of him" not because it completes His nature, but because it is the appointed sphere in which His fullness is expressed and operative in the world during the present age.

One might use the analogy: the river does not add water to the spring; it is nevertheless "the fullness" of the spring as the spring's waters are carried out and manifested across the landscape. So the church is the fullness of Him, in that it is the extension and expression of His fullness.

Head and Body Imagery

The context in Ephesians is the head-body relationship:

"...gave him to be the head over all things to the church, which is his body..." Ephesians 1:22–23

The head possesses life and directs the body. The body does not give life to the head, but it does manifest the life and activity of the head. When you see the body move, you are seeing the head's decisions expressed. Applied to Christ:

• Christ, as Head, retains and possesses all divine fullness.
• The church, as His body, is the living expression of that fullness in history, insofar as His life and purposes are being displayed.

Thus, "fullness" in Ephesians 1:23 is not about ontological addition to Christ but about the completeness of His expression in and through His body.

Does the Church Add Anything to Christ?

Your question asks specifically what the church adds to Christ to justify the term "fullness." In terms of essential deity, the answer is: nothing. Christ is fully God, with or without the church. The pleroma of the Godhood is His regardless.

However, in terms of the outworking and display of His purpose in this age, the church is the appointed instrument. The church does not increase His fullness, but it is the sphere in which that fullness is made known. As such, one could say:

• Christ is the fullness of God.
• The church is the fullness of Christ in the sense that, as His body, it is the corporate entity through which His fullness is displayed.

This is similar to Paul's idea in Colossians 1:24:

"Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church."

Paul does not add to the redemptive value of Christ's sufferings. Rather, he participates in sufferings that express and extend Christ's afflictions in the world for the church's sake. The church does not complete Christ's deity, but it participates in the completion of His purposes in history.

Fullness in Two Senses

We may summarize the relation of the two texts this way:

• Colossians 2:9: Fullness of God in Christ essentially and bodily.
• Ephesians 1:23: Fullness of Christ expressed corporately in His body, the church.

Same word (pleroma), but applied in two related yet distinct ways:

1. In Christ, as to what He is.
2. In the church, as to how what He is is displayed and operative in history.

Understood this way, the church does not fill up an ontological lack in Christ, but is rightly called "his fullness" as the arena where the fullness that dwells in Him is made manifest and operative among humanity in this dispensation.

questiontransition